Himachal Pradesh Court March 2000 Judgments

H.P. Financial Corporation Vs. Puneet Printers and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2001HP13

ORDERSurinder Sarup, J.1. This order will dispose of the above application under Order 9 Rule 4 C.P.C. praying for re-calling the order of dismissal of suit in default and restoring the same.2. The facts giving rise to the present application are that the plaintiff - H.P. Financial Corporation, now the applicant, had filed Civil Suit No. 58 of 1992 in this court. A perusal of the record shows that a Bench of this Court, which was seized of the matter had finally heard the arguments and judgment had been reserved as per the order dated 14-9-1993. Subsequently, the same Bench passed an order dated 4-10-1993 indicating that in the suit defendants have been proceeded against ex parte and ex parte arguments, after recording the evidence, had been heard and judgment had been reserved. Since one of the points involved was the point of limitation, the Bench in order to seek certain clarification had asked the learned counsel for the plaintiff to attend the case in Chambers. The counsel gave a ...

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. R.K. Singha and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2000CriLJ4102

Kuldip Chand Sood, J.1. This appeal, by the State is directed against the judgment of learned Special Judge (II), Sirmour District at Nahan, acquitting accused-respondents, R. K. Singha, Lekhbir Singh and Harbinder Singh, hereinafter referred to as A-l, A-2 and A-3 respectively. Accused Al and A2 were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corruption Act.' Accused A3 was tried for the offences punishable under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. All the three accused have been acquitted, by the learned Special Judge (II), Sirmour District at Nahan, for want of adequate evidence.2. It may be pertinent to notice here that during the pendency of the appeal A3 died and appeal is so far A-3 is concerned stands abated.3. Prosecution case in brief :A1 was posted as Assistant Soil Conservation Officer, Paonta Sahib in the year 1990, A2 ...

Bhupinder Singh Vs. Smt. Kanchan Rani

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2001HP16,II(2000)DMC365

Kuldip Chand Sood. J. 1. This appeal under Section 47 of the Guardians and Wards Act, 1890. hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', is directed against the judgment of the Senior Sub-Judge. Solan, District Solan (exercising the powers of the District Judge) dated 31-8-1992.2. It appears kanchan Rani, hereinafter referred to as the wife, was married to Bhupinder Singh, appellant herein and hereinafter referred to as the husband, in the year 1984. Kumari Alka was born out of the wedlock on 4-11-1984. In the year 1990, the wife filed a petition under Section 11 and 13(1) (ia) of the Hindu Marriage Act before the learned District Judge, Solan for declaration that her marriage with the husband is nullity and in the alternative for a decree of divorce on the ground of cruelty. The learned District Judge vide his judgment dated 28-11-1990 held that no legal marriage was solemnised between the parties.3. The husband and wife I hereafter started living separately. The wife is employed as nurse in...

Shiv Lal and Etc. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2001CriLJ3205

ORDERM.R. Verma, J.1. Since all these three petitions for grant of anticipatory bail arise out of the same First Information Report and are based on the same grounds, therefore, are being disposed of by this common order.2. The accused/petitioners (hereafter referred to as 'accused') apprehend their arrest in a case FIR. No. 96/2000 dated March 14, 2000 under Sections 147/149/366/323 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Arms Act registered on the basis of a statement under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code made by Sumna. The accused claim that the case registered against them is false and that they are alleged to have abducted one Sumna aged more than 18 years and that no recovery is to be made from them.3. The case of the prosecution against the accused, in brief, is that on March 14, 2000 when the prosecutrix Sumna, along with her cousin Sunita, was returning home after taking exams, in Science paper from Government Senior Sectionndary School Hatgrarh at about 12.0...

Karam Chand Vs. Punjab National Bank and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

R.L. Khurana, J.1. The plaintiff has filed the present suit against the seven defendants claiming the following reliefs :(a) delivery of truck No. HIH-2046 plus Rs. 1,00,000 as compensation for restoring the truck to its original position or in the alternative for recovery of Rs. 3,50,000 being the price of the truck ; (b) mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 10,000 per month from July 13, 1991, till the date of the suit besides future mesne profits at the rate of Rs. 10,000 per annum till the truck is restored back ; (c) costs of the suit ; and (d) any other or further order which the court may deem fit and proper on the facts and in the circumstances of the case. 2. Briefly, the facts leading to the present suit may be thus stated. The plaintiff Karam Chand, obtained a loan of Rs. 1,60,000 from New Bank of India which subsequently came to be merged with the Punjab National Bank, for the purchase of a truck. The truck was purchased by him on February 17, 1987, for a sum of Rs. 2,38,200.6...

H.P. State Council for Child Welfare Vs. Unique Mixers and Furnaces Pr ...

Court: Himachal Pradesh

R.L. Khurana, J. 1. This order will dispose of the objections preferred by the petitioner, H.P. State Council for Child Welfare, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short : the Act) against the award dated 7.4.1998 of the learned Arbitrator.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case leading to the present objection petition are these. The petitioner in the year 1982 decided to set up a 'Panjiri' plant, that is, Food Processing Unit, for children at Parwanoo. However, later on it was decided to set up such plant at Hira Nagar, near Shimla. For the purpose of setting up such a plant the petitioner entered into an agreement with the respondent for the supply of necessary machinery. A sum of Rs. 6, 00, 000/- as advance was paid to the respondent in two instalments on 28.8.1988 and 7.3.1989. A dispute, however, arose between the parties in respect of the land which was selected as site for the installation of the plant. Consequent upon such dispute, the petitio...

H.P. State Council for Child Welfare Vs. the Unique Mixers and Furnace ...

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2001HP22

ORDERR.L. Khurana, J.1. This order will dispose of the objections preferred by the petitioner, H.P. State Council for Child Welfare, under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short : the Act) against the award dated 7-4-1998 of the learned Arbitrator.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case leading to the present objection petition are these. The petitioner in the year 1982 decided to set up a 'Panjiri' plant, that is, Food Processing Unit, for children at Parwanoo. However, lateron it was decided to set up such plant at Hira Nagar, near Shimla. For the purpose of setting up such a plant the petitioner entered into an agreement with the respondent for the supply of necessary machinery. A sum of Rs. 6,00,000/- as advance was paid to the respondent in two instalments on 27-8-1988 and 7-3-1989. A dispute, however, arose between the parties in respect of the land which was selected as site for the installation of the plant. Consequent upon such dispute, the petiti...