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.
Smt. Neelam Anand Vs. Sardar Manmohan Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2005
Reported in: I(2006)ACC766,2007ACJ1386,2006(1)ShimLC154
Deepak Gupta, J.1. Neelam Anand, the appellant, was a happily married woman. She had a husband and two sons. She worked as a Special Assistant in Canara Bank at Ambala Cantt. On 17.4.1999 she alongwith her husband was traveling from Delhi to Solan in a vehicle bearing No. HR-01F-3692. Then tragedy struck. Near Shahbad there was a collision between this vehicle and another vehicle bearing No. PB-08Q-7535. Neelam Anand lost her husband, K.K. Anand in the said accident and she herself was seriously injured.2. The appellant suffered injury in the spine as a result of which her whole body below damages may vary according to the gravity of the injuries sustained by the claimant in an accident. On account of the injuries, the claimant may suffer consequential losses such as, (i) loss of earning; (ii) expenses on treatment which may include medical expenses, transportation, special diet, attendant charges etc., (iii) loss or diminution to the pleasures of life by loss of a particular part of t...
Balwant Singh Alias Rattan, Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-22-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC197
Surjit Singh, J.1. Appellants, in all the three appeals, were jointly charged with and tried for offences punishable, under Sections 459, 392/395 read with Sections 397, 427 read with Sections 34, 342 read with Sections 34 and 354 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, for allegedly breaking open the house of one Kanshi Ram, during night time, robbing him of currency notes and golden ornaments, making an attempt to murder him, in the course of the commission of the aforesaid offence of robbery, committing the offence of mischief by pelting stones on the roof of the house of said Kanshi Ram and damaging the slates of the roof, confining said Kanshi Ram in his house and assaulting his minor daughter, aged about 8 years, with an intent to outrage her modesty.2. On 2.10.1998 a statement was made to the police by said Kanshi Ram, when he was admitted in the District Hospital, Bilaspur. Police recorded that statement, under Section 154 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and on the ba...
Devender Singh Vs. State Bank of India and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-21-2005
Reported in: [2006(109)FLR1114],2006(1)ShimLC236
K.C. Sood, J.1. Anant Ram, the father of the petitioner, was employed as Messenger in the State Bank of India at its Sawra Branch in District Shimla. By a letter dated December 12, 1998, he sought retirement on medical grounds saying that he is suffering from tuber closes and diabetes. His eye sight has deteriorated. He also simultaneously prayed for his retirement from service on medical grounds (Annexure-PC) and employment for his son who is a Matriculate so that he could become bread earner for the family. He was medically examined by a Medical Board consisting of the Medical Specialist and Surgeon of Deen Dayal Upadhya Hospital, Shimla. The Board certified that Anant Ram was permanent incapacitated for further service of any kind in the Department, to which he belonged, because of diabetes retinopathy (Annexure-PD). The Zonal Office of the Bank conveyed to the Branch Manager of the Bank at Sawra by its letter dated August 5, 1999 (Annexure-PE/1) that Anant Ram has been granted perm...
New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Walaiti Ram and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-17-2005
Reported in: 2006ACJ2748
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act (herein-after referred to as 'the Act') is directed against the award of the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Hamirpur (for short 'the Tribunal') in M.A.C. Case No. 65 of 1998 whereby he has awarded compensation of Rs. 1,20,000 to the claimants who are the parents of deceased Suresh Kumar.2. Admittedly, Suresh Kumar was the cleaner of truck No. HP- 51 1558 and was aged about 23 years at the time of accident. The defence taken by the insurance company was that the driver did not have a valid driving licence. The learned Claims Tribunal has negatived this contention of the insurance company. The present appeal has been filed by the insurance company.3. Mr. K.D. Sood, the learned Counsel appearing on behalf of insurance company contends that the endorsement in driving licence permitting the driver, Shyam Lal to drive a heavy goods vehicle is appar-ently illegal and against law. He further submits that the said ...
Moon Hotel Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Smt. Venu Bakshi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC210
V.M. Jain, J.1. This appeal has been filed by the plaintiff - appellant against the order dated 2.7.2005 passed by the learned District Judge, Shimla, dismissing the application of the plaintiff-appellant under Order 9 Rule 9 C.P.C., seeking restoration of the suit, which was dismissed in default on 11.7.2003.2. The facts which are relevant for the decision of the present appeal are that the plaintiff had filed a suit against the defendants, which was pending in the Court of District Judge, Shimla. On various dates, the plaintiff failed to produce evidence in support of its case. The next date fixed in the case was 11.7.2003 for the plaintiff's evidence being the last opportunity subject to payment of Rs. 1,000/- as costs. On 11.7.2003, no one came present on behalf of the plaintiff. Even though the counsel for the defendants were present. After noticing that no evidence of the plaintiff was present inspite of the fact that it was the last opportunity subject to payment of costs and ev...
ishwari Prashad Vs. Kuldeep Kumar and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-10-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC247
V.M. Jain, J.1. This Regular Second Appeal has been filed by defendant-appellant Ishwari Parshad against the judgment and decree dated 10.3.2005 passed by the District Judge, whereby the judgment and decree passed by the trial Court were modified in terms of the alleged compromise.2. The facts which are relevant for the decision of the present appeal are that Kuldeep Kumar etc. plantiffs had filed suit for permanent prohibitory injunction and also for mandatory injunction against the defendants including defendant No. 1 Ishwari Parshad (father of the plaintiffs). In the written statement, the defendants contested the suit. It was denied that the plaintiffs were the son and daughter of defendant No. 1, alleging therein that the mother of the plaintiffs had left defendant No. 1 about 40 years back and was residing with her parents and the mother of the plaintiffs had given birth to the plaintiffs at her parents house, even though defendant No. 1 had not visited her nor she had joined him...
Mehar Chand Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-09-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC177
V.M. Jain, J.1. This Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the plaintiff - appellant against the judgments and decrees of the Courts below, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiff was dismissed by the trial Court and the appeal filed by him was also dismissed by the learned District Judge.2. Mehar Chand, plaintiff had filed a suit for declaration to the effect that he was the absolute owner in possession of the suit property, having acquired ownership thereof by adverse possession and that the orders passed by the Assistant Collector, Collector, Commissioner and the Financial Commissioner in the proceedings under Section 163 of the Himachal Pradesh Land Revenue Act, seeking his ejectment from the suit property were illegal and void and were liable to be declared as such. Inspite of various opportunities no written statement was filed on behalf of the defendant. However, the learned trial Court framed various issues and fixed the case for plaintiff's evidence. The plaintiff produced e...
Keshav Ram and ors. Vs. State of H.P. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC180
V.M. Jain, J.1. This Regular Second Appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs-appellants against the judgments and decrees of the Courts below, whereby the suit filed by the plaintiffs was dismissed by the trial Court and the appeal filed by them was also dismissed by the learned Additional District Judge.2. The facts which are relevant for the decision of the present appeal are that plaintiffs Keshav Ram etc. had filed a suit for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction against defendants State of H.P. etc. with the allegations that they were owners in possession of the suit land, whereas the defendants had no right, title or interest therein. It was alleged that the suit land was recorded as 'Shamlat Deh' in possession of the villagers in the revenue records. It was alleged that on coming into force of the Punjab Village Common Land (Regulation) Act, 1961, the land was mutated in the name of the Gram Panchayat. It was alleged that however, at the time of the coming into force o...
Ashok Kumar Vs. H.P. State Cooperative Housing Federation Ltd. and anr ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-08-2005
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC252
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. This case presents a saga of events which demonstrate as to how the public interest came to be totally jeopardized and the manner in which the functionaries of the State Government have been consistently failing to discharge their statutory obligations.2. The petitioner suffered an award passed against him under Section 72 read with Section 73 of the H.P, Cooperative Societies Act, 1968 (1968 Act, for short). This award was passed against the petitioner in the year 1995. In 1996 the petitioner challenged this award by filing a statutory appeal under Section 93(1)(h) of the 1968 Act. Since the impugned award in this case was passed by the Registrar, the appeal in terms of Sub-section (2) (a) of Section 93 (supra) was filed before the Government.3. The Additional Secretary in the Department of Cooperation, Government of Himachal Pradesh was seized of this appeal and despite 9 years having elapsed since the filing of the appeal, the appeal has not been disposed of so fa...
Bimla Devi Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Nov-03-2005
Reported in: [2006(109)FLR800],2006(1)ShimLC219
K.C. Sood, J.1. Petitioner Bimla Devi is widow of late Sepoy Amar Singh of Punjab Regiment, who laid down his life on 22nd September, 1965, during Indo-Pak War. Petitioner was granted special pension. On her remarriage special pension was withdrawn and instead was granted normal family pension permissible under the Pension Rules. Family pension was also withheld/stopped w.e.f. 1st February, 1972.2. The petitioner by this writ petition prays for quashing of the orders/communications as communicated to her vide Annexures P-l and P-2.3. Admitted facts :On the death of her husband, in action, during Indo-Pak War of 1965, petitioner was granted special family pension in January, 1966, being nominated person by her husband. However, respondent No. 5 Jharu Ram, father of the deceased, represented to the Army Authorities for the grant of the special family pension as he was totally dependant on the income of his son Amar Singh as Bimla Devi, the petitioner, refused to maintain him. The Army Au...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »