Himachal Pradesh Court September 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.
Anita Mahendru and ors. Vs. Kailash Verma and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-10-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1338
Sanjay Karol, J.1. The present appeal arises out of the impugned award dated 1.4.2003 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-I, Solan, H.P. in M.A.C. Petition No. 1-S/2 of 2002 titled as Anita Mahendru v. Kailash Verma, whereby a sum of Rs. 2,96,000 plus interest at the rate of 9 per cent has been directed to be paid as compensation to the appellants-claimants.2. Brij Mohan, respondent No. 2 was driving vehicle No. HP 07-3725 owned by Kailash Verma, respondent No. 1 which met with accident on 4.11.2001 in which Kailash Chand Mahendru died. F.I.R. No. 258/2001 was registered against the driver.3. The claimants being the legal heirs of the deceased Kailash Chand Mahendru filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') for the grant of compensation. Claimant No. 1 is the wife, claimant Nos. 2 and 3 are minor daughters and claimant No. 4 is the mother of the deceased.4. On the pleadings of the parties, the Tribunal fram...
The Oriental Insurance Company Limited Vs. Vidya Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1434,2009(1)ShimLC99
Rajiv Sharma, J.1. This FAO has been filed against the award dated 30.9.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Solan in MAC petition No. 33-S/2 of 2004.2. The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this appeal are that on 21.2.2004 the deceased had gone to Parwanoo. Around 12.30 p.m. when he was crossing a road at Parwanoo Chowk, Maruti Van No. HP-01-1280 appeared from Kalka side at a very fast speed. It hit the deceased. The deceased sustained fracture of ribs. The fractured ribs hurt the lungs, heart and spleen which resulted in the death of the deceased. The claimants filed the claim petition seeking compensation of Rs. 5,00,000/-. The owner resisted the claim and alleged that accident took place because of deceased own negligence. The appellant-company also resisted the petition by filing reply. It was alleged by the insurance company that respondent No. 6 hereinafter referred to as the owner and driver did not possess valid and effective driving licence. The lea...
Surjeet Kaur Vs. Shamsher Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1325
Sanjay Karol, J.1. Award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-II, Solan, H.P. dated 24.5.2004 in M.A.C. Petition No. 26-NL/2 of 2001 titled as Surjeet Kaur v. Shamsher Singh, awarding a compensation of Rs. 2,02,000 along with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum, in favour of claimant No. 1, Surjeet Kaur, widow of the deceased is under challenge.2. A petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was filed seeking compensation of Rs. 6,00,000 on account of death of Darshan Singh, who died in an accident, which took place on 1.7.2001 due to rash and negligent driving of Parkash Chand, respondent No. 2 of vehicle No. HP 34-3815.3. Shamsher Singh, respondent No. 1 owner and Parkash Chand, respondent No. 2 driver filed a joint written statement and National Insurance Co. Ltd. filed separate written statements.4. Based on the pleadings of the parties the Tribunal framed the following issues:(1) Whether on 1.7.2001 at about 7 p.m. at Kiratpur Sahib, Tehsil Anandp...
New India Assurance Company Vs. Durgi Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-09-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1851,2008(3)ShimLC314
Sanjay Karol, J.FAO No. 244 of 20051. Mr. Vivek Thakur, learned Counsel for the appellant/claimant has instructions to submit that he does not press this appeal, as such, it is dismissed as not pressed.FAO No. 436 of 2004The present appeal arises out of the impugned Award dated 9.9.2004 passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, H.P. in M.A.C. Case No. 94 of 2001 titled as Durgi Devi v. The New India Assurance Company Ltd. and Ors. awarding a sum of Rs. 2,52,000/- as compensation to the claimant.2. The present appeal has been filed only by the New India Assurance Company Limited on the ground that the liability could not have been fastened upon the Assurance Company for the reasons that the deceased was undisputedly a gratuitous passenger and in view of the breach of conditions of the Insurance Policy, no liability could have been fastened on them.3. On 11.6.1996, a Tractor bearing No. HP-23-2644 met with an accident at a place known as Paniala, District Bilaspur, H.P., du...
Smt. Rajo Devi Vs. Kailash Giri Bus Service Society and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-08-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ShimLC318
Sanjay Karol, J.1. The claimant in the present appeal has assailed the award dated 28th June, 2004 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (II), Mandi in Claim Petition No, 72 of 2001 titled as Smt. Rajo Devi v. Kailash Giri Bus Service Society and Ors. seeking enhancement of the awarded amount of compensation.2. A petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was filed by the claimant alleging that on 30.8.2000 bus bearing No. HP-37-3287 being driven by respondent No, 2, in which the claimant was travelling, met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving on the part of the said driver. FIR No. 52 of 2000 was registered against the driver. In the said accident, she sustained multiple grievous injuries and had to be admitted and given treatment in Government Hospital, Sujanpur, District Hamirpur, H.P., Indira Gandhi Medical College, Shimla; and Post Graduate Institute, Chandigarh. Inspite of treatment she could not recover and b...
Prem Lata Dutta and anr. Vs. Ajay Kumar Rana and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-04-2008
Reported in: 2009ACJ1521,2008(3)ShimLC200
Sanjay Karol, J.1. Claimants have filed the present appeal against the award dated 1st November, 2003 passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Una, in MAC Petition No. 8/2001, titled as Smt. Prem Lata Dutta and Anr. v. Ajay Kumar Rana and Ors.2. Claimants Smt. Prem Lata Dutta and Shri Santokh Singh are the parents of deceased Shri Anil Dutta. On 1.11.2001 Shri Anil Dutta and Shri Santokh Singh, claimant No. 2 were travelling on Scooter No. HP-20-6970 from Una to Haroli when Scooter No. HP-20-9907 being driven by Shri Ajay Kumar Rana-respondent No. 1 herein came from behind and after overtaking, without any signal suddenly turned to the extreme left side of the road as a result of which the scooter being driven by Shri Anil Dutta collided with the scooter of Shri Ajay Kumar Rana and in the said accident Shri Anil Dutta sustained injuries and died after some time.3. The claimants filed Claim Petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) ...
Commissioner of Central Excise Vs. Steel Strips Alloys Ltd. and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ShimLC474
Deepak Gupta, J.1. All the aforesaid Excise and Reference Petitions are being disposed of by a common judgment as the following common questions of law are involved in all the cases:1. Machine, machinery, plant, apparatus, tool or appliances, etc., used for producing or processing of any goods or for bringing about any change in any substance in or in relation to the manufacture of final produce are ineligible for Modvat Credit under the exclusion clause of explanation to Rule 57-A. Ramming Mass, Foundry Flux, Mortar, ILR MIX and Castable Powder are used as part of furnace. Therefore, will not the Ramming Mass, Foundry Flux, Mortar ILR MIX and Castable Powder be covered in the excluded category of item of explanation to Rule 57-A?2. The term machine, machinery, plant etc., have been vised in the exclusion Clause (1) to Rule 57-A in a general sense. If their constituents are taken as inclusive input when the plant or machine are not, will not the exclusion become superfluous and meaning...
Commissioner, Central Excise Vs. Fermenta Pharma Biodil Ltd.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ShimLC290
Deepak Gupta, J.1. These reference petitions have been admitted on the following questions of law:1. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case CEGAT was right in interpreting the provisions of proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 11-A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 and holding that the extended period was not invokable in facts of the case?2. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case CEGET ought to have taken into account Section 110 of the Finance Act, 2000 which seeks to validate certain actions taken under Section 11-A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 with retrospective effect?2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee Firm is manufacturing a product known as Penicillin G. Amidase Biocatalyst. The assessee declared the classification of this produce under sub-heading 3002.00 in the classification list w.e.f. 24.10.1999. The items classified under heading 3002.00 attract nil rate of duty. The list furnished by the assessee was approved by the Ass...
Yash Pal Gupta Vs. Comptroller and Auditor General of India and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-03-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ShimLC528
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This writ petition is directed against the order of the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, dated 20th December, 2000 rejecting the claim of the petitioner that he should be promoted to the post of Audit Officer (Commercial) on the ground that there should be three per cent reservation in all categories of posts in view of the provisions of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (here-in-after referred to as the Act).2. Brief facts necessary for the decision of the case are that the petitioner joined the office of the Accountant General, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla, as LDC in the year 1970. He was promoted as UDC in the year 1971. The petitioner is a orthopaedically handicapped, person suffering from Post Encephalitis Paraparesis. In the year 1981, his disability was assessed at 45%. On 17.1.1997 the disability of the petitioner was assessed at 50% in one lower limb with limp jerks and muscle wasti...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Lalita Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Sep-01-2008
Reported in: 2008(3)ShimLC344
R.B. Misra, J.1. The present appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act by the National Insurance Company against the order dated 5.7.2004 passed in MACP No. 13-K of 2002 by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal-Ill, Kangra at Dharamshala (in short called learned 'Tribunal'), whereby the claim petition preferred by respondents 1 to 5 under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 (in short 'MV Act') for compensation to them in reference to the death of Mohinder Singh in a motor accident involving the truck bearing No. HP-40-1260 owned by Himachal Flour Mills, Kangra has been allowed.2. While adjudicating the claim petition, learned Tribunal has awarded a compensation to the tune of Rs. 5,04,000/- in favour of respondents 1 to 5 with further direction to deposit Rs. 2.00 lakh in favour of respondent No. 1 and respondents No. 2 to 4 stated to be entitled to the tune of Rs. 75,000/- each and Rs. 79,000/- is directed to be awarded in favour of respondent No. 5 (being...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- Next ›