Skip to content

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.

Apr 03 2006

Surjit Singh and ors. Vs. Jagraj Singh and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Decided on: Apr-03-2006

Reported in: 2006(2)ShimLC48

Deepak Gupta, J.1. This judgment shall dispose of six appeals being FAO Nos. 485, 486, 487, 488, 489 and 500 of 2003 filed by the claimants as they arise out of the same accident. The appeals have been filed in a similar point and the same point is in issue in all the appeals.2. The brief facts necessary for decision of the case are that the victims in all the six cases were travelling as passengers in Tractor Trolly No. PB-05B-3175. They were going from their village Sadhuwala to Pir Nigaha temple on 30.3.1998. At about 8.30 a.m. when the tractor trolley reached their village Palkwah it turned turtle resulting in the death of the six victims. The heirs of the victims filed six separate claim petitions for compensation Under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act. The claim petitions were only contested by the Insurance Company and the owner-cum-driver of the tractor Jagraj Singh remained ex-parte. The Insurance Company took up the plea that it was not liable to pay the compensation sin...


Apr 03 2006

Ram Kali and anr. Vs. Pankaj Sharma and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Decided on: Apr-03-2006

Reported in: IV(2006)ACC108,2007ACJ2835,2006(2)ShimLC57,2007(1)SLJ403(HP)

V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. This is yet another case in a long series of a catena of cases where this Court, time and again is confronted with situations where persons donning the mantle of quasi-judicial or judicial authorities under various statutes, such as Criminal Procedure Code, the Payment of Wages Act, the Gratuity Act and Workmen's Compensation Act etc. etc., pass judgments and orders which are not wholly and truly in keeping with the specific provisions of the law with which they are dealing. In passing these orders, these officers also betray their total ignorance about the common law principles as well as their disregard to the principles of natural justice. On a few occasions in the past this Court unfortunately had to adversely comment upon the very poor quality of judgments and orders passed by these officers. It had been noticed in the past by this Court that sometimes these cases related to the violation of civil liberties and human rights of the citizens. Time and again, this ...


Apr 03 2006

Mandeep Kaur Vs. Sukh Dev Singh

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Decided on: Apr-03-2006

Reported in: AIR2006HP97,2006(1)ShimLC397

Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal under Section 28 of the Hindu Marriage Act is directed against the judgment and decree dated 17.12.1999 passed by the learned District Judge, Mandi in H.M. Petition No. 27 of 1996 whereby the learned trial Court has granted a decree of divorce in favour of the husband.2. The brief facts relevant for the decision of the case are that the parties were married at Amritsar on 6.2.1994 according to Hindu rites. They last resided together in Mandi till December, 1995. Thereafter the wife went and resided with her parents at Amritsar. The husband instituted a petition for grant of divorce on 18.10.1996. The divorce was sought on the ground of cruelty. The instances of cruelty detailed in the petition are as follows:-(a) The wife on account of 'Sukhna' undertaken before marriage was to go to Nanaksar in Ludhiana on every Purnima (full moon) for five months after the marriage. Though there was direct bus to Ludhiana from Mandi, but the wife would insist to go to N...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial