Himachal Pradesh Court October 2007 Judgments

State of H.P. Vs. Jagat Ram

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Dev Darshan Sud, J.1. The State of Himachal Pradesh has filed this appeal against the concurrent findings of both the Courts below decreeing the suit of the respondent-plaintiff for declaration to the effect that they alongwith defendants No. 2 to 13 are owners in possession of the suit land continuously since the year 1910-11 till date.2. The facts are being noticed in brief as the subsequent amendment in the law would render this appeal as infructuous.3. Briefly put, the case of the plaintiff is that they had been recorded in possession alongwith Whether the reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgement? defendants No. 2 to 13 of the suit land since the year 1910 which facts have been incorporated in the Jamabandi continuously.4. The State contested the suit on the ground that the Civil Court has no jurisdiction and that the suit land which is described as `Shamlat Tika Makbuja Malkan' is assessed to land revenue and has rightly vested in the State of Himachal Pradesh...

Ayush Constructions Pvt. Ltd. Vs. National Hydroelectric Power Corpora ...

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(1)ShimLC37

V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. This Petition has been filed under Section 11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (1996 Act : for short) whereby the petitioner seeks the appointment of an Arbitrator in terms of the arbitration agreement between the parties. The contention of the petitioner in this Petition is that it had entered into an agreement with the respondents with respect to the construction of permanent B Type quarters, 24 in number including the provision of internal water supply and sanitary works etc.2. The tender for the said work was opened on 10th Mach, 2003 and the price bid of the petitioner was opened on 15th May, 2003. According to the petitioner, the work stood completed in all respects on 3rd May, 2005 and intimation to this effect was also given to the respondents vide petitioner's letter dated 20th May, 2005. The completion Certificate was thereafter issued by the officers concerned on 5th November, 2005.3. In the reply filed by the respondents, a number of preli...

Shri Santokh Singh Vs. H.P.S.E.B. and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(1)ShimLC31

Deepak Gupta, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order of the learned H.P. State Administrative Tribunal (For short Tribunal) dated 5.7.2007 in O.A. No. 2484 of 2003 whereby the original application filed by the petitioner has been rejected.2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was appointed as Sub Station Attendant with the H.P. State Electricity Board (For short the Board). On 18.8.2003 the petitioner was working in Electrical Division, Gagret. The admitted facts are that the post of Sub Station Attendant in which the petitioner is working is a post where the cadre is maintained at the Circle level. According to the petitioner he could not have been posted out of the cadre. On 18.8.2003 the petitioner was posted from Electrical Division, HPSEB, Gagret to Electrical Division, HPSEB, Kaza in Spiti. He challenged the transfer order by filing an Original Application No. 2484 of 2003 before the learned Tribunal and the main ground of attack was that he could ...

National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Naresh Kumar and ors.,

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2008ACJ869,AIR2008HP49,2008(1)ShimLC182

Deepak Gupta, J.1. By this judgment the aforesaid four appeals are being disposed of since they arise out of the same accident and involve common questions of law. 2. On 17.2.2001 at about 11.00 p.m. an accident took place between jeep No. HP-12-1711 and truck No. HIS 9211. A number of claim petitions were filed and the learned Tribunal held that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of Jagtu, driver of the truck which was owned by Bahadur Singh. Compensation was awarded and the Insurance company was held liable to pay compensation. 3. The dispute raised by the Insurance Company is that on the date of accident the truck was not insured with it. The admitted facts are that a cover note was issued by the appellant-Insurance Company in favour of Bahadur Singh, owner of the truck No. HIS 9211 whereby truck was insured w.e.f. 21.4.2000 to 20.4.2001. The payment of premium was made by Bahadur Singh, owner of the truck, vide cheque No. 989130, dated 19.4.2000, Ex.PW-3/...

Maya Ram Vs. Smt. Kamla Devi

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2008HP43,I(2008)DMC249

Deepak Gupta, J.1. The appellant/husband filed a petition under Section 12 read with Section 12(2)(b)(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) seeking decree for annulment of marriage between him and the respondent/wife. The main ground raised in the petition was that a female child was born to the respondent/wife within 6 months after the marriage after the normal period of pregnancy and therefore, according to the husband, it was apparent that the wife was pregnant at the time of marriage from some other person and this fact was not disclosed to him. The respondent/wife contested the case mainly on the ground that the child which was born was a premature child and according to her, the child was born from the loins of the husband. The learned District Judge rejected the petition filed by the husband mainly on the ground that in view of Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act the paternity of the child could not be called in question. The Court below came...

Biptu Ram Vs. Balwant Singh and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Dev Darshan Sud, J.1. This is the plaintiff's revision against the order of the learned Trial Court allowing the application under Order 9 Rule 13 of the Code of Civil Procedure, instituted by the respondents/defendants for setting aside the ex parte decree which had been passed against them.2. The successor-ininterest of late Shri Khushi Ram (who was the defendant) in the suit instituted by the predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner titled Sant Ram v. Khushi Ram, filed the application for setting aside ex parte decree passed against them. The respondents herein pleaded that their predecessor-ininterest late Khushi Ram who was the defendant in the suit, was never served and that Shri Sant Ram, plaintiff (predecessor-in-interest of the petitioner) had obtained an ex parte decree in Civil Suit No. 390/1993 on 16.1.1996 in connivance with the witnesses.3. The pleadings in the application may be noticed. The applicants averred that the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents late Khu...

Ramesh Kumar Mahajan Vs. State of H.P. and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(I)ShimLC12

Rajiv Sharma, J.1. The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that respondent No. 2 had issued notice to the petitioner on 8th September, 2003 under Section 211 (i)(a) of the H.P. Municipal Act, 1994 for carrying out unauthorized construction. The respondent No. 2 issued another notice to the petitioner dated 12th September, 2003 under Section 211 (5) of the H.P. Municipal Act, 1994 whereby the petitioner was asked to show cause within 24 hours from the receipt of the notice that why a fine of Rs. 1,000/- and further for non-compliance of the notice and continuous of work, Rs. 50/- per day be not imposed. The petitioner submitted reply to the notice dated 12th September, 2003 stating therein that due to heavy rain during the month of August, 2003, some cracks had developed in the walls and existing slab and those cracks were repaired by him. The Executive Officer of the respondent No. 2-Council directed the petitioner to demolish the unauthorized construction o...

Hiri Ram and ors. Vs. State of H.P. and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(I)ShimLC41

Sanjay Karol, J.1. The present writ petition has been filed inter alia praying for quashing of the letter dated 15.3.2003 (Annexvire P-3) with a direction that felling permission be accorded to the petitioners and also the condition of extension fee imposed in the order dated 6.1.2003 (Annexure P-2) be struck down.Facts necessary for adjudicating the present writ petition are as under:2. Petitioners are agriculturists owning and possessing land in Tehsil Kasauli, District Solan, H.P. on which there is forest produce i.e. fully grown trees of different categories and species.3. The State of Himachal Pradesh has enacted the Himachal Pradesh Land Preservation Act, 1978 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Preservation Act') as also the Himachal Pradesh Forest Produce (Regulation of Trade) Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Trade Act') to regulate the activities of felling and sale of the trees grown on the private land. No tree can be commercially exploited by a private owner and the ...

GurnaraIn Suri and Company Vs. H.P. State Co-operative Bank Ltd. and a ...

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2008(1)ShimLC175

Kuldip Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment, decree dated 26.3.2004, passed by learned District Judge, Bilaspur, H.P., in Civil Appeal No. 92 of 2001 setting aside the judgment, decree dated 19.3.2001 passed by learned Senior Sub Judge, Bilaspur in case No. 74-1 of 1998.2. The facts, in brief, are that the appellant filed a suit for declaration that the order dated 24.6.1991 passed by Collector Sadar, Sub Division, Bilaspur and order dated 12.3.1997 passed by Divisional Commissioner, Mandi are void and not binding on appellant inasmuch as the H.P. Public Premises and Land (Eviction and Rent Recovery) Act, 1971 (for short 'Public Premises Act') is not applicable, the appellant is a tenant in the suit premises. A decree for permanent prohibitory injunction restraining the respondents from interfering in possession of the appellant has also been prayed. In case appellant is dispossessed from the suit premises during the pendency of the suit then possession may also be ...

Shri Mast Ram Vs. Chairman-cum-managing Director, State Bank of Patial ...

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Deepak Gupta, J.1. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has prayed for the following relief:a) Direct the respondents to grant the benefits of pension or Bank's contribution to provident fund as provided under the terms and conditions of V.R.S. Scheme in accordance with the provisions of pension fund scheme under State Bank of Patiala (Employees) Pension Regulations 1995 & Bank's contribution to Provident Fund Rules along with 12% interest w.e.f. 01.04.2001 till the date of payment.b) Direct the respondents to release arrears of Exgratia payment as per the terms and conditions of V.R.S. Scheme with 12% interest on the said amount till realization.2. The petitioner was an employee with respondent No. 1 i.e. State Bank of Patiala. He joined service on 22.5.1981. In the year 2001, respondent No. 1 introduced a voluntary retirement scheme (VRI) applicable to employees who had put in 15 years of service or had completed 40 years of age as on 31st December, 2000, who were to be elig...