Himachal Pradesh Court March 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.
Sirtaj Constructions Ltd. Vs. Col. Suresh Chander Dogra and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-18-2005
Reported in: AIR2005HP47
ORDERM.R. Verma, J. 1. This application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure is preferred by the applicant/plaintiff (hereafter referred to as 'the plaintiff') seeking interim relief of restraining the defendants/respondents (hereafter referred to as 'the defendant') from interfering with the possession of the plaintiff or dispossessing him from Flats Nos. 1, 8, 9 and 5 constructed by the plaintiff over the suit land and also further restraining the defendants from selling, transferring or encumbering the suit property in any manner.2. Brief facts leading to the presentation of this application are that the plaintiff had instituted a suit for permanent prohibitory injunction and a decree for Rs. 17,14,446/-. The case of the plaintiff as made out in the plaint is that it is a construction company and the defendants are the owners of the suit land, measuring, 595 square meters situate in Brock Hurst Chhota Shimla. The parties entered into a c...
Satish Kumar Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-16-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3240
Arun Kumar Goel, J.1. For having committed the offence of culpable homicide, by having done to death his wife Smt. Kamlesh Kumari, appellant was charged under Section 302, IPC. After having been found guilty, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-, and in default of the payment whereof, he was sentenced to simple imprisonment for one year.2. Charge against the appellant was that on the intervening night of 22/23-10-2001, at village Padhori, he committed the murder of his wife Smt. Kamlesh Kumari and thus committed an offence under Section 102, IPC. He pleaded not guilty to this charge and claimed trial.3. At the time of hearing of this appeal, learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the presence of appellant at his residence in village Padhori is not at all established on the night intervening 22/23-10-2001. Similarly, Ex. PDD FIR in this case was not only outcome of deliberations but In the face of documentary and oral ...
Chetan Vs. Himachal Road Transport Corporation and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-16-2005
Reported in: III(2005)ACC386,2006ACJ1326
Deepak Gupta, J.1. The appellant Chetan, a minor, was aged about 11 years at the time of the accident. He was a student of class VII. On 16.4.1996, when he was travelling with his parents on a scooter, the same met with an accident with bus No. HP 22-0581 owned by the Himachal Road Transport Corporation and driven by Ramesh Kumar, respondent No. 3.2. As a result of the accident, the claimant suffered serious injuries, in which his pelvis was fractured and he also suffered fracture of the inferior pubic rami. He was initially taken to the hospital at Namhol on 16.4.1996, from where he was referred to the District Hospital at Bilaspur. The doctors at District Hospital, Bilaspur, referred him to the Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Shimla, where he remained admitted from 17.4.1996 to 6.6.1996. During this period he underwent surgery in that hospital. Three of his teeth were also broken in the accident.3. The claimant being a minor filed the present claim petition before the Mot...
Master Chetan Vs. H.R.T.C. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-16-2005
Reported in: 3(2005)ACC386
Deepak Gupta, J.1. The appellant Chetan, a minor, was aged about 11 years at the time of the accident. He was a student of Class-VII. On 16.4.1996, when he was travelling with his parents on a scooter, the same met with an accident with Bus No. HP-22-0581 owned by the Himachal Road Transport Corporation and driven by Shri Ramesh Kumar, respondent No. 3.2. As a result of the accident, the claimant suffered serious injuries, in which his pelvis was fractured and he also suffered fracture of the inferior pubic ramii. He was initially taken to the hospital at Namhol on 16.4.1996, from where he was referred to the District Hospital at Bilaspur. The Doctors at District Hospital, Bilaspur referred him to the Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Shimla, where he remained admitted from 17.4.1996 to 6.6.1996. During this period he underwent surgery in that hospital. Three of his teeth were also broken in the accident.3. The claimant being a minor filed the present claim petition before th...
Budhi Singh Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-15-2005
Reported in: 2005CriLJ3340
Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J.1. Appellant-Budhi Singh (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') faced trial in Sessions Trial No. 25 of 2001 for the alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'IPC') and Section 25 of the Arms Act. Having found the accused to be guilty of the offences, the learned Sessions Judge, Mandi sentenced him to imprisonment for life under Section 302, I.P.C. and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for one year. For the offence under Section 25 of the Arms Act, the accused has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-. In default of payment of fine to suffer rigorous imprisonment for one year. The amount of fine, if realized, was ordered to be paid to the heirs of deceased Raju Ram. The sentences imposed on the accused have been directed to run concurrently.2. The prosecution version as unfo...
ishwar Dass and anr. Vs. Mansha Ram and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-15-2005
Reported in: AIR2005HP44
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 one of the plaintiffs, namely, Ishwar Dass was dismissed by the learned District Judge.2. The plaintiffs had filed a suit for declaration and permanent injunction against the defendants with the allegations that the plaintiffs and the defendants were joint owners in possession of the suit land and the orders dated 2-6-1987, 21-2-1989 and 8-11-1989 passed by the Assistant Collector, Collector and the Divisional Commissioner, respectively, were illegal and without jurisdiction and the same would have no effect over the right, title or interest of the plaintiffs and that the defendants be restrained from getting possession of the suit land as per the order of partition and in the alternative the plaintiffs sought joint possession over the suit land. It ...
Himachal Road Transport Corporation and ors. Vs. Krishna Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-2005
Reported in: III(2005)ACC277,2006ACJ1248
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act is directed against the award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur in the Claim Petition No. 25 of 1990, decided on 30.8.1993 whereby an award of Rs. 3,00,000 has been made in favour of the claimant and against the H.R.T.C.2. The facts necessary for the decision of this case are that deceased Nishchint Singh Sain was working as Junior Engineer. On 14.1.1990 he was travelling in bus No. HID 424 belonging to H.R.T.C. This bus was hit by truck No. HIB 2634 belonging to respondent No. 2 and insured with respondent No. 4. The Tribunal below held that the drivers of both the vehicles were equally responsible for the accident and apportioned the liability 50:50. The Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs. 3,00,000 to the claimant, who is the mother of the deceased.3. Mr. Rakesh Jaswal, Advocate, has challenged the findings of the Tribunal on the issue of negligence and also challenged the quantum awarded to th...
Sanjay Arora Vs. Pritam Singh and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-11-2005
Reported in: III(2005)ACC131,2006ACJ1163
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act has been filed by the claimant whose claim petition has been dismissed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (I), Kangra at Dharamshala vide award dated 5.9.1994.2. The facts giving rise for disposal of the present appeal are that according to the claimant-petitioner on 29.5.1992 he was travelling from Kangra to Palampur by a scooter No. PB 08-9810. He claims that he was driving the scooter and was alone on the scooter. At a place known as 61 Miles, a bus bearing registration No. HP 39-201 belonging to H.R.T.C., respondent No. 2 and driven by Pritam Singh, respondent No. 1, is alleged to have come from the opposite direction. He further alleged that the said bus was driven by its driver in a rash and negligent manner and it struck against the scooter as a result of which he was thrown on the ground. The appellant-claimant claims that he sustained multiple grievous injuries including fracture of his right leg. H...
Shobit Construction and anr. Etc. Vs. T.K. International Ltd.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-07-2005
Reported in: AIR2006HP4,2006(1)ARBLR510(HP)
ORDERK.C. Sood, J.1. The order will dispose of OMPs No. 32 and 57 of 2004 in Civil Suit. No. 52 of 2003 and OMPs No. 12 and 56 of 2004 in Civil Suit No. 51 of 2003 as parties in both the suits are same and one of the questions raised is same in both the suits.2. O.M.P. No. 32 of 2004 is filed by the defendant under Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for referring the dispute raised in Civil Suit No. 52 of 2003 to the Arbitration. By OMP No. 57 of 2004 in Civil 3uil No. 52 of 2003 and 58 of 2004 in Civil Suit No. 51 of 2003 under Order 8, Rule 1 of the Code, the plaintiffs pray for closing the defence of the defendant for having failed to file the written statement within the time limited under Order 8, Rule1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. OMP No. 12 of 2004 (Civil Suit No. 51 of 2003) is filed by the defendant for rejection of the plaint.3. Plaintiff in Civil Suit No. 52 of 2003 is M/s. Shobit Construction and another and in Civil Suit No. 51 of 2003 is Shobit Fab...
Mansa Devi and anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-03-2005
Reported in: III(2005)ACC200,2006ACJ1135
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act is directed against the award of the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-II, Kangra at Dharamshala, dated 2.5.1994, rendered in M.A.C. Petition No. 13 of 1992, whereby he has dismissed the claim petition filed by the claimants.2. The facts necessary for the decision of the present appeal are that on 9.1.1992 bus No. HPK 2280 belonging to the Police Department and owned by the respondent No. 1 and driven by respondent No. 2 was going from Gaggal towards Pathankot. Motor cycle No. HIC 126 was being driven by deceased Hem Raj. Kamal Singh was the pillion rider. This motor cycle was also going in the same direction. After about 1 km from Gaggal there is a bifurcation and on the right side a road leads to Gaggal Airport. The admitted case is that the bus turned from the main road towards the airport and the motor cycle hit against the bus which Hem Raj was driving.3. The appellants being the parents of late Hem Raj, who ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›