Himachal Pradesh Court September 2002 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.
Narotam Ram and Etc. Vs. Land Acquisition Collector and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-25-2002
Reported in: AIR2003HP55
Kamlesh Sharma, J.1. The following points are referred to this larger Bench of three Judges :--(i) If in a given case the actual possession of the acquired land is taken before the date of Notification under Section 4 of the Act or from the date of taking possession under Section 16 or 17 of the Act, whether the claimant is entitled to additional compensation under Section 23 (1 -A) of the Act from the date of taking actual possession or from the date of notification under Section 4 of the Act? (ii) Whether the interest under Section 28 of the Act is to be paid from the date the possession is taken under Section 16 or 17 of the Act? 2. So far first point of reference is concerned, it is no longer res Integra. The learned Judges of the Supreme Court in Siddappa Vasappa Kuri v. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2002) 1 SCC 142 : (AIR 2001 SC 2951) while interpreting the 'expression whichever is earlier in Section 23(1-A) of the Act' have held in para 6 :'...... the starting point for the...
Jeet Ram and Etc. Etc. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2002
Reported in: 2003(2)ALD(Cri)17,2003CriLJ736
ORDERM.R. Verma, J.1. Since all these petitions arise out of the same F.I.R. No. 97 of 2002 dated 19-7-2002 under Sections 302, 147, 148, 149, 201, I.P.C. registered at Police Station, Tieog, therefore, these are being disposed of by this common order.2. The case of the prosecution against the accused petitioners (hereafter referred to as 'the accused persons') is that on 19-7-2002 at about 6.30 p.m. at Bag, Ramesh Heta (since deceased and hereafter referred to as 'the deceased') was caught hold by the accused persons and their co-accused Savitri and Bimla pelted stones at him. In the meanwhile, Bhupender, another co-accused named in the F.I.R., inflicted a 'Draft' blow to the deceased on the back portion of his neck while proclaiming that he would be done to death there and then. After inflicting the injury with the aforesaid blow to the deceased, said Bhupender while carrying the 'Draft' bolted away and the accused persons and co-accused Savitri and Bimla also ran towards their house...
Himachal Road Transport Corporation Vs. Sukh Ram
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-24-2002
Reported in: II(2003)ACC22,2003ACJ929
K.C. Sood, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 arises out of the award made by learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Shimla dated 1.12.1992. In order to appreciate the controversy facts in brief may be noticed:Respondent Sukh Ram was the claimant before the Tribunal. Appellant Himachal Road Transport Corporation, hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation' was the respondent owner of the bus involved in the accident. On 3.9.1989, Sharda Devi boarded bus HPS 4387 of the Corporation at village Tihana for Shimla. Ramesh Singh, respondent No. 2 before the Tribunal, was the driver of the bus. The bus rolled down into a gorge near Sainj resulting in the death of seven passengers. Sharda Devi sustained multiple injuries and succumbed to the injuries on 21.9.1989 at Indira Gandhi Medical College, Shimla where she was brought for treatment. The Corporation admitted the accident as well as the death of Sharda Devi.2. Learned Tribunal found that the accident occ...
Mohan MeakIn Ltd. Vs. Internations Trade and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-23-2002
Reported in: AIR2004HP11,II(2005)BC105
ORDERR.L. Khurana, J.1. 'Whether a Court in a suit for rendition of account can pass a final decree exceeding its pecuniary limit of jurisdiction' is the question involved in the present reference made by the learned Additional District Judge, Solan.2. Briefly, the facts giving rise to the present reference may be thus stated. A suit. being Civil Suit No. 31-S/1 of 1995/993 was filed by Messrs. Mohan Meakin Limited. Solan against Messrs. Internations Trade. New Delhi and another for rendition of accounts. Such suit was valued for the purpose of Court-fee and jurisdiction at Rs. 4,00,000/- and requisite Court-fee was affixed on the plaint. An ex parte preliminary decree for rendition of accounts was passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Solan, on 13-8-1999 in favour of the plaintiff and against the defendants.3. On 6-10-1999 an application was made by the plaintiffs praying for appointment of a local Commissioner to go into the accounts of the parties and to report regarding ...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Gulab Singh Chauhan and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-18-2002
Reported in: 2004ACJ1851,AIR2003HP102
M.R. Verma, J.1. This appeal under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure (hereafter referred to as the 'Code') has been preferred by the appellant-defendant (hereafter referred to as 'the appellant1) against the judgment and decree dated 31-12-1988, passed by the learned District Judge, Kinnaur Division at Rampur, whereby he had modified the judgment and decree dated 28-11-1996 passed by the learned Sub-Judge, Rampur.2. Brief facts leading to the presentation of the present appeal are that respondent No. 1 (hereafter referred to as R-1) Instituted a suit against the appellant, respondents 2 and 3 (hereafter referred to as 'R-2' and 'R-3') and one M/s. Jindal Roadways, now represented by respondents 4 to 8 (hereafter referred to as 'R-4 to R-8') for Rs. 54,500/-. Case of R-1 as made out in the plaint, is that he owns and possesses an apple orchard from which he supplies apple boxes for marketing to Delhi and other places in India. The apple boxes are sent in trucks to the marketing...
Smt. Phool Kumari (Since Deceased) Through L. Rs. and ors. Etc. Vs. Na ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-17-2002
Reported in: AIR2003HP75
ORDERR.L. Khurana, J.1. 'Whether a judgment which has been pronounced in the open Court but has remained unsigned due to the death of the judicial Officer is a valid and binding judgment under the Code of Civil Procedure' is the common question of law which is involved in the present set of nine revision petitions taken up by this court in exercise of its suo motu powers under Section 115, Code of Civil Procedure (for short the Code)2. Civil suits No. 280/1 of 1999/96, 452/ 1 of 1999, 314/1 of 1999/96, 132/1 of 1999/92 and 376/1 of 1999/96 were decreed by the learned Sub Judge Ist Class, Kasauli at Solan, respectively on 6-10-2001, 24-9-2001, 10-10-2001, 12-9-2001 and 20-9-2001 while Civil Suits No. 54/1 of 2000/ 96, 91/1 of 1999/94, 565/1 of 1999/93 and 154/1 of 1999/98 were dismissed respectively on 22-8-2001, 16-10-2001, 28-7-2001 and 29-9-2001.3. The learned Sub Judge, namely, Shri Piar Chand Chauhan, who recorded the judgments in all the above mentioned cases and had pronounced th...
General Sales Ltd. and anr. Vs. Jagdish Rana
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-16-2002
Reported in: AIR2003HP90
R.L. Khurana, J.1. In the present suit for specific performance, the plaintiffs have sought the following relief(s):--'a decree for specific performance be passed in favour of the plaintiffs (or any of them preferably the second plaintiff) and against the defendant and-- (i) the defendant (in terms of Agreement to Sell dated 28-9-1990 as modified by the two addenda dated 20-10-1990 and 13-12-1991) be directed to transfer his right, title and interest in the property known and styled as The Peak, situated in village Mashobra, Pargana Showhawali, Tehsil and District Shimla along with plants and trees standing thereon, comprised in Khewat Khataunl No. 83 min/102, khasra Nos. 194/1 (0-11 biswas), 195/1 (11 bighas 13 biswas), 196 (0-8 biswas), 197 (0-3 biswas), 198 (0-2 biswas), 199/1 (7 bighas 19 biswas), 200 (0-18 biswas), 201 (1 bigha 3 biswas), 202 (0-15 biswas), 203 (0-4 biswas), 204 (0-4 biswas) and 205/1 (26 bighas 14 biswas) with one bungalow, outhouses and buildings standing therei...
NaraIn Singh Bramta Vs. State of H.P. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-11-2002
Reported in: AIR2003HP81
M.R. Verma, J. 1. This is a suit for declaration that the plaintiff has raised the construction of a four storeyed building with a roof thereon on the land comprising Khasra No. 664/29/1 measuring 5 biswas situate in Mauza Pateog, Tehsil and District, Shimla (hereafter referred to as 'the building in suit') with the deemed sanction of the defendants, therefore, the notices dated 14-9-1995 and 24-10-1996 issued by the defendants under the provisions of the Himachal Pradesh Town and Country Planning Act (hereafter referred to as 'the Act') are illegal, void and inoperative against the rights of the plaintiff and the defendants have no right to Interfere in any manner in the aforesaid construction and for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the defendants from interfering with the said construction and from demolishing the same.2. Case of the plaintiff, as made out in the plaint, is that he purchased land Khasra No. 29 measuring 1-4 bighas in village Pateog from Shanti Devi in th...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Surat Singh and Etc. Etc.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2002
Reported in: 2003CriLJ386
ORDERR.L. Khurana, J.1. The above-noted 14 revision petitions have been taken up by this Court in exercise of suo motu revisional powers under Section 397 read with Section 401, Code of Criminal Procedure.2. In all these cases a common question of law is involved as to what is the effect of a judgment recorded and pronounced by a Magistrate and such Magistrate failed to sign the same before his death? Therefore, all the above-noted cases are being disposed of by this single Judgment.3. The respondent, Surat Singh in Cr. R. No. 105 of 2002, was tried for the offences under Sections 273, 337 and 201, Indian Penal Code and under Section 184, Motor Vehicles Act. He was acquitted of such offences on 17-10-2001.4. In Cr. R. No 103 of 2002, the twelve respondents, Hari Dutt and others, were tried for the offences, under Sections 147, 148, 353 and 332 read with Section 149, Indian Penal Code. They were acquitted of such offences on 22-8-2001.5. Respondent Smt. Nirmala Devi in Cr. R. No. 104 of...
Steel Strips Ltd. Vs. Him Teknoforge Ltd.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-02-2002
Reported in: [2003]42SCL177(HP)
Arun Kumar Goel, J.1. This case has a chequered history and pleadings of the parties in Company Petition No. 5 of 2001 makes an interesting reading. With a view to properly appreciate and understand the case as was projected on behalf of the parties at the time of hearing, few facts which are relevant and necessary for deciding this appeal need to be noted.2. Parties had business dealings between them. Appellant had admittedly supplied some material to the respondent, who had been making payments from time to time regarding such supplies. Appellant claims that as on 1-4-1999 a sum of Rs. 1,21,93,169.48 paise was due and outstanding payable by the respondent to it. This amount was inclusive of interest up to 31-3-1999. Further case of the appellant is that 8 cheques of the total value of Rs. 27,82,799 were issued by the respondent towards the outstanding amount. These were dishonoured when presented to the bankers of the respondent for encashment with the endorsement exceeds arrangement...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »