Himachal Pradesh Court December 2006 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.
H.P. State Forest Corporation and anr. Vs. Ram Singh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-29-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC237
Surinder Singh, J.1. The appellant-plaintiffs herein, have filed the instant original side appeal, feeling aggrieved and dis-satisfied with the impugned judgment and decree passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Suit No. 15 of 1990 dated 5th June, 1998 whereby the suit filed by them was dismissed.2. In brief, the facts giving rise to the instant appeal are:The appellants had filed a civil suit for the recovery of Rs. 12,48,460, against the respondent-defendant, for the loss of timber caused by the respondent while executing the work assigned to him. It was averred by the appellants that tenders were invited by them for khad-floating, stacking, carriage etc. of timber with respect to various lots in the Forest Working Division, Chamba. The work of lot No. 5/84-86 was awarded to the respondent-defendant and agreement dated 10th September, 1986 was executed. In terms of the aforesaid agreement, the respondent was required to deliver back the timber launched at Dunali road side depot ...
State of H.P. Vs. Des Raj
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC242
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This petition by the State is directed against the order of the learned H.P. State Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 385 of 1991, decided on 18.8.2006.2. This case has a rather chequered history. The respondent was appointed as a helper on daily waged basis on purely temporary basis in the mini workshop of GAD on 20th June, 1984. On 28.2.1986 he was appointed on ad hoc basis and the relevant portion of the appointment letter reads as follows:This is a purely stop gap arrangement and his services shall be terminated without assigning any reason thereof with one month's notice on either side. 3. Thereafter the services of the respondent were terminated on 29th December, 1987 by an order which on the face of it was an innocuous and non-stigmatic order. The respondent challenged the order of termination by filing an original application before the learned Administrative Tribunal in March, 1991. The original application was contested by the petitioner-State on various g...
Nishar Ahamed and ors. Vs. State of H.P. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)ShimLC301
Deepak Gupta, J.1. These petitions can be disposed of by a common order. Chaudhary Sarwan Kumar Himachal Pradesh Vishvavidyalaya, Palampur, (hereinafter referred to as the University) issued an advertisement inviting applications from eligible candidates for admission to the two years' Veterinary Pharmacist Training Course. The admissions to this course were made on the basis of a written test and interview. The criteria for a candidate to be eligible to apply was that he must have passed 10+2 examination. One of the other essential qualifications was that he should have done matriculation with science subject. Only permanent residents of Himachal Pradesh between the age of 18 to 20 years were eligible to apply.2. The petitioners being eligible for admission applied for the said course. A written test was conducted on 13.7.2003. The result of the same was declared on 11.9.2003. The petitioners cleared the written test and were called for personal interview. After the interview, the pet...
Mohan Singh Vs. Smt. Leela Devi
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC327
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is directed against the order of the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Shimla, dated 26.7.2005 whereby he has dismissed the petition filed by the husband for grant of divorce.2. Brief facts necessary for decision of the case are that the parties, who are Hindu, were married on 10.5.1986 and lived together as husband and wife at village Kalhali, Tehsil and District Shimla till 19.7.1992. Two children, one son and one daughter, were born out of the wedlock and these children are residing with the wife.3. In 1995 the husband had filed a petition for grant of divorce. A decree for divorce was granted in his favour by the learned District Judge, Shimla. Thereafter Leela Devi preferred an appeal in this Court which was registered as FAO No. 270 of 1997. The matter was compromised between the parties on 7.1.1998. The appeal was allowed in terms of the compromise. The decree for di...
Siddharatha Super Spinning Mills Ltd. Vs. State of H.P. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-2006
Reported in: [2007(114)FLR297],2007(1)ShimLC291
Dev Darshan Sud, J.1. All these six writ petitions have been filed against the award of the learned Labour Court in case No. 24 of 1994. Three writ petitions have been preferred by the Management and three writ petitions being CWPs No. 514, 515 and 519 of 2001 by the workmen. Since a common question of law is involved, all the three petitions are disposed of by a common judgment. By the three awards which were passed by the learned Labour Court, the petitioners have been reinstated in service and it has been further ordered that they would be entitled to back wages to the extent of 33% of their salary. The common issue on which decision was taken by the learned Labour Court was; whether the enquiry, in question, was conducted in a fair and proper manner? If so, its effect? The judgment passed by the learned Labour Court, is based on two decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court; namely; Union of India v. Mohd. Ramzan 1991 Lab. I.C. 308 and Managing Director, ECIL, Hyderabad etc. etc. v. B...
State of H.P. Vs. Tara Chand and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ2044
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal by the State is directed against the judgment dated 26-3-1999 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghumerwin in case No. 237/1 of 1995 whereby he had acquitted the respondents of having committed offences under Sections 147, 149, 323, 325 & 506 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The prosecution case in brief is that the five accused persons came in a jeep bearing No. HP23-1072 and beat the complainant Sanjay Kumar. Complainant Sanjay Kumar died during the pendency of the proceedings before the trial Court. His death is, however, not related to the injuries caused to him in the incident. Complainant Sanjay Kumar was the owner and driver of tanker No. PBL-8125. According to the complainant, the accused pulled out him out of the tanker and beat him up. Challan was filed and the accused were summoned. They pleaded not guilty. The prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses in support of its case. Therefore, the statements of the accused persons under...
Shimla Education Society and anr. Vs. Central Board of Secondary Educa ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-28-2006
Reported in: 2007(3)ShimLC87
Deepak Gupta, J.1. The Shimla Education Society and Trust (petitioner No. 1) is running a school under the name and style of Hillgrove Senior Secondary Public School (petitioner No. 2) at Sheetal Kunj Estate, Kamlanagar, Sanjauli, Shimla-171006. The school is affiliated to the respondent Central Board of Secondary Education. The petitioner, for the last many years, has been requesting the respondents that petitioner No. 2 school may be declared as an examination centre for classes 10 and 12 examination. This prayer of the petitioners has not been accepted and hence the present petition.2. Mr. Rajeev Sharma, learned Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of the petitioners contends that the school is situated outside the Municipal limits of Shimla. According to him the school is very far away from Shimla city and, therefore, the students of the school face great difficulty while appearing in the annual examination for 10th and 12th classes. He, therefore, submits that the school should be...
Bittu Ram Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-27-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC314
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This case discloses a very sordid state of affairs where neither the prosecution nor the Court thought it fit at the appropriate time to go into the question as to what is the age of the accused. In case this had been done at the appropriate time a long and unnecessary trial could have easily been avoided.2. The background of the case is as follows: The prosecutrix in this case was born on 22.4.1987. According to her in December, 1999 she had gone to the house of Dhani Ram to attend the marriage of Asha Devi daughter of Dhani Ram who is her 'Bua'. She stayed the night in Dhani Ram's house. Further according to the prosecutrix, appellant-Bittu, one other girl Pompa and the prosecutrix slept on one bed and one other person, namely, Devinder slept on another bed. In the middle of the night, accused Bittu tried to open the 'Nara' of her salwar. The prosecutrix woke up and raised an alarm. The accused then placed his hand on her mouth. Thereafter the accused is alleged to...
Khazana Ram and anr. Vs. Lac and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-27-2006
Reported in: AIR2007HP47,2007(1)ShimLC321
ORDERDev Darshan Sud, J.1. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order passed by the learned District Judge, Solan, in Land Reference Petition No. 4-NS/4 of 1994 and the order passed by the Collector, Land Acquisition, in Case No. 20/ 98, titled : Khajana Ram v. Land Acquisition Collector and Ors., Annexures P-10 and P-11 to the writ petition. A furtherprayer has been made for a direction to the learned District Judge to entertain the Reference Petition, Annexure P-9 with the writ petition.2. The petitioners allege that they are the land-owners of land at Darlaghat which was acquired by respondent No. 1 for respondent Nos. 3 and 4. They approached the Collector and requested that Reference Petition under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') be sent to the Court of the learned District Judge for redetermination of the compensation as they were not satisfied with the amount which had been granted to them. The learned District Judge, vide his ...
Jai Dassi and ors. Vs. Smt. Neelmani and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Dec-22-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC265
Surjit Singh, J.1. By this common judgment, two appeals, i.e. RSA Nos. 63 of 1995 and 67 of 1995, are being disposed of, as both the appeals have been admitted on the very same substantial questions of law, which are as follows:1. Whether the possession of a co-owner against the other co-owner on the basis of adverse possession matures into title unless the ouster is proved?2. Whether in the event of reaching the conclusion on appraisal of the material on record that private partition between the co-owners has not been proved, a decree of declaration on the basis of adverse possession against a co-owner can be passed.3. Whether a mere non-participation in profits of the property by one co-owner and exclusive possession by the other lead to a inference of ouster in the absence of an open and unequivocal repudiation of title of the co-owner to his knowledge?4. Whether a suit for declaration could have been filed beyond a period of three years after the order of the A.C. 1st Grade, in a p...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »