Himachal Pradesh Court October 2008 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.
Amit Kohli and ors. Vs. Sumeet Walia and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-31-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC265
Dev Darshan Sud, J.1. This revision has been preferred by the Judgment Debtors against the order dated 7.5.2008 passed by the learned executing Court in an application under Section 151 read with Section 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure having been filed in the review petition preferred by the petitioner herein.2. The application under Sections 151 and 152 of the Code of Civil Procedure was moved by the Judgment Debtors Arvind Kohli and Amit Kohli (petitioners herein) praying that correction be made in the judgment and decree passed in favour of the Decree Holder. The learned Court holds that not only is the application vague, but the application for amendment of the decree does not show as to what the applicants-Judgment Debtors want. The first two paragraphs of the judgment hold:This order disposes of an application under Sections 151, 152 C.P.C. The pleadings as contained in paras 1 to 5 and also in the prayer clause are vague. The prayer clause is reproduced below:It is, therefor...
H.P. Housing and Urban Development Authority Vs. Satish Chhiber
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-30-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC155
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is directed against the order of the learned Additional District Judge, Shimla passed in Arbitration Case No. 1-S/2 of 2001, decided on 10.10.2007, whereby he has rejected the objections filed by the appellant against the award of the Arbitrator.2. The appellant entered into a contract with the respondent, hereinafter referred to as the contractor, for construction of some portion of the residential complex, below BCS, in Phase-II, New Shimla. Dispute arose between the parties and the matter was referred to arbitration in terms of arbitration clause.3. The contractor filed a petition setting out his claim and one of the claims was that the department had wrongly imposed compensation amounting to Rs. 1,22,340/- under causes 2 of the agreement. The arbitrator only allowed this claim. Objections were filed to the award of the arbitrator and one of the objectio...
Paras Ram Sharma Vs. Rajbansh Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-23-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ2182,[2009(121)FLR93],2009(1)ShimLC158
Sanjay Karol, J.1. The claimants have assailed the impugned award dated 24th June, 2002, passed by Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation Act, Rajgarh, District Sirmaur, H.P., dismissing the claim petition filed by the parents of deceased Shri Vinod Kumar alias Raju.2. A petition under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was filed by the claimants-appellants herein, on the ground that their son Shri Vinod Kumar employed as a Conductor by Shri Rajbans Singh and Shri Surinder Singh, owners of vehicle No. HP-14-1085, died in an accident on 9.2.1998. Vinod Kumar, at the relevant time was discharging the duties of a conductor/cleaner and drawing salary of Rs. 2,000/-. The owners inspite of service chose not to cause appearance and were proceeded ex parte, but, however, the Oriental Insurance Company, the Insurer of the vehicle in question filed its reply inter alia taking preliminary objections that in the absence of any proof of privity of contract; vali...
Mandeep Guleria Vs. Prithi Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-23-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC203
Rajiv Sharma, J.1. Since common questions of law and facts are involved in these FAOs, the same were taken up together for hearing and are being decided by a common judgment.FAO No. 130/2004 with cross-objections No. 248/2004:2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this appeal and cross-objection are that when the appellant along with his parents and sister was proceeding to his native place in village Behli on a scooter on 9.8.2001, a Tempo Trax came from opposite side and hit the scooter on extreme left side of the road. The appellant and other members of his family fell down. The accident resulted in multiple injuries on the face of the appellant resulting in extraction of two frontal teeth, fracture of jaw, fracture in left arm and lacerated wound on the occipital region of skull and pressing of vital organs like kidney and liver etc. A sum of Rs. 50,000/- is claimed to have been spent on medicines. Respondent No. 1 (owner) and respondent No. 2 (driver) filed joint reply t...
Tilak Raj Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-23-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC60
V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is a revision petition filed by the petitioner against the judgment, dated 27.8.2001, of the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, vide which he dismissed the appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment of the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur camp at Ghumarwin, convicting the petitioner under Sections 279/304-A of the IPC as under:Under Section 279: Rigorous imprisonment for four months andto, pay fine of Rs. 500/-.Under Section 304-A: Rigorous imprisonment for 1-1/2 years andto pay fine of Rs. 2,000/-.In default of payment of fine, the petitionerwas sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonmentfor four months.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 9.11.1992 at about 7.45 p.m. at place Banoha, Police Station Bharari, a minor boy Pushvinder Kumar aged about 8-9 years was crushed by a Maruti Van Bearing No. HP 02 2504, being driven by the petitioner. The injured was taken to the hospital where he was declared dead. A report...
State of H.P. Vs. Gouru Ram
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC54
V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the State of H.P. against the judgment of the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, dated 1.10.1991, vide which the respondent was acquitted of the charge framed against him under Section 376 I.P.C.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that on 7.2.1990, at about 5.00 p.m., a report was lodged with the police by one Kunju. He alleged therein that on the previous day i.e. on 6.2.1990 in the morning time he had gone to Tehsil Bali Chowki in connection with some work. He returned to his house on 7.2.1990 at 3.00 p.m. and when he reached near Hanogi Bridge, his wife Dhainu and his daughter's (name not mentioned) met him and his wife told him that on the previous day at about 5.30 p.m. Gouru i.e. the respondent had raped her daughter and he sent his wife and daughter towards the house and came to lodge the report, on which a case was registered and after investigation, the challan was filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate who commit...
Harish Rangta Vs. State of H.P. and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-22-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ803,2009(1)ShimLC41
Surinder Singh, J.1. This revision petition has been directed against the order dated 27.3.2008, passed by the learned Sessions Judge in Criminal Revision No. 29-S/10 of 2007 whereby the respondent No. 2 Shri Narender Sood, a dealer was ordered to be summoned by the learned trial Court by impleading him as an accused under Section 20-A of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, in short 'the Act', was set aside.2. In brief, the facts are that the petitioner herein was running a shop at Lellu Pul and was prosecuted for the offence punishable under Section 16(1)(a)(i) of the Act, as sample of 'Lehar Slice' Bottle 250 ml purchased by the Food Inspector was found to be misbranded by the Public Analyst. A notice of accusation was put to him. He pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.3. During the trial of the case, an application was moved by the petitioner under Section 14 read with Section 20-A of the Act for impleading respondent No. 2 as co-accused being the Dealer having sold the said p...
Shanta and ors. Vs. B.S. Chauhan and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-21-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1771
Sanjay Karol, J.1. The present appeals arise out of award dated 17.1.2007 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (Fast Track), Shimla, H.P. in M.A.C. Petition No. 138-S/2 of 2005/2004 tilted as Shanta v. B.S. Chauhan.2. F.A.O. No. 72 of 2007 has been filed by the claimants seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal and F.A.O. No. 132 of 2007 has been filed by United India Insurance Co. Ltd. assailing the award on the ground that Claims Tribunal has wrongly fixed the liability on the insurance company.3. On 4.7.2004 bus bearing No. HP 51-3393, owned by B.S. Chauhan, met with an accident near village Kanog on Kufri-Chail Road, District Shimla, H.P. An F.I.R. was registered against the conductor of the bus Man Singh, who is alleged to have driven the vehicle at the time of accident. Sanjay alias Sanjeev was in fact the driver of the bus. In the said accident, various passengers received injuries and some of them succumbed to the same and died. Various claim application...
Bansi and ors. Vs. Gurdas
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-20-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC33
Rajiv Sharma, J.1. This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 17.1.1997 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Una in civil appeal No. 99/1994.2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this appeal are that the respondent-plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff for convenience sake) filed a suit for permanent injunction in the Court of Sub Judge 1st Class, Amb on the allegation that the suit land was earlier in possession of one Santu son of Falla as tenant, who was father of the plaintiff. He used to pay rent to the owners. It is further alleged that after the death of Santu, the suit land came in possession of the plaintiff as tenant and thereafter she was in possession of the land as a tenant. The appellant-defendant (hereinafter referred to as 'the defendant' for convenience sake) resisted the suit of the plaintiff and filed a written statement. The learned trial Court on the basis of the evidence led by the parties dis...
Kamal General Store Vs. Kishori Lal Vij
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ882,2009(1)ShimLC45
Surit Singh, J.1. Present revision petition, under Section 397 Cr.P.C. read with Section 482 Cr.P.C, is directed against the judgments of trial Magistrate and the Appellate Court (Additional Sessions Judge), whereby the revision petitioner has been convicted by the trial Court of an offence, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 52,000/-; in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months, and the amount of fine has been ordered to be paid to the respondent, as compensation, and his appeal against the said judgment has been dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge.2. Facts relevant for the disposal of revision petition may be stated. Respondent Kishori Lal Vij, hereinafter called complainant, filed a complaint, under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Una, alleging that he had advanced two loans of Rs. 20,000/- each, to the revision petitione...