Himachal Pradesh Court March 2007 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.
Aman Deep and anr. Vs. Smt. Sukhan Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-23-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ShimLC119
Surjit Singh, J.1. This appeal by the owner and the alleged driver of the vehicle, i.e. Scooter No. HP-22-1294 has been filed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, whereby they have been ordered to pay compensation, amounting to Rs. 2,35,000/-, and the Insurance Company has been absolved of its liability with the finding that the vehicle was being driven by appellant No. 1 Aman Deep, who is son of appellant No. 2 Balbinder, at the time of the occurrence of the accident and he was not only not possessing a driving licence but was also not eligible for grant of licence, on account of his being minor.2. The grievance of the appellants is that the finding of the Tribunal that the vehicle was being driven by appellant Aman Deep is contrary to the evidence on record. According to the appellants, the scooter was being driven by appellant Balbinder, who held a valid driving license, at the time when the accident took place. It is also the grievance of the appellants that the...
Gambhir Chand Vs. Sainik School Society and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-22-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ShimLC519
Sanjay Karol, J.1. This judgment is being dictated in open Court in the presence of the learned Counsel for the parties.2. The petitioner herein has assailed the order dated 7.1.2000 (Annexure P-4), letter dated 23rd December, 2000 (Annexure P-11) and letter dated 5th March, 2001 (Annexure P-14) whereby petitioner has been directed to be compulsorily retired and salary paid to him is sought to be recovered.3. On a complaint filed by one Smt. Veena Devi to the effect that the petitioner had wrongly disclosed his date of birth at the time of his induction into service with the respondents, a show-cause notice dated 24th November, 1999 was issued to the petitioner. As per the complaint, the actual date of birth of the petitioner is 28.3.1937 whereas he has wrongly recorded his date of birth as 28.3.1947 and that he has deliberately misled the school authority by submitting a false certificate. In response thereto petitioner stated that maternal grand parents, who were illiterate and rusti...
Bishan Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-21-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ShimLC226,2008(3)SLJ494(HP)
ORDERSanjay Karol, J.1. This judgment is being dictated in open Court in the presence of the learned Counsel for the parties.By way of this writ petition, the petitioner is seeking quashing of the order dated 24.9.2001 passed by Commandant, Group Centre, SSB, Dharampur. Petitioner has further prayed that the disciplinary enquiry initiated against him vide order dated 4.11.1999 and proceedings in connection thereto be quashed and set aside and the enquiry report given by the Enquiry Officer be held illegal and that he be reinstated with all consequential benefits. Undisputed facts leading to the filing of the present writ petition are as under:Petitioner was enrolled as Constable No. 8564509, in Group Centre, SSB, Dharampur, District Solan, H.P. and was lastly posted as Constable in Tapri Circle, District Kinnaur, H.P. On 24.4.1994, petitioner is alleged to have deserted his place of duty without permission of the Competent Authority to follow Shri Lachhi Ram and Shri Kedar Ram, who wit...
Vidya Prakash Singh Negi and ors. Vs. State of H.P. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)ShimLC163
Surjit Singh, J. 1. These seven appeals, titles and particulars whereof are mentioned hereinabove, arise out of the same award, i.e. award dated 28.8.1995, delivered by the Additional District Judge, on a reference, under Sections 18 and 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, and the question of fact and law raised therein, are also common and so they are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. First the relevant facts may be noticed. The Government of Himachal Pradesh issued a Notification, under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act on 27.7.1988, expressing its intention to acquire 153 Bighas 2 Biswas land situated in Mouza Pateog. Thereafter, Notification under Sections 6 and 7 was issued and notices under Section 9, were given to the affected persons and finally the market value was assessed at various rates according to the classification of the land. Disputes regarding apportionment of the market rate among the right holders were also there. The right holders were aggrieved by the qua...
Sone Lal Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-20-2007
Reported in: 2009CriLJ2880
V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant through jail against the judgment, dated 18-9-2004, of the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur, vide which the appellant was held guilty under Section 302, IPC and was sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, he was to undergo further imprisonment for six months.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 7-2-2004 at 10.30 a.m., a statement under Section 154 of the Cr.P.C. was made by Shashi Mohan to the SHO, Police Station, Bhoranj in which he alleged that he is a resident of village Doh and is the Up Pradhan of the Gram Panchayat. He further alleged that, as usual, today when he went for morning walk, at about 8.00 a.m. when he reached near Dalan-da-Gahra Chowk, he saw a person lying on the road and an axe was embedded in his neck and the person appeared to have sustained injuries and blood was scattered all around. A drat was also lying nearby. His state...
Baldev Singh and Kuldeep K. Verma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-16-2007
Reported in: 2007(2)ShimLC235
Sanjay Karol, J.1. The above writ petitions have been filed seeking issuance of a writ to the respondents to grant disability pension to the petitioners with effect from due date with all consequential benefits.2. Before I advert to the relevant facts, it will be necessary to note down the position of law with regard to admissibility of disability pension to various personnel in the Army. Pension Regulations for Army, 1961 (herein-after referred to as 'the Regulations') have been brought for settlement of all claims of pension, gratuity and allowances of personnel of Indian Army, at the time of individual's retirement, release, resignation, discharge and death etc. Part-I of these Regulations stipulates that unless otherwise specifically provided a disability pension may be granted to any individual who is invalided from service on account of a disability which is attributable to or aggravated by military service and is assessed at 20 per cent or over. The question whether a disability...
National Insurance Co. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Lehnu Mal Ram Krishan and ors ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-14-2007
Reported in: 2007ACJ2118,AIR2007HP41
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This original side appeal under Section 10 of the Delhi High Court Act, 1966 (as applicable to the State of Himachal Pradesh) read with Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure is directed against the judgment and decree of learned single Judge of this Court in Civil Suit No. 8 of 1998 decided on 6-4-1999 decreeing the suit of the respondents for a sum of Rs. 12,50,000/- along with interest and costs.2. The facts necessary for disposal of the case are that the respondent No. 1 (Plaintiff No. 1 in the suit) M/s. Lehnu Mal Ram Krishan is a partnership firm. The other respondents (plaintiffs) are the partners or heirs of the partners of the said firm. The plaintiffs were carrying on the business of forest lessees. In April, 1984 the plaintiffs through their bankers M/s. Grindlays Bank, the Mall Shimla got some of their timber stocks, stacked near Chaura in District Kinnaur, insured with the appellant-Insurance Company for a sum of Rs. 23,50,000/-. According to the plai...
Rajesh Kumar and anr. Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-14-2007
Reported in: 2007CriLJ3029,2007(3)ShimLC415
V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellants against the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solan vide his judgment dated 24-7-2006 and the appellants were convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years each and were further sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 20.000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34, IPC. In default of payment of fine both the appellants were ordered to further suffer simple imprisonment for one year each. It was further directed that the amount of fine on reasliazation from the appellants to be paid to the injured.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 12-5-2005 at about 2 a.m. a statement under Section 154, Cr.P.C. was made by Sunil Kumar P.W. 1 before a police officer. He stated that on 11-5-2005 at about 10-30 p.m. he along with Raman Kumar P.W. 2 came to the tea shop of Bish Ram after doing agriculture work and Bish Ram and one Gopal Singh were already si...
Vijay Kumar Sharma Vs. State of H.P. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-14-2007
Reported in: 2007(3)ShimLC515
Surinder Singh, J.1. The petitioner is resident of Sanjauli, Tehsil and District Shimla. In public interest, the petitioner has mainly sought the following relief:(i) Opening of Bar and proposed Liquor Vend at Sanjauli Chowk, be shut down and closed.(i) (a) To order the closure of the Bar and Liquor Vend at Sanjauli.(ii) Direct the respondent authorities to review the place of all existing Liquor vends within Shimla City and its immediate vicinity.(ii)(a) Direct the closure of all liquor vends which have been opened up by not following the procedure laid down.(ii)(b) Direct the respondent authorities to scrupulously adhere to the legal provisions while permitting/granting permission to sell liquor in future.2. We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties and have judicially scanned the documents on record.3. In brief, the facts are that a Bar under the head and style 'Uphar Bar and Restaurant' at Sanjauli Chowk, was opened during the financial year 2006-07. A liquor vend was being...
Pradeep Kumar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Mar-13-2007
Reported in: 2007(1)ShimLC395
Surjit Singh, J.1. Appellant is aggrieved by the judgment of the Fast Track Court, whereby he has been convicted of offences, under Sections 376, 342 and 506 IPC and sentenced as follows:1. Section 376 IPC Seven years imprisonment and fine of Rs.25,000 and in default of payment of fine, simpleimprisonment for one year.2. Section 342 IPC One year imprisonment and fine of Rs. 500and in default of payment of fine, simpleimprisonment for fifteen days.3. Section 506 IPC One year imprisonment and fine of Rs. 1,000and in default of payment of fine, simpleimprisonment for three months.2. First, the prosecution version may be noticed. On 18.3.2006, prosecutrix, who was then aged about 21 years, was all alone in the house, as her two sisters-in-law (Jethanis) had gone to the forest to collect fodder for the cattle. The prosecutrix had been left behind for cooking meals and for taking care of the cattle. Around 11 or 11.30 a.m., when she was there in the cattle-shed, which is at some distance fro...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »