Himachal Pradesh Court November 2001 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Major Vijay Singh Mankotia and ors. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-2001
Reported in: 2002CriLJ3165
ORDERM.R. Verma, J.1. This petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereafter referred to as 'the Code') read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India is directed against the order dated 3-1-2001 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (I), Kangra at Dharamshala whereby he had dismissed the revision petition preferred by the petitioners against the order dated 18-12-1999 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, I-Class (I), Dharamshala holding that a prima facie case is made out against the petitioners for the commission of offences punishable under Section 147 read with Section 149 and Section 341 of the Indian Penal Code.2. In brief, the material facts arc that. the Officer-in-charge, Police Station, Shahpur submitted a charge-sheet under Sections 147/149/341 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioners on the allegations that on 1-3-1999 a secret information was received by the police that about 200 250 persons of Congress (I) has gathered at ...
Bakshi Ram Dogra Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-2001
Reported in: [2002]255ITR38(HP)
C.K. Thakker, C.J. 1. Admitted. Mr. Inder Singh, senior advocate, instructed by Mr. Vijay Thakur, advocate, waives service of notice of admission on behalf of the respondents. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the matters have been taken up for final hearing today.2. These petitions have been filed by the petitioner for an appropriate writ, direction or order quashing and setting aside a communication dated October 25, 2000 (annexure PK), and by directing the respondent-authorities to issue a certificate compounding the cases pending in the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, and prohibiting them from prosecuting the petitioner for any offence for the assessment years 1979-80, 1980-81, 1981-82 and 1982-83. Other reliefs have also been claimed.3. The case of the petitioner was that he received summons from the court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla, staring therein that proceedings have been initiated against him by the respondents for the above assessment ...
Chitru Devi Vs. Smt. Ram Dei and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-2001
Reported in: AIR2002HP59
Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J.1. This is plaintiffs second appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 against the judgment and decree dated 29-9-1997 of Disrict Judge, Kullu in Civil Appeal No. 33/1996 whereby the appeal of defendants Nos. 1 & 2 (respondents Nos. 1 to 3 herein) against the judgment and decree dated 20-11-1996 of Senior Sub Judge, Kullu has been partly allowed thereby setting aside the judgment and decree of Senior Sub Judge, Kullu passed in Civil Suit No. 133/92. Hereinafter UK: parties are referred to as the plaintiff and the defendants.2. The facts giving rise to the tiling of the present appeal are that plaintiff Smt. Chatru Devi filed suit for declaration that she along with defendant No. 4 Smt. Jagtamba Devi are owners in possession of the land to the extent of 1/3rd share measuring 21.12.0 bighas as described in para 1 of the plaint situate in Phati Shilihar, Kothi Kotkandi. Tehsil and District, Kullu (hereinafter referred to suit land) and the muta...
Eicher Limited Through Bimal Sachdeva Vs. Himachal Pradesh Housing Boa ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-2001
Reported in: AIR2002HP135
ORDERKuldip Chand Sood, J.1. By this petition, under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, plaintiff-applicant seeks to restrain the defendant/non-applicant from taking any steps to recover unearned increase demanded by- it and from cancelling the lease in favour of the plaintiff-applicant also pray for a restrain on the defendant from interfering with the possession of the Plaintiff/applicant on Plot No. 29 and 30. Industrial Area. II. Parwanoo.2. Facts necessary for the disposal of this petition may be noticed :Plaintiff/applicant 'Eicher Limited' is a Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 with a registered office at New Delhi. The Plaintiff is the successor company of Eicher Tractors Limited. According to the Plaintiff, Eicher Tractors Ltd. amalgamated with 'Royal Enfield Motors Limited' in accordance with the Scheme of amalgamation approved by the Delhi High Court and Madras High Court vide orders dated January 29, 1996 and April ...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Sumitra Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-27-2001
Reported in: 2002ACJ1974
Arun Kumar Goel, J.1. It is proposed to dispose of both these appeals by a common judgment since they arise out of the same order passed by the Commissioner under Workmen's Compensation Act at Theog, District Shimla in Case No. 2 of 1993 on 24.9.1996.2. Respondent No. 1, is the widow and respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are minor daughters of deceased Himmat Singh. He was employed with the respondent No. 4 as a driver on truck No. HIR 308. This truck while on way to Solan met with an accident at Khachi curve near Theog. Himmat Singh died as a result of the accident during the course of his employment with respondent No. 4. This accident took place on 23.4.1993. Up to this extent case is clearly made out from the evidence on record and learned counsel for the parties were not at variance.3. Application for grant of compensation was filed before the Commissioner at Theog. Respondent No. 4 being the owner/employer, admitted the factum of accident and pleaded that since the truck in question was in...
Smt. Manorma Devi and ors. Vs. Smt. Sukarma Bhardwaj and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2001
Reported in: AIR2002HP48
ORDERR.L. Khurana, J.1. This regular second appeal at the instance of the plaintiffs against the judgment and decree dated 16-2-2000 of the learned District Judge, Shimla, reversing the Judgment and decree dated 8-9-1998 of the learned Sub-Judge 1st Class (2), Shimla, has been admitted for hearing on the following substantial question of law:--'Whether the nominee named in the Savings Certificates is entitled in his own right to the amount of such certificates to the exclusion of other legal heirs of the deceased holder of the Savings Certificates?'2. Briefly stated, the facts of the present case are these. Plaintiff No. 1 is the widow, plaintiffs Nos. 2 and 3 are the sons while plaintiffs Nos. 4 and 5 are the daughters of one Shri Kedar Nath Bhoil. Defendant No. 1is the sister of the said Shri Kedar Nath Bhoil, who has died on 26-3-1993.3. The abovenamed Shri Kedar Nath Bholl during his life time on 14-5-1991 had purchased seven 'Kisan Vikas Patra' worth rupees ten thousand each. Whil...
Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Gulshan Begum and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-23-2001
Reported in: II(2002)ACC204
C.K. Thakker, C.J.1. Admitted. Ms. Priyanka Verma, Advocate appears and waives service of notice of admission on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 4 and Mr. V.S. Chauhan, Advocate appears and waives service of notice of admission on behalf of respondent No. 5. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for final hearing today.2. This petition is filed by the petitioner Insurance Company against an order passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shimla on September 4, 2001 in case No. 41-8/2 of 1999 titled Gulshan Begum v. Surat Ram and Ors.3. The case of the Insurance Company is that a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') was filed by present respondent Nos. 1 to 4 alleging that due to accident which took place on February 9,1999 with Truck No. HP-09-1612 owned by respondent No. 5, the husband of the respondent No. 1, father of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 and son of respondent No. 4 died. A petition was...
Yudhister Lal Thukral Vs. Smt. Sumitra Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2001
Reported in: [2002]112CompCas493(HP),[2003]44SCL509(HP)
Arun kumar Goel, J.1. It is proposed to dispose of all these five criminal revisions by a common judgment, because except for cheques as well as memos issued by the bankers, all other questions of law and fact involved in these revisions petitions are identical.2. Against the petitioner, the late Shri Prakash Nath Chawla (predecessor-in-interest of the respondents), preferred a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Afterconclusion of the trial, the petitioner was found guilty of having committed offence under Section 138 of the Act. Accordingly, he was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 40,000 and in default to undergo simple imprisonment for three months in each case. In case the amount is paid, the same was to be given as compensation to the complainant.3. It may be observed that the learned trial court has found the petitioner guilty of having committed offence under Section 138 of the Act whereunder also notice of ac...
S. Butail and Company Vs. H.P. State Forest Corpn.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2001
Reported in: AIR2002HP1
ORDERR.L. Khurana, J.1. The plaintiff, a registered Partnership Firm of Chartered Accountants, has filed the present suit for the recovery of Rs. 14.21,450/- (Rs. 10,93,425/- as principal and Rs. 3,28,025/- as interest at the rate of 18% per annum for the period 30-3-1998 to 30-11-1999).2. The defendant is a Company duly constituted under the Companies Act, 1956. It is assessed to income-tax and is also subjected to statutory audit. The plaintiff has been rendering professional services as Chartered Accountant to it by way of audit, finalisation of accounts, taxation and other allied matters since 1973. During the course of finalisation of the assessment of income for the purpose of income-tax for the year 1992-93, it was found that the defendant had shown the assessable income as Rs. 1,30,000/- as against the actual assessable income of Rs. 4,88,58,590/-. The income-tax authorities had, therefore, issued a notice dated 18-1-1996 under Section 148 of the Income-tax Act with regard to c...
Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Yashwant Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2001
Reported in: 2003ACJ27
Kamlesh Sharma, J.1. The petitioner insurance company is respondent No. 3 in the claim petition filed by respondent No. 1 claimant Yashwant Singh which is pending before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Shimla. Respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in the claim petition being owner and driver of the vehicle in question. One Rameshwar Singh, son of Kanwar Singh, who is respondent No. 4 in the claim petition, is another owner of the vehicle, but inadvertently he has not been impleaded as party respondent in this revision petition. This defect was not pointed out at the time of hearing of the revision petition. However, it is not material as owner Yashwant Singh and driver Kanwar Singh are impleaded as respondents in the revision petition.2. The petitioner insurance company is aggrieved by the later part of the order dated 11.4.2001 whereby its evidence was closed and the statement of K.S. Raina, its Assistant Administrative Officer, who was present with a true copy of t...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »