Himachal Pradesh Court November 2005 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.
Madan Lal Vs. Kunta Devi Etc.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-30-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC186
V.M. Jain, J.1. This revision petition under Section 24(5) of the H.P. Urban Rent Control Act, 1987 (hereinafter to be referred as the Act), has been filed by the petitioner-tenant against the order dated 10.11.2005 passed by the Rent Controller (Executing Court) dismissing the objection petition filed by the tenant-J.D. under Section 47 C.P.C.2. The facts which are relevant for the decision of the present petition are that Jai Karan, landlord had filed the eviction petition under Section 14 of the Act against Madan Lal , tenant, in respect of the demised premises, on account of the non-payment of arrears of rent. After hearing both sides and perusing the record, the learned Rent Controller, Shimla, vide order dated 15.1.1999, allowed the eviction petition filed by the landlord and ordered the ejectment of the tenant from the demised premises, with the stipulation that in case the tenant makes the payment, as mentioned below, within one month from the said date, he shall not be evicted...
Smt. Sandhya Devi and anr. Vs. H.R.T.C. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC203
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal filed by the claimants is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Kullu, in Claim Petition No. 39/99, decided on 1.12.2001, whereby the claim petition filed by the claimants has been dismissed.2. The claimants, who are the parents of deceased Jitender Sharma, filed a claim petition in which it was alleged that the deceased was a pillion rider on a scooter belonging to respondent No. 4 Krishan Gopal Thakur and being driven by his son Jitender Thakur. According to the claimants, there was collision between this scooter and an HRTC bus which was going from Kullu side towards Manali. They averred that the accident had occurred due to the rash and negligent driving of both the driver of the bus as well as the driver of the scooter. As far as the owner and driver of the bus are concerned, their case was that no collision had taken place between the scooter and the bus. As far as respondents No. 4 and 5 are concerned, according to them...
Sheela Nehru Vs. Nirmala Sharma and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-29-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC208
V.M. Jain, J.1. This Regular Second Appeal has been filed against the judgment and decrees of the Courts below whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff was dismissed by the trial Court and the appeal filed by her was also dismissed by the learned District Judge.2. The plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration and injunction. One of the issues i.e. Issue No. 6 framed in the case was as to whether the suit has not been properly valued for the purposes of Court fee and jurisdiction. The learned trial Court while deciding this suit had decided Issue No. 6 against the plaintiff and it was held that the suit had not been properly valued for the purposes of Court fees and that the plaintiff was required to pay additional Court fee of Rs. 4080.70P. It was further directed that the plaintiff shall affix the requisite Court fee within one month from the date of the judgment failing which the same shall be recovered from the plaintiff as per law. The learned trial Court also decided the other iss...
(Dr.) Sanjiv Sharma Vs. State of H.P. and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-25-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC741,AIR2006HP141,2006(1)ShimLC226
K.C. Sood, J.1. On 26th February, 2000, the petitioner was driving his Car bearing registration No. HP-09-0050 on his way to Chandigarh from Shimla. His vehicle was checked by Head Constable Abhimanu and it was found that he was not carrying a valid 'Pollutions under Control' Certificate. The one he was carrying had expired. He was challaned and produced before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Shimla on the spot. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate imposed a penalty of Rs. 400/- upon the petitioner. The amount of fine was deposited, on the spot, with the officials of the court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate.2. The case of the petitioner is that he was challaned without following the procedure as provided under Chapter-V of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. It is also the case of the petitioner that he requested the concerned police officer that his vehicle should be got tested, as per Rule 116 of the Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, or in the alternative he should be...
Sher Singh Vs. Rakesh Kumar and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-25-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ2367
Deepak Gupta, J.1. The main appeal and the application filed are being taken up together for hearing with the consent of the parties.2. The facts necessary for decision of the case are that Sher Singh filed a petition for grant of compensation on the ground that he was an employee of Kaushal Roller Flour Mills, Tahliwal, District Una, H.P. He alleged that Kaushal Roller Flour Mills was owned by Rakesh Kumar who was the sole proprietor of the flour mills. He alleged that during the course of employment his right hand was crushed in the grinding machine which resulted in permanent amputation of all the fingers. The claimant further alleged that his monthly wages were Rs. 2,800 and prayed for compensation accordingly.3. Rakesh Kumar was arrayed as the respondent and shown to be the proprietor of Kaushal Roller Flour Mills. In his reply, he stated that in fact he was not the proprietor of Kaushal Roller Flour Mills and the firm Kaushal Roller Flour Mills is a separate juristic entity being...
H.P. Agro Industries Corporation Ltd. Vs. S.N. Chemicals and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC162
Surjit Singh, J.1. Plaintiff is a Company, registered under the Companies Act, 1950. It is owned and controlled by the State of Himachal Pradesh. Shri R.K. Sharma, its Divisional Manager of Pesticides Wing, is authorized to file the suit on behalf of it. The plaintiff deals in pesticides and insecticides, for which it has been issued a licence by the Government of India, Ministry of Commerce. Defendant No. 1 is a firm having two partners, i.e. defendants No. 2 and 3. This firm is engaged in formulation of pesticides and insecticides. Defendant No. 1 does not have the licence to import directly the technicals for the formulation of pesticides and insecticides. It approached the plaintiff for procurement of three technicals, namely Mancozeb technical, Dimethoate technical and Phenthoate technical for it from a firm of Italy. The plaintiff agreed to the proposal of defendants No. 1 to 3. It was agreed that the plaintiff will open an account of letter of credit with State Bank of Patiala, ...
State of H.P. Vs. Muni Lal
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC216
Surjit Singh, J.1. The State of Himachal Pradesh is aggrieved of the judgment of the learned trial Magistrate, whereby respondent Muni Lal, who was tried for the offences punishable under Sections 325, 323 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code on police report, has been acquitted.2. One Smt. Kamla Devi lodged a report with the police that on 17.3.1996 at 8.30 p.m., when she went to her khokha to serve tea to her husband, she saw that respondent Muni Lal was trying to outrage the modesty of a girl, to which she objected to and due to such objection, the respondent caught hold of her by her arm and started giving beating, as a result of which one of her upper teeth was broken. Police registered a case and got the lady medically examined. The medical examination showed that there was laceration of upper lip and the tooth just behind the lacerated portion of the lip had broken. On completion of the investigation, report was filed against the respondent. The learned trial Magistrate charged the ...
Moti Ram Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC231
Surjit Singh, J.1. Appellant Moti Ram is aggrieved by the judgment dated 30.7.2005 of the trial Court, whereby he has been convicted for an offence, under Section 20(B) of the Narcotic, Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six years and to pay fine of Rs. 60,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of one year.2. Police instituted a case against the appellant by submitting a report, under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, alleging that on 1.2.2003, around 6.30 a.m., when S.I. Laljit Singh, accompanied by HC Harbans Kumar and LHC Sunil Kumar and other police officials, was present at a place called Sambha, within the jurisdiction of Police Station, Banjar, the appellant was seen coming from Niharni side and on seeing the police, he got unnerved and that aroused the suspicion of the said Sub-Inspector The Sub-Inspector deputed a constable, named Anup Ram, who was ac...
P.D. Attri and ors. Vs. State of H.P. and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-25-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC190
K.C. Sood, J.1. The question raised in this petition is whether the recommendations of Hon'ble the Chief Justice of this High Court have been considered by the Respondent-State Government objectively after exchange of views and thoughts between the Governor of Himachal Pradesh and the Chief Justice of this Court in terms of the orders of the Supreme Court in State of H.P. v. P.D. Attri and Ors. : 1993CriLJ2086 .2. The Perspective:3. The petitioners herein were employees working in the establishment of the High Court as Senior Translators and Junior Translators. They are governed by the Himachal Pradesh High Court Officers and Servants (Salaries, Leave, Allowances and Pension) Rules, 1971, ('Himachal Rules' for short). Similar posts in the establishment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court were governed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court Establishment (Appointment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1973. ('Punjab Rules' for short).4. Punjab Rules relating to the Senior Translators and ...
Pala Ram Vs. Punjab Roadways and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-24-2005
Reported in: 2007ACJ983,2006(1)ShimLC214
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal by the claimant has been filed against the award of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I, Kangra at Dharamshala in MAC Petition No. 54-G/II/1998 decided on 1.3.2001 whereby the claimant has been awarded only Rs. 7,000/- as compensation and, therefore, this appeal.2. First of all I shall deal with the preliminary objection raised by learned Counsel for the respondent that the appeal is not maintainable as the amount awarded is less than Rs. 10,000/-.Section 173(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act reads as follows :173. Appeals :(1) ...(2) No appeal shall lie against any award of a Claims Tribunal if the amount in dispute in the appeal is less than ten thousand rupees.3. Mr. Sharma, relies upon this section to submit that the disputed amount being less than Rs. 10,000/- the appeal is not maintainable. Reliance is also placed on the judgment of this Court in Mittar Singh and Ors. v. Ashish Kumar and Ors. 1998 (2) Shim.L.C. 7, and the judgment of Karnataka H...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »