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.
Sukhbir Singh Vs. National Insurance Company Ltd. and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-06-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ923,2007(1)ShimLC30
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. An award was passed on 27th February, 2003 by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mandi in Claim Petition No. 36 of 1998 relating to and arising out of the death of Dr. N.C. Sharma in an accident involving his official jeep and a truck tipper No. PB-110-9313. The petitioner Sukhbir Singh in this petition was respondent No. 1 in the aforesaid Claim Petition. Respondent No. 2 herein Ashok Kumar was respondent No. 2 in the Claim Petition. Respondent No. 1 - National Insurance Company was the 3rd respondent in the Claim Petition. Petitioner and respondent No. 2 were the owner and the driver respectively of the truck tipper No. PH-110-9313.2. In the written statement filed by respondent No. 1 - National Insurance Company in answer to the Claim Petition, it was alleged and pleaded that the driver did not possess a valid and effective driving licence at the time of the accident. Based on the pleadings of the parties, following five issues were framed by the Tribuna...
D.K. Agnihotri Vs. the State Bank of India and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-05-2006
Reported in: (2007)IILLJ765HP,2007(1)ShimLC70
Surjit Singh, J.1. Through the present writ petition the petitioner has sought quashing of orders dated 3rd July, 1997 and 20th August, 1998, whereby he has been ordered to be removed from the service of respondent No. 1, by way of punishment. In the alternative a direction has been sought for holding fresh inquiry in which the writ petitioner should be afforded an opportunity to engage a defence assistant of his choice.2. Brief facts leading to the presentation of this writ petition are that the petitioner was initially employed as Clerk-cum-Cashier with respondent No. 1. Thereafter he was promoted as Head Clerk and then as Assistant Manager. In the year of 1988 he was posted in the capacity of Assistant Manager in Kaza Branch of respondent No. 1 - Bank. On further promotion, he was posted as Branch Manager in Kaza Branch itself on 27th August, 1990. He remained posted as such in the said Branch up to August, 1993. On 27.10.1993 the petitioner was placed under suspension for certain a...
Cosmo Ferrites Ltd. Vs. Himachal Builders
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-04-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ShimLC165
Deepak Gupta, J.1. Two agreements dated 21.3.1986 were entered into between the parties which contained an arbitration clause. By these agreements, the present objector-petitioner had entrusted some construction work to the respondent. The work was done by the respondent and disputes arose between the parties with regard to the payment for the work done by the respondent.2. The respondent thereafter filed a petition before this Court under Sections 8 and 20 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for appointment of an Arbitrator. This petition was registered as Civil Suit No. 33 of 1992. By an order dated 5.3.1993 the petition was allowed and this Court directed the parties to appoint their respective Arbitrators in terms of the agreement. Pursuant to the directions of this Court the petitioner appointed Shri CM. Kaushal as its Arbitrator. The respondent appointed Shri S.K. Sawhney as its Arbitrator. Soon after his appointment, Shri C.M. Kaushal, the Arbitrator appointed on behalf of the petition...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Vijay Kumar and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-02-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)ShimLC196
K.C. Sood, J.1. This appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is directed against the judgment of acquittal recorded by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (I) Dehra, District Kangra vide his judgment dated March 26, 2001.2. The respondents Vijay Kumar, Vivek Soni and Vipin Kumar, hereinafter referred to as the 'accused', were tried by the learned trial Magistrate for offences punishable under Sections 380,411 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.The prosecution case:3. Des Raj, complainant, is resident of village Gathuther in the District of Kangra. He lives with his mother and three small children, his wife having expired in May, 1999. On November 24, 1999, the accused Vijay Kumar, who belongs to the village of the in-laws of the complainant, came to the house of the complainant along with accused Vipin in the morning hours and informed the complainant that everything was well in the house of his in-laws. They were to catch train for Amritsar at 11...
Promila Bakshi and ors. Vs. Ashok Bhatia and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-01-2006
Reported in: AIR2007HP14,2006(2)ShimLC276
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. Vide the impugned order dated 19th July, 2006, the learned Civil Judge (Junior Division) Court No. 2, Kasauli, District Solan has rejected the Application of the petitioners filed under Order 23 Rule 1(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure for permission to withdraw the pending suit with liberty to file a fresh suit on the same cause of action. Sub-rule (3) of Rule 1 of Order 23 of the Code of Civil Procedure reads thus:(3) Where the Court is satisfied,-(a) that a suit must fail by reason of some formal defect, or(b) that there are sufficient grounds for allowing the plaintiff to institute a fresh suit for the subject-matter of a suit or part of a claim, it may, on such terms as it thinks fit, grant the plaintiff permission to withdraw from such suit or such part of the claim with liberty to institute a fresh suit in respect of the subject-matter of such suit or such part of the claim.2. By now it is a settled proposition of law that permission to withdraw the suit with ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›