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.
Raj Kumar Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-17-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC50
Surit Singh, J.1. Appellant is aggrieved by the judgment of learned Special Judge, Shimla, whereby he has been convicted of offences, under Sections 409, 468 and 471 IPC, and Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-; in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of two months, in respect of offence under Section 409 IPC, rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of four months, in respect of each of the offences, under Sections 468 and 471 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/-; in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for a further period of four months, in respect of offence, under Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.2. Prosecution case, which led ...
Aksh Deep and ors. Vs. Ram Bax and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-14-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1633
Sanjay Karol, J.1. The claimants have filed the present appeal assailing the impugned award dated 7.5.2003 passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-II, Una (H.P.) in M.A.C. Petition No. 100 of 1998, titled as Neelam v. Ram Bax, awarding compensation of Rs. 10,62,000 plus interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum to the claimants.2. Since the scope of the present appeal is narrow, facts necessary for deciding the present appeal are being narrated herein-below.3. The claimants filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') claiming compensation on account of death of Suresh Kumar, predecessor-in-interest of the claimants in an accident on 28.9.98. Vehicle No. HP 20-1264, owned by Ajay Jaswal and driven by Ram Bax hit the scooter No. HP 20-9530 being driven by the deceased. The accident occurred due to negligence of Ram Bax in which Suresh Kumar sustained injuries and ultimately succumbed to the same.4. Based on the pleadings ...
G.D. Engineering Construction Vs. H.P. Board Pvt. Ltd. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-14-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC24
Sanjay Karol, J.1. By filing the present objections under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, the claimant M/s G.D. Engineering Construction, a proprietorship concern has assailed the award dated 22.6.2004 passed by Shri S.S. Juneja, Arbitrator, who entered upon the reference made by this Court vide order dated 23.5.2002.2. The challenge is on the ground that while passing the award the Arbitrator has applied his personal knowledge and thus misconstrued and misread the provisions of the contract; settled principles of equity, fair play and natural justice have been violated as adequate opportunity to plead the case was not permitted; the award is contradictory, inconsistent and is based on surmises and conjectures.3. This Court on 21.6.2006 framed the following issues for adjudication of the present objections filed under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996:1. Whether the impugned award dated 22.6.2004 is in conflict with the public policy of ...
State of H.P. Vs. Mansha Ram and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-13-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC96
Surjit Singh, J.1. State has appealed against the judgment and decree, dated 2nd March, 1998, of learned District Judge (the first Appellate Court), whereby appeal filed against the judgment and decree, dated 23rd February, 1991, of the trial Court, passed in favour of plaintiff-respondent Mansha Ram, in a suit for declaration and permanent prohibitory injunction, has been dismissed.2. Relevant facts are like this. Respondent Mansha Ram filed a suit for declaration that he is owner in possession of 18 biswas land, comprised in Khasra No. 159/90/1, situate in Tehsil Ghumarwin, District Bilaspur, H.P., as it had been in his possession since the time of his father. By way of further relief, he prayed for issuance of permanent prohibitory injunction, restraining the present appellant, i.e. the State of Himachal Pradesh, from interfering in his possession, on the basis of revenue entries, showing it to be the owner in possession of the said land. It was alleged that in the year 1945, the Ru...
H.P. Housing Board Vs. Siri Ram Karan and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-10-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC80
Sanjay Karol, J.1. The appellant, beneficiary of the acquisition proceedings, is aggrieved with the order dated 21.5.2003 passed by the Additional District Judge, Solan, H.P. in Petition No. 1-S/4 of 2000 titled as H.P. Housing Board v. Ram Karan and Ors. for the reasons that its application filed under Section 28-A(3) read with Section 18(2)-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') stands dismissed.2. Primarily, the question which arises for consideration before this Court is as to whether the beneficiary's application under Section 28-A(3) of the Act, in effect being restitution proceedings, is maintainable or not and as to whether the claimants who have received the amount pursuant to an Award passed under Section 28-A are entitled to retain the amount received in excess of the final determination of the market value in an appeal under Section 54 of the Act or Article 136 of the Constitution of India.3. For the public purpose, namely, establishment ...
State of H.P. Vs. Ravi Kumar
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2008
Reported in: 2009CriLJ806,2008(3)ShimLC412
ORDERSurinder Singh, J.1. This petition is treated to be a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on the request of learned Law Officer.2. The facts germane to the present petition are that during the intervening night of 11th and 12th July, 2005, the respondent-accused came from Manimajra and had stayed along with his wife Monika (deceased) in 'Ganga Lodge' Hotel at Una wherein Shri Krishan Kumar (PW13) was the Manager and Sudama Mahato, a waiter who was attending the aforesaid couple. Following morning, the accused-respondent is alleged to have slipped away from the hotel on the pretext that he was going out to smoke a cigarette outside and would return within ten minutes but, he did not return. The hotel staff entertained a suspicion, thus Sudama Mahato waiter was sent to verify from the room where the couple was staying but it was found locked. Thereafter, the Manager opened the door of the room with a duplicate key and found Monika strangulated with dupatta....
Roshan Lal Vs. Mehar Chand and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1878,2009(1)ShimLC268
Sanjay Karol, J.1. In the present appeal, the owner has assailed the award dated 28.5.2005 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Fast Track Court, Hamirpur, H.P. in MACT No. 4/2001, RBT No. 34/2002 RBT No. 3/2004, titled as Mehar Chand Azad v. Sh. Roshan Lal and Anr.2. Two claim Petitions being MACT No. 4/2001, RBT No. 34/2002 RBT No. 3/2004 and MACT No. 6/2000 RBT No. 35/2002, RBT No. 4/ 2004 were decided in terms of impugned award. The appeal filed by the claimant of MACT No. 6/2000 RBT No. 35/2002, RBT No. 4/2004, was withdrawn by him, and, therefore, the present appeal is concerned with the facts of the case titled as Mehar Chand Azad v. Sh. Roshan Lal.3. The present respondent Mehar Chand Azad, filed a Claim Petition No. 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act), claiming compensation for a sum of Rs. 10 lacs on account of injury and permanent disability suffered in an accident on 15.1.2000. Tractor No. HP-22-9756 being driven by Shri Naresh K...
Virender Kumar Sewal and anr. Vs. Shanti Devi Paul and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC1
Sanjay Karol, J.1. In terms of the impugned judgment dated 29.6.2002, passed in Civil Appeal No. 51-N/13 of 2000, the Additional District Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P. has set-aside the judgment and decree dated 2.8.2000 passed by the Sub Judge 1st Class, Nahan, in Civil Suit No. 97/1 of 1999/98 and after returning the findings on Issue No. 5 and holding that the plaintiff's suit was not barred under the provisions of Order 2 Rule 2 CPC, remanded the matter back to the trial Court for disposal in accordance with law.2. Smt. Shanti Devi, contesting respondent No. 1 herein (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff') purchased land from the appellants herein (hereinafter referred to as 'the defendants'). On the strength of the Sale Deed, the plaintiff filed Civil Suit No. 62/1 of 1986/88/1 of 1987 titled as Smt. Shanti Devi v. Pritama Katoch and Ors. claiming a right of passage over Khasra No. 358/1 belonging to Smt. Pritama Katoch. In the said suit, the defendants who were also...
Managing Director, Himachal Road Trans. Corpn. and anr. Vs. Sito Devi ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ2474
Sanjay Karol, J.1. The present appeal arises out of an award dated 26.4.2004 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Hamirpur, H.P., whereby compensation amounting to Rs. 3,65,000 was awarded in favour of the claimants and the liability to pay the same was fastened in equal ratio upon New India Assurance Co. Ltd. and the present appellants.2. The claimants being the wife, mother and minor daughters of deceased Rakesh Kumar filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') alleging that on 10.12.2000, deceased Rakesh Kumar was travelling as pillion rider on scooter bearing No. HP 20-2016, being driven by Sunil Kumar, respondent No. 4 herein and owned by Anant Ram Kaundal, respondent No. 5 herein. When they reached near a place called Bassi, District Hamirpur, on seeing the bus coming from the opposite side, respondent No. 4 who was driving the scooter in a rash and negligent manner lost control and the scooter fell down caus...
L.A.C. and anr. Vs. Badri Nath and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Oct-01-2008
Reported in: 2009(1)ShimLC518
Sanjay Karol, J.1. The challenge in the appeal is to the award dated 1st November, 2002 passed by District Judge, Kullu, H.P. in Reference Petition No. 20 of 2002 titled as Badari Nath and Ors. v. Collector Land Acquisition and Anr..2. For the public purpose, namely, construction of Sidhwan-Gorigar road situated in Phati Deotha, Kothi Gopalpur, Tehsil Banjar, District Kullu, the claimants' land was acquired in terms of Notification issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') dated 22nd February, 1995 and published on 18th March, 1995.3. The Collector's Award No. 3 of 1997 dated 9th April, 1997 was passed awarding compensation for the acquired land.4. Aggrieved by the same, the claimants filed Land Reference Petition under Section 18 of the 'Act' and the District Judge while deciding the same in terms of impugned award enhanced the market value of the land to Rs. l5,000/- per bigha and also awarded interest on the compensation from 1st...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›