Himachal Pradesh Court August 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.
Bhawna Singh and ors. Vs. Magma Leasing Ltd. and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-31-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ARBLR551(HP),2007(1)ShimLC90
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. The petitioners filed a petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in the Court of the learned Additional District Judge, Solan for setting aside the arbitral award dated 21st September, 2001 passed by the sole Arbitrator, respondent No. 2 herein, namely, Shri S.K. Jain, Advocate, Delhi High Court on various grounds. In the reply filed by respondent No. 1 to the said application under Section 34 of 1996 Act, amongst various defences raised, respondents took the preliminary objection with respect to the territorial jurisdiction of the Court by contending and submitting that the Court at Solan did not have any territorial jurisdiction and that the territorial jurisdiction vested exclusively in the Courts at Delhi. This plea was based upon and linked with the facts relating to the accrual of the cause of action as well as a specific clause in the Arbitration Agreement conferring exclusive territorial jurisdiction upon the Courts at Delhi. Fo...
Kumari Pushpa Chauhan Vs. Shreedhar Sharma
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-31-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC46
Deepak Gupta, J.1. The respondent, hereinafter referred to as the landlord filed a petition for eviction of the tenant as specified landlord under Section 15(2) of the H.P. Urban Kent Control Act. The relevant portion of the Section reads as follows:15(2) Where a specified landlord, at any time within one year prior to or within one year after the date of his retirement or after his retirement but within one year of the appointed day whichever is later, applies to the Controller, alongwith a certificate from the authority competent to remove him from service indicating the date of his retirement and his affidavit to the effect that he does not own and possess any other suitable accommodation in the local area in which he intends to reside to recover possession of one residential building, for his own occupation, there shall accrue, on and from the date of such application to such specified landlord, notwithstanding anything contained elsewhere in this Act or in any other law for the ti...
Mahindra and Company Vs. the State of H.P. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-29-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ShimLC89
Surjit Singh, J.1. There had been some agreement between Mahindra & Company, hereinafter referred to as decree holder, and the State of Himachal Pradesh through Secretary (Forest), whereby Maple Shuttle Blocks were agreed to be supplied by the State of Himachal Pradesh and other judgment debtors to the decree holder. It appears that the judgment debtors did not supply the entire agreed quantity of the Shuttle Blocks. The matter was referred to the Arbitrator in terms of the agreement. The Arbitrator gave an award that the decree holder was entitled to the supply of 109.803 cubic meters of Maple Shuttle Blocks. The award was submitted to this Court and was made rule of Court by this Court, vide decree dated 18.6.1984 and it was ordered that 109.803 cubic meters Maple Shuttle Blocks would be supplied to the decree holder by the judgment debtors within one year. On the asking of the judgment debtors, the period was extended twice, initially by one year and then up to 31.12.1986. The judgm...
Punjab National Bank and anr. Vs. Shri Durga Dutt Sharma and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-28-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ShimLC316
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This writ petition by the Punjab National Bank (hereinafter referred to as the employer) is directed against the award of the Presiding Officer, Central Government Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) dated 20.6.2002 whereby he has held that the action of the employer in dismissing the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the employee) from the bank's services is not justified and has ordered the reinstatement of the employee into service with full back-wages, continuity of service and all consequential benefits including senority etc. The employer has also been held liable to pay interest (c) 8% p.a. on the back-wages from the date they became due and payable.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the employee joined the services of the employer in the year 1978. He was posted at Shimla in 1982. On 9.8.1989 the CBI registered a case against the employee under Sections 420, 468, 467 and 471 IPC. The al...
Himachal Ayurvedic Association Vs. State of H.P. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-25-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ShimLC117
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. In compliance to our order dated 24th July, 2006, Secretary (Ayurveda), Government of Himachal Pradesh, has filed his affidavit, which we have perused.2. We have heard Mr. Goel, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, Mr. M.S. Chandel, learned Advocate General appearing for respondents No. 1 and 2, and Mr. Shrawan Dogra, learned Counsel appearing for respondent No. 3.3. At this stage, we are concerned only with the issue of the deemed suspension of respondent No. 3 owing to the fact that he was in detention (police custody as well as on judicial remand) for a period of more than 48 hours, between 8th October to 12th October, 2004. Relevant facts of the case have been taken note of in our order dated 24th July, 2006. The affidavit of the Secretary (Ayurveda) also informs us that respondent No. 3 did remain in custody for more than 48 hours during October, 2004 but the State Government came to know about this fact only in March, 2006 after an inquiry had been con...
Rajiv Kapila Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-25-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ShimLC122
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. With the consent of learned Counsel for the parties, this petition is taken up for final disposal today without formally admitting to hearing.2. Apparently the Medical Council of India sent a communication on 3rd September, 2004 to the Principal, Indira Gandhi Medical College, Shimla, asking him to stop admissions in M.S. (Ortho.) and D. Ortho qualifications from the academic session starting in that year in view of certain observations made in that letter. The contents of this letter, which have been shown to us by Mr. Chandel today, read thus:Medical Council of India.No. MCI-63(22)/2004-Med./ DateThe Principal,Indira Gandhi Medical College,Shimla-171001.Sub: Himachal Pradesh University- Recognition of D. Ortho. qualifications in respect of students being trained at Indira Gandhi Medical College, Shimla.I am to state that the Post-graduate Committee of this Council at its meeting held on 4.8.2004 considered the Council Inspector's report (July, 2004) on the standard...
National Insurance Company Vs. Chameli Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC84
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. The only ground upon which this appeal assailing the judgment of the Claims Tribunal has been filed by the insurer is that Rakesh Kumar, respondent No. 4 herein who was driving the scooter at the time of the accident, was not possessed of a valid driving licence.2. The following issues were framed by the Tribunal for adjudication in this case:1. Whether deceased Mam Raj died in an accident involving scooter bearing registration No. HIN 278, being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1? OPP.2. If issue No. 1 is proved in affirmative, to what amount of compensation and from whom the petitioners are entitled to receive? OPP.3. Whether the driver of the scooter was not having a valid driving licence, if so, its effect? OPR-3.4. Relief.3. Finding on issue No. 3 is as under:33. The respondent No. 1 was having a licence with him, but the case of the respondent No. 3 is that the said driving licence was fictitious. To prove this allegation they examined one Kirpal...
Mohar Singh Vs. State of H.P. and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC116
Surjit Singh, J.1. Through the present writ petition, under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought the quashing of notice dated 5.8.1998, issued by the Collector, Kullu in Case No. 4 of 2002 (Annexure P-3), order dated 29.9.2004 (Annexure P-8), passed by the Collector, Kullu in the aforesaid case No. 4 of 2002 and order dated 9.6.2006 (Annexure P-10), passed by the Commissioner, Mandi Division, Mandi in appeal against the order Annexure P-8, besides seeking direction to the respondents not to take any further action against the petitioner under the provisions of the H.P. Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), and not to evict him from the land measuring one Biswa, 8 Biswansis, bearing Khasra No. 4434/1, situate in Phati and Kothi Nagar, Tehsil and District Kullu, except by due process of law.2. A notice was issued under the Act to the petitioner on 5.8.1998 (copy Annexure P-3), calling ...
Dr. Chander Bhave and Dr. Rohini Rao Vs. State of H.P. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ShimLC15
Surjit Singh, J.1. Common questions of law and facts are involved in these two writ petitions and, therefore, they are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. Post Graduate Degree & Diploma Courses are conducted by Indira Gandhi Medical College, Shimla. For the session 2002-2003 admissions were sought to be made for Post Graduate Degree Courses in different faculties. Two seats were available in Obstetrics & Gynecology faculty, one of which was reserved for Scheduled Tribe candidates. Last date for submission of applications was 11.12.2002. Entrance test was conducted on 29.12.2002. Three candidates including the petitioners in these two writ petitions, who applied for admission against the seat reserved for Scheduled Tribe candidates, qualified the entrance test. The candidate, who was on the top in order of merit, did not join. Dr. Chander Bhave (petitioner in CWP No. 1227 of 2004) was second in order of merit, while Dr. Rohini Rao (petitioner in CWP No. 145 of 2004) was third. Bot...
Hardyal Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Aug-22-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC93
Deepak Gupta, J.1. The petitioner in the present case initially joined the Agriculture Department of the State of Himachal Pradesh on 6.12.1961. Thereafter, he was selected in the Indian Army and joined as a Commissioned Officer on 19.1.1964. In the year 1965, the Border Security Force Act (for short: BSF) was promulgated and the BSF was set up. The petitioner was discharged on 9.4.1970 and thereafter joined BSF as Assistant Commandant on 29.7.1970. At the relevant time, the BSF had not framed its own rules and it was governed by the Central Reserve Police Force (for short: CRPF), Rules.2. Rule 43 of the said rules provided that the age of superannuation of an officer of the BSF who reaches the rank of Commandant was 55 years and those who were promoted above this rank superannuated at the age of 58 years. Rule 102 of the rules provided that if the rules were silent, the condition of service would be same as applicable to other permanent employees of the Government.3. In the year 1978,...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »