Skip to content

Himachal Pradesh Court December 2004 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.

Dec 31 2004

Ram Pal Vs. Vinod Kumar and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-31-2004

Reported in: II(2005)ACC545

Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 is directed for enhancement of compensation against the Award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal), in MAC Petition No. 21-MAC/2 of 1998 decided on 4.10.1999.2. The appellant along with his friend Rajinder Singh was on Motor Cycle No. CHH-3435, which was hit by a TATA Sumo No. DL-8-CB-0190. The factum of the accident is not in dispute. Even the finding on the issue of negligence is not under challenge. The only question to be decided in this appeal is, what is the just and reasonable compensation, which the appellant is entitled to.3. Mr. Romesh Verma, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the claimants has urged that the appellant had suffered fracture of both bones of his right leg and that he remained admitted in PGI Chandigarh from 27th October, 1997 to 29th October, 1997 and that thereafter he has been bed rideen for a long...


Dec 30 2004

Rakesh Kumar Vs. State of H.P. and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-30-2004

Reported in: 2005(3)ARBLR187(HP)

K.C. Sood, J.1. The question raised in this objection petition is:Whether the award made under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, is liable to be set aside, if oral hearing is denied to one of the parties ?2. In order to appreciate the controversy, few facts may be noticed.3. In a dispute between the petitioner regarding execution of the work 'Shimla By-Pass Phase II and Retaining Wall and Breast Wall (Agreement No. 101 of 1994-95)' the Superintending Engineer, Arbitration, Solan, was appointed as the sole arbitrator by the Chief Engineer (NH), HP PWD on 05.02.2004.4. It so happened the arbitrator who was earlier seized of the dispute and had entered into arbitration was transferred and his successor took over the charge from him. The impugned award was made by the successor on 24.06.2004. The arbitrator made this award without hearing oral arguments. Even though the petitioner moved an application before the arbitrator on 7th April, 2004, saying that when the case was fixed o...


Dec 29 2004

Sohan Singh and Etc. Vs. State of H.P.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-29-2004

Reported in: 2005CriLJ973

ORDERM.R. Verma, J.1. Since both these petitions raise similar questions for determination, therefore, are being disposed of by this common order.2. Petition No. 6 is directed against the order dated 1-1-2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu whereby the order dated 31-3-2003 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, I-Class, Manali, directing the release of wooden doors, seized by the police in case FIR No. 71/03, dated 24-3-2003, under Sections 41 and 42 of the Indian Forest Act, has been set aside.3. Petition No. 7 is directed against the order dated 1-1-2004 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Kullu whereby the order dated 26-3-2003 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, I-Class, Manali, directing the release of vehicle, i.e. Jeep No. HP-58-0864, seized by the police in the aforesaid FIR, has been set aside.4. The facts relevant for the purpose of consideration of these petitions are that in the aforesaid FIR a police party on checking of Mahindra Jeep No. HP-58-08...


Dec 29 2004

Lal Singh Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-29-2004

Reported in: 2006ACJ482

Deepak Gupta, J.1. The present appeal has been filed for enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Shimla in M.A.C. Case No. 127-S/2 of 1998, decided on 4.6.2003.2. Facts giving rise to filing of this petition are that claimant was travelling in bus No. HP 25-0710 on 11.12.1997. This bus was owned by respondent No. 1 and driven by respondent No. 2. The same met with an accident and the claimant suffered serious injuries in the accident. He filed a claim petition claiming compensation for the loss suffered by him on account of the injuries sustained by him in the accident. The Claims Tribunal has awarded a sum of Rs. 1,48,000 as compensation. Claiming that the compensation awarded is too meagre, the appellant has filed the present appeal in this Court.3. The facts relevant for determining the compensation are that due to the accident the claimant suffered fracture in pelvis and his urethra was also damaged considerably. His leg has been shortened by...


Dec 24 2004

Sunil Kumar Vs. State of H.P.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-24-2004

Reported in: 2005CriLJ2512

M.R. Verma, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated (sic) 9-2004 rendered by the learned Presiding Officer (Additional Sessions Judge), East Track Court, Kangra at Dharamshala, whereby the appellant-accused (hereinafter referred to as the accused) has been convicted under Sections 376/511 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three-and-a-half years and fine Rs. 3,000/-and in default of payment of fine, to undergo imprisonment for six months.2. The case of the prosecution against the accused is that in the first half of the year 2000 he was posted as a teacher in Government Primary School, Takhnahar. PW-3, then aged about 12 years, was a student of IV Class in the said school. In the month of May, 2000, it was noticed by Durgi Devi (PW-11) mother of PW-3 that PW-3 was reluctant to go to school, therefore, on 12-5-2000 she enquired from PW-3 as to why she was reluctant to go to school whereas earlier she had been going to school happily. On s...


Dec 22 2004

Deepa Ram Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-22-2004

Reported in: (2005)IILLJ1054HP

Arun Kumar Goel, J.1. This writ petition is taken up at the joint request of learned counsel for the parties and also keeping in view the limited controversy involved in it.2. Petitioner has challenged order dated February 24, 2003, Annexure P-1, passed by respondent No. 2. By means of impugned order, reference of dispute between the petitioner and Himachal Pradesh Public Works Department, Division Shillai, District Sirmaur, has been declined on the ground that the dispute was raised after 12 years without giving any proper justification of delay.3. Facts in this case are by and large admitted. These are as under:Petitioner was working as a daily-rated workman since 1984. According to him, his 10 services were terminated in the year 1990, without following the principles of either natural justice or the Industrial Disputes Act. He therefore, right from beginning was approaching the office of PWD at Shillai for his re-engagement, but despite assurance that he will be re-engaged, nothing...


Dec 21 2004

Himachal Road Transport Corporation and ors. Vs. Raj Kumar

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-21-2004

Reported in: II(2005)ACC625,2006ACJ1084

Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been filed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (I), Kangra, at Dharamsala dated 22.2.1997.2. The appellants have filed this appeal mainly on the ground that the accident had occurred due to failure of the brakes and, therefore, there was no negligence on the part of the driver and hence the liability could not be fastened upon the appellants. The appellants have also assailed the compensation granted as being excessive.3. The respondent-claimant has filed cross-objections claiming enhancement of the amount.4. The claimant-respondent aged about 30 years was travelling in a bus bearing registration No. HP 39-0290 belonging to the appellant No. 1. The said bus met with an accident on 26.4.1995 in which the respondent suffered injuries.5. The claimant-respondent in support of his case has proved on record the F.I.R. and has examined himself and the other witnesses. Admittedly, the accident h...


Dec 14 2004

State of H.P. Vs. Ram Lal

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-14-2004

Reported in: 2006CriLJ3070

M.R. Verma, J.1. This application has been preferred by the State for grant of leave to appeal against the judgment dated 16-9-2004 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sirmaur at Nahan whereby the respondent has been acquitted of the accusations under Section 8(2) read with Section 9 of the H.P. Good Conduct Prisoners (Temporary Release) Act, 1968 (hereafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The accusations against the respondent are that on conviction under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code he was undergoing life imprisonment in Model Central Jail, Nahan. On his application he has temporarily released on 42 days parole w.e.f. 17-5-2002 to 27-6-2002 and was to surrender himself in the Jail on 28-6-2002. The respondent, however, failed to surrender on the due date and instead surrendered on 24-7-2004 after an overstay of 26 days against the sanctioned parole period, hence, a complaint was lodged against him in the trial Court under Section 9 read with Section 8(2) of the Act ...


Dec 14 2004

Bihari Lal Vs. State of H.P.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-14-2004

Reported in: 2006CriLJ3832

Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J.1. Bihari Lal-appellant (hereinafter referred to the 'accused') has challenged the judgment and order dated 6-6-2002 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kinnaur Sessions Division at Rampur Bushahr in Sessions Trial No. 15 of 2001 convicting him under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 (for short the 'I.P.C.') for the murder of his wife Smt. Sewa Dassi and Naresh Kumar son about four years of age and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer simple imprisonment for further period of two years.2. The prosecution case against the accused was that the accused married Smt. Sewa Dassi some time in the year 1990. Two sons, namely, Ram Sawarup and Naresh Kumar were born to them. In the month of January/February, 2000 the accused started treating his wife Smt. Sewa Dassi with cruelty as he suspected that her moral character was not good. Smt. Sewa Dassi left the house of the accused ...


Dec 06 2004

H.P. State Industrial Development Corporation Vs. State of H.P. and or ...

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Decided on: Dec-06-2004

Reported in: [2005]126CompCas1(HP),[2005(105)FLR234],(2005)IILLJ384HP,[2005]63SCL424(HP)

K.C. Sood, J. 1. The question raised in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is:Whether the petitioner HPSIDC having taken over the hypothecated assets of a loanee Company under Section 29 of the State Financial Corporation Act, and then handing over back such assets to the same loanee Company after one time settlement, can be termed as successor or assign of the loanee company within the meaning of Section 18(c) of the Industrial Disputes Act. 2. In order to appreciate the controversy, the facts relevant for the purpose of the disposal of this writ petition may be noticed.3. The petitioner H.P. State Industrial Development Corporation, (HPSIDC for short), a Government Company incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, and Himachal Pradesh Financial Corporation, (HPFC for short) respondent No. 8, advanced a loan of Rupees 32.2 lakhs and Rupees 30 lakhs respectively, to Unit Techno Cylinders (P) Ltd., ('First Company' for short). First Company defaulted in ...


  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial