Himachal Pradesh Court September 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.
Mehar Chand and ors. Vs. Rakesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-29-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC64
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. A very short and simple but interesting question of law is involved for consideration in this case but the facts first.2. Respondents filed a Civil Suit against the appellants in the Court of the then Sub Judge 1st Class (II), Palampur for obtaining a decree of possession on the ground that two pieces of land, details whereof are as under:(a) measuring 0-35-30 hectares being half share in the land measuring 0-70-59 hectares comprising of Khata No. 46 min Khatauni No. 158 and Khasra Nos. 261, 325, 327, 328, 329, 330, 332, 337 and 1082 of Mohal Badehar, Mauza Patti, Tehsil Palampur; and(b) measuring 0-37-71 hectares being half share in the land measuring 0-75-43 hectares comprising of Khatauni No. 163 and Khasra No. 353 of Mohal Badehar, Mauza Patti, Tehsil Palampur.Even though recorded in the respective Jamabandis under the ownership of their respective owners being in the possession of late Gulaba Ram as a non-occupancy tenant, the said Gulaba Ram wrongly executed a ...
Digvijay Singh and Baldev Singh Vs. Bhagwan Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-29-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC40
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This order shall dispose of two appeals being FAO No. 235 of 2005, titled as Digvijay Singh v. Bhagwan Singh and Ors. and FAO No. 243 of 2005, titled as Baldev Singh v. Bhagwan Singh and Ors. as they arise out of two virtually identical orders passed by the learned District Judge, Solan whereby he has allowed the applications for interim relief filed by the plaintiffs in the trial Court and has restrained the defendant No. 1 (appellant herein) from selling water from the suit land till disposal of the suit.2. Briefly stated the facts necessary for disposal of the present appeals are that Civil Suit No. 17-S/l of 2005 and Civil Suit No. 20-S/l of 2005 were filed by Bhagwan Singh and 54 other plaintiffs who were residents of Mauzas Ded, Mahi, Ghalie, Mahi, Jokhri, Srinagar, Dolang, Kadhar, against defendants Baldev Singh and Digvijay Singh, respectively. In both the suits Jai Parkash University of Information Technology and Hotel Destination Luxury Resort were arrayed ...
Amrit Lal Sehgal Vs. Smt. Ramawati Sahu
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-29-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC55
Surjit Singh, J.1. This revision petition by the tenant is directed against the order of Appellate Authority, whereby reversing the finding of the Rent Controller, it has been held that the tenant had ceased to occupy the premises and was therefore, liable to be evicted from the tenanted premises and consequently, order of ejectment on the ground of cessation to occupy the premises for a period of 12 months without reasonable cause has been ordered.2. Relevant facts are that eviction of the revision petitioner/tenant was sought from the demised premises by the respondent-landlady on two grounds, viz. non-payment of the rent and the tenant having ceased to occupy the premises for a period of 12 months without reasonable cause. The Rent Controller after holding the trial held that the tenant was in arrears of rent and accordingly ordered his eviction on that ground. As regards the other ground, the Rent Controller returned the finding against the landlady and consequently did not order t...
State Bank of India Vs. Esskay Woollen and Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. and ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-22-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC10
Surjit Singh, J.1. This Court, in exercise of its original jurisdiction, passed an ex parte decree for a sum of Rs. 1,07.501.42 P. with interest at the rate of 11% and costs of the suit, in favour of decree holder - State Bank of India and against judgment debtors M/s. Esskay Woollen & Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. Industrial Estate Kangra and Mrs. Parveen Chaudhary, hereinafter referred to as judgment debtors 1 and 2 respectively, vide judgment dated 30.4.1981 in Civil Suit No. 10 of 1980. When the decree money was not paid, the decree holder filed an execution petition. Execution of decree was sought by attachment and sale of 442 Kanals 7 Marias land, situate at Mehal Beli, Mauza Stana, District Kangra, owned by judgment debtor No. 2. The Court passed an order for attachment of the property on 9.5.1991. Thereafter an application was moved by the decree holder praying for the sale of the attached property and settling the terms of proclamation, under Order 21 Rule 66 of the Code of Civil Pr...
Continental Construction Ltd. Vs. H.P. State Electricity Board
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-19-2006
Reported in: 2006(2)ShimLC453
Surjit Singh, J.1. On 10.5.1983 an agreement was executed between the plaintiff and the defendant, whereby work of construction of diversion weir, intake, desilting tank and storage reservoir of Sanjay Vidyut Pariyojna, Bhaba (120 MW) project was awarded to the plaintiff by the defendant for Rs. 20,47,70,450/-. The work was agreed to be executed by 10.10.1985, subject to various terms and conditions, specified in the agreement. Clause 25 of the agreement provided for the settlement of disputes, arising between the parties in relation to the meaning and interpretation of the terms of the contract, specifications, designs, drawings and instructions and as to the quality of workmanship or material used in the work or as to any other question, claim, right, matter or thing whatsoever in any way arising out of or relating to the contract, designs, drawings, specifications, estimates, instructions, orders or other conditions or otherwise concerning the work or the execution or failure to exe...
The New India Assurance Company Ltd. Vs. Smt. Jamna Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-13-2006
Reported in: IV(2005)ACC593,2007(1)ShimLC19
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. In this appeal, the judgment and award passed by the learned Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Sundernagar dated 29th June, 2006 has been assailed on two grounds; firstly that the deceased was not an employee of respondent No. 3 as on the date of accident and secondly that the appellant-insurer was not liable to pay the interest on the amount of compensation. On both the counts the appeal should fail and for the following reasons.2. The question whether the deceased was an employee of respondent No. 3 or not is based purely and conclusively on appreciation of evidence. The evidence was led before the Commissioner which clearly established that the deceased at the time of the accident was working as a Conductor in the vehicle in question, under the employment of respondent No. 3. Neither there is any warrant for me in this appeal to upset this finding of fact nor is this ground available to the appellant looking to the limited nature of grounds of appeal avail...
Jiwan Lal Sharma Vs. S.S. Parmar
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-13-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC58
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. This Contempt Application relates to and arises out of a judgment passed by a Division Bench of this Court on 19.10.2005 in CWP 1031 of 2005. In the said writ petition, an important question had arisen for this Court's consideration and the question was as to whether the rigour of 3 years' experience as a Joint Director, for promotion to the post of Director Prosecution be persisted with or it should be dispensed with because of the non-availability of eligible Joint Directors linked with the aforesaid pre-requisite of 3 years' experience. This Court had observed that under the Recruitment and Promotion Rules, the post of Director Prosecution was required to be filled up 100% by promotion, and failing that, by deputation. Noticing the aforesaid rule position and the resultant harshness being faced by the incumbent Joint Directors, because of the aforesaid 3 years' experience being an eligibility criteria, this Court observed thus:After hearing the learned Counsel for...
Smt. Urmila Devi Vs. Shri Narinder Singh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-2006
Reported in: AIR2007HP19,2006(2)ShimLC445
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal by the wife is directed against the judgment of the learned District Judge, Shimla whereby he has allowed the petition of the husband and annulled the marriage of the parties under Section 12 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act).2. The facts necessary for disposal of the case are that the parties who are Hindus were married on 25th November, 2001. According to the husband the marriage between the parties was not consummated due to impotence of the wife. It is also the allegation of the husband that his consent for marriage was obtained by the wife and her family by fraud and material concealment of fact. According to the husband though the wife was about 31 years old when they got married she did not before her marriage disclose to her husband or his family members that she had not attained menarche and has never had menses. Further the wife was not having a uterus and one ovary was missing and these facts were known to her...
N.K. Chaurasia Vs. High Court of H.P. and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-12-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC80
Deepak Gupta, J.1. The petitioner in the year 1990 was working as a Civil Nazir in the Court of Senior Sub Judge-cum-Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kinnaur at Reckong-Peo. He proceeded on leave on 9th March, 1990 and was expected to resume duty on 21.3.1990. He could not join duty and sent a wireless message-to the Senior Sub Judge through the General Assistant to the Deputy Commissioner, Kinnaur that the keys of office almirah are lying in his residence and the office almirah may be opened after taking the keys from his house. The lock of the residence was broken open and the keys were taken. Thereafter in the presence of Senior Sub Judge and some other Court officials, the Reader of the Court opened the official almirah. An inventory of the cash and other material found was prepared. The cash found was short by Rs. 928/- when tallied with the cash book. Dues of two officials were also found not paid to them. When the petitioner rejoined on 23rd April, 1990, an explanation was called from...
Prithvi Raj Jhingta and anr. Vs. Gopal Singh and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-07-2006
Reported in: AIR2007HP11,[2007(1)JCR533],2006(2)ShimLC441
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. In this petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the validity and correctness of the order dated 21st January, 2006 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Junior Division, Court No. 1, Rohru in Civil Suit No. 116/1 of 2003, on 6th July, 2006 a learned Single Bench of this Court passed a detailed order with respect to the question of law arising for consideration in this petition touching upon the interpretation to be placed upon Rule 2 of Order 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure in so far as this Rule deals with the scope and ambit of the jurisdiction to be exercised by a Civil Court for deciding preliminary issues of law, pure and simple and/or the preliminary issues of law as well as of facts, independent of the other, main issues both of law and fact which might arise for adjudication in the suit and upon which the parties go for trial. For ready reference the order dated 6th July, 2006 passed by the learned Single Judge touching upon t...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »