Himachal Pradesh Court April 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.
Charu Bhatnagar Vs. H.P.M.C.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-10-2006
Reported in: AIR2006HP119,2007(2)CTLJ126(HP),2006(1)ShimLC465
K.C. Sood, J.1. This second appeal arises out of the judgment of reversal of learned District Judge, Shimla dated September 1, 1999.2. It appears pursuant to the decision taken by the Government of Himachal Pradesh, the Horticulture Produce Marketing and Processing Corporation, a Government of Himachal Pradesh undertaking, was charged with the responsibility to purchase unmarketable 'Culled Apple' under the 'Support Price Scheme' to help the farmers from financial crisis as all the apple crop had gone bad. Under the Scheme, the 'Culled' fruit was to be received by the Incharge of the concerned Centre and issue receipt indicating the net weight of the fruit and the amount to be paid to the fruit grower in prescribed form.3. The plaintiff-appellant laid a suit before the learned Sub-Judge 1st Class, Rohru for the recovery of rupees 49,794/-. The case of the plaintiff as disclosed in the plaint is:4. The plaintiff is owner of 'Charu orchards'. This orchard was jointly managed, at the rele...
Smt. Shakuntla and ors. Vs. Sh. Surinder Chand and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-10-2006
Reported in: AIR2006HP108,2006(2)ShimLC9
K.C. Sood, J.1. This second appeal arises out of the judgment and decree of reversal rendered by learned Additional District Judge, Kullu on July 11, 1995. This second appeal was admitted by Goel J. on July 15, 1997 with the observations :Admit on substantial questions of law at Nos. 4, 5 and 8 mentioned at page 10 of the paper book.Substantial questions of law at page 10 reads:4. Whether in the absence of specific plea as to which religion the plaintiff belong, findings in the matter of regulation of succession could not be recorded?5. Whether in the matter of succession, the parties to the suit are governed by custom or by the provision of Hindu Succession Act. In case of custom, what are the particulars of the custom and whether the same is valid?8. Whether the parties to the suit in the matter of succession are governed by the custom known as Rewaj-e-Zamindara, if so, the same has been specifically pleaded or proved?2. When the appeal was being heard, learned Counsel for the appell...
Madan Mohan and anr. Vs. H.P.M.C.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-10-2006
Reported in: AIR2006HP105,II(2007)BC602
K.C. Sood, J.1. This second appeal arises out of the judgment and decree of reversal of the learned District Judge, Shimla, dated 1st September, 1999 in Civil Appeal No. 37-S/13 of 1999.2. The appeal was admitted by this Court on 8th November, 1999, on the following substantial questions of law:(1) Whether the defendant could deny payment of the balance price of culled apples and interest thereon to the appellants when the receipt of apples is not disputed and the defendants had enjoyed the benefit of such apples and whether the appellants were entitled to such payment under Section 70 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872? (2) Whether the findings of the learned District Judge, Shimla are not sustainable in law for non-consideration of material oral and documentary evidence and particularly documents Ex. PW-1/A, PW8/1, PW8/2, PW3/A and PX and statements of PW8 Shri Mohd. Sadiqu, PW10 Sh. Preet Pal Monga and PW9 Sh. Ram Singh and the findings of fact and appreciation of evidence by the tria...
Deepak Chandel and ors. Vs. Megh Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-10-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ShimLC363
Surjit Singh, J.1. This appeal, by the plaintiffs/appellants, is directed against the judgment and decree of the first appellate Court (Additional District Judge), whereby decree dated 26.6.1972, passed by the trial Court in favour of the appellants/plaintiffs in a suit instituted by them, has been set aside and the suit dismissed.2. Relevant facts may be summed up thus. Appellants/plaintiffs filed a suit for possession of 22 Bighas, 13 Biswas of land bearing Khasra Nos. 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24 and 25, situate in Mohal Khilra, Tehsil Sundernagar, District Mandi, hereinafter referred to as the suit land, pleading the following cause of action.3. One Shri Padu was the owner of the suit land. On his death his widow Achhri inherited life interest in it. Through a sale deed dated 7.12.1950 said Achhri transferred the suit property in favour of defendants Keshab and Titia (now both deceased and represented by their legal representatives.) The sale was challenged by the plaintiffs in their cap...
Ajudhia Lal Vs. Smt. Sandhya Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ShimLC108
Surjit Singh, J.1. This appeal by the plaintiff is directed against the judgment and decree dated 5.12.1994 of the learned District Judge, Bilaspur, whereby reversing the decree of declaration with further relief of permanent prohibitory injunction, passed by the trial Court in favour of the appellant, the suit of the appellant-plaintiff has been dismissed.2. Facts relevant for the disposal of the appeal may be noticed. Appellant, hereinafter called plaintiff, filed a suit seeking declaration that he and proforma respondents were owners in possession of land measuring 15 Biswas, bearing khasra No. 237 on the basis of an agreement of exchange having taken place between him and respondent-defendant Babu Ram (deceased). By way of further relief, permanent prohibitory injunction had been sought restraining the respondent-defendants Babu Ram, Niku and Jagdish from causing any interference in his possession or raising any construction on any portion of the said land. It was alleged that init...
Paras Ram and ors. Vs. Jai Ram and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(1)ShimLC391
Surjit Singh, J.1. The present appeal was admitted, vide order dated 14.11.1994, on one specific question of law and also on such (unspecified) questions of law, which the appellants might urge at the time of final hearing.2. Facts relevant for the disposal of the appeal may be noticed. Respondent Jai Ram (herein after called 'plaintiff') filed a suit against the present appellant Ghan Shyam and predecessors of the other appellants seeking a declaration that he was in possession of 0-017-97 hectares of land, bearing Khasra Nos. 878 and 881, situate in Mauza Sungal, Tehsil Palampur, in the capacity of a tenant and also for injunction restraining the appellants-defendants from causing any interference in his right to enjoy the said property, as a tenant. Respondent No. 2 Mast Ram was also impleaded as one of the defendants. Respondents Oma Devi and Ashok Kumar were impleaded as proforma-defendants.3. Cause of action that was disclosed in the plaint was like this. Predecessor of the appel...
Smt. Arun Gupta and anr. Vs. Sansar Chand and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-2006
Reported in: III(2006)ACC19,2007ACJ1954,2006(2)ShimLC53
Surjit Singh, J.1. This appeal, Under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, has been filed by the claimants, as they are aggrieved by quantum of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.2. Facts relevant for the disposal of the appeal may be noticed. Deceased Surinder Kumar Gupta was employed as General Manager with H.P. Financial Corporation, whose Managing Director has been impleaded as respondent No. 4 in the appeal. On 25.3.1998, he was travelling by the car of his employer, i.e. H.P. State Financial Corporation, bearing registration No. HP-03/1290, in connection with some official tour. The car was being driven by Mangat Ram, respondent No. 5 herein. It collided with a truck, bearing registration No. HP-31/2133. Truck was owned by respondent Sansar Chand and was being driven by respondent Brij Lai. It was insured with National Insurance Company Ltd., impleaded as respondent No. 3. The car, by which the deceased was travelling, was insured with respondent No. 6 New India Assurance Com...
Syed Khushahnad Anwar Naqvi Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ShimLC180
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the judgment and order dated 30th May, 2003 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mandi in Special Act Case No. 158-1/2001. 126-11/2002. Vide the aforesaid impugned judgment the learned CJM, Mandi has convicted the petitioner-accused of committing the offences punishable under Sections 3, 4 and 5 of the Indian Official Secrets Act, 1923 (1923 Act, for short). Even while convicting the petitioner-accused of the aforesaid offences under the 1923 Act, the learned CJM has acquitted the petitioner-accused of the offence under Section 120-B IPC. Vide a separate order dated 31st May, 2003 the learned Court below has passed a sentence of seven years rigorous imprisonment against the petitioner.2. The case has a very chequered history, indeed unfortunately chequered, and to the total prejudice of the petitioner. The chequered history is so unfor...
The National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Rajeev Kohli Vs. Rajeev Verma and ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ1643,2006(1)ShimLC406
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This judgment shall dispose of the aforesaid two appeals arising out of the same Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-1, Solan in claim petition No. 79-S/2 of 1998 decided on 27.7.2002.2. The facts relevant for the decision of the case are that the claimant Rajeev Verma was travelling on a scooter when he was hit by truck No. HP-14-4578, which was being driven by Sher Singh. This truck was owned by Rajeev Kohli and insured with National Insurance Company. The claimant alleged that he suffered various injuries and disability to the extent of 60% and claimed compensation. The claim petition was contested by the driver on the ground that in fact no accident had taken place. As far as the owner is concerned, in his reply he has only stated that the vehicle was duly insured with the National Insurance Company. The Insurance Company in its reply took up the plea that the driver did not have a valid driving licence and as such the Insurance Company was not lia...
Basant Ram Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-03-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2850,2006(1)ShimLC417
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal by the accused is directed against the judgment of the Sessions Judge, Kinnaur Division at Rampur Bushehar in Sessions Trial No. 18 of 1996 decided on 12.7.1999 whereby he has convicted the accused of having committed an offence under Section 376 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and to pay fine of Rs. 5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for 3 months.2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 14.7.1995 the prosecutrix was proceeding to Pasha Kanda for extraction of Dhoop. She was accompanied by her daughter aged 4 years. The prosecutrix is a widow and had lost her husband a year earlier. When they reached Mooling, accused Basant Ram met them. He took the daughter of the prosecutrix and placed her on his mule. When they reached a place called Basteech the accused forcibly dragged the prosecutrix and raped her. The prosecutrix returned to her home after one day and narrated th...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »