Himachal Pradesh Court September 2009 Judgments

Sh. Sohan Lal Vs. Sh. Jagat Singh and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Sanjay Karol, J.1. The original plaintiff has filed the present appeal assailing the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Courts below. Plaintiff filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief of possession to the effect that the alienation of the suit property by Smt. Bhag Puri (original defendant No. 3) in favour of Sh. Jagat Singh and Smt. Radha Devi (original defendants No. 1 and 2) is contrary to the customs prevalent in the area as the widow had a limited right of ownership in the estate of her husband and as such was not competent to alienate the suit land and therefore as per prevalent custom the property was to revert back to the plaintiff Sh. Sohan Lal and proforma defendants Sh. Amar Sukh, Sh. Pratap Chand and Sh. Sukh Dev. The trial Court dismissed Civil Suit No. 10-1 of 1999, titled as Sh. Sohan Lal v. Sh. Jagat Singh and Ors. in terms of its judgment and decree dated 28.12.2006 which was further affirmed by the First Appellate Court in Civil Appeal No. 5 of...

K.P. Singh Vs. the High Court of Himachal Pradesh and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Kuldip Singh, J.1. The petitioner through this petition has prayed for quashing of order/ notification dated 5.6.2004 Annexure P-18 vide which the petitioner has been removed from service by respondent No. 2 on the basis of recommendations of respondent No. 1, quashing of enquiry proceedings including enquiry report dated 4.2.2004 and directing the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service w.e.f. 5.6.2004 with all consequential benefits including seniority, arrears of salary alongwith interest at the rate of 12% per annum.2. The pleaded case of the petitioner is that one K.C. Sadyal was posted as Superintendent of Police at Una, who had been secretly monitoring the activities, functioning of Judicial Officers and their staff. The petitioner wrote a letter dated 3.10.1990 Annexure P-1 to K.C. Sadyal asking him on whose instance he was monitoring the functioning and supervising the Judicial Officers and their staff, who replied vide letter dated 8.10.1990 Annexure P-2 and had sh...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shree Kangra Steel Pvt. Ltd.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: [2010]320ITR691(HP)

Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law:1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Hon'ble Tribunal was right in law holding that CIT(A) was justified in taking into account the fresh evidence produced by the assessee without confronting it to the Assessing Officer in disregard to the provisions of Sub-rule 3 of Rule 46A of Income Tax Rules, 1962 wherein it has specifically been provided that CIT(A) could not accept such evidence unless the Assessing Officer has been given reasonable opportunity to examine the evidence so produced?2. Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble Tribunal has misconstrued the material on records?2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that for the assessment year 1996-97, the respondent (hereinafter referred to as the assessee) submitted a return showing loss of Rs. 19,16,720/-, T...

Rahul Singh and ors. Vs. State of H.P.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Surjit Singh, J.1. The present eight appeals, whose particulars are given in the heading of this judgment, are being disposed of by a common judgment, as all of them are directed against two judgments delivered in the same Sessions Trial and evidence, upon which the judgments are based, is the same. The judgments are dated 20th January, 2005 and 22nd September, 2007, delivered by Sessions Court at Una. As a matter of fact, there could have been a single judgment, but the necessity for writing a second judgment arose, because one of the appellants (convicts), namely Gurjant Singh, after the close of the evidence by the prosecution and even after his own examination, under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, absconded and he had to be declared a proclaimed offender, on account of his being not traceable. A separate judgment was written in his (Gurjant Singh's) case on 22nd September, 2007.2. We may notice the prosecution case, which led to the trial. Una Police filed a report,...

Smt. Kanta Dhir and anr Vs. Smt. Meera Sehgal and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Rajiv Sharma, J.1. This Regular Second Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 9.5.2001, passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Solan in Civil Appeal No. 11-S/13 of 1998.2. Brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this Regular Second Appeal are that the respondent-plaintiff (hereinafter referred to as 'the plaintiff' for convenience sake) filed a suit for perpetual injunction, stating therein that she is owner in possession of land (hereinafter referred to as 'the suit3. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. land' for convenience sake) comprised in Khata/ Khatauni No. 86/132, Khasra No. 163 measuring 42 Square meters, situated in Mauja Kather Solan, Tehsil and District Solan, H.P. as per Jamabandi for the years 1986-1987 and adjoining the suit land is the land of appellants-defendants (hereinafter referred to as 'the defendants' for convenience sake) bearing Khasra No. 162 which has been leased to them by the Municipa...

Sukhdev Singh Vs. Sunder and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Sanjay Karol, J.CMP (M) No. 32 of 20091. For the reasons stated in the application, which is supported by an affidavit, the delay of 126 days in filing the appeal has been sufficiently explained and is accordingly condoned.RSA No. 33 of 20092. Plaintiff's Civil Suit No. 2/1 of 2003, titled as Sukhdev Singh v. Sunder and Ors., was dismissed by the Court of Civil Judge (Jr. Division), Bilaspur, District Bilaspur, in terms of judgment and decree dated 27.10.2006. The plaintiff's Civil Appeal No. 104 of 2006, titled as Sukhdev Singh v. Sunder and Ors., arising out of the same also stands dismissed by the District Judge, Bilaspur (H.P), in terms of judgment and decree dated 31.5.2008.3. Both the Courts below have concurrently held that the plaintiff failed to prove that he had become owner by way of adverse possession of the suit land. Consequently, plaintiff's suit for declaration that he is owner in possession of the suit land comprised in Khasra No. 260/211, measuring 6-16 Bighas, situat...

Smt. Suman Kaul Vs. State of H.P. and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is a civil writ petition filed by the petitioner under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India for setting aside the order passed by the H.P. State Administrative Tribunal, Shimla, dated 27.8.2004 in O.A. No. 558/2001.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the petitioner was posted as J.B.T. teacher. According to the seniority list of J.B.T. teachers, the name of petitioner was appearing at Sr. No. 400. It was alleged that the respondents issued promotion orders of J.B.T. teachers as Head Teachers and the petitioner who was duly qualified was also entitled to be promoted as Head Teacher. It was alleged that in the final Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes. seniority list of Head Teachers as it stood on 31.12.1997, the name of the petitioner appears still as J.B.T. teacher, whereas several persons have been promoted who were junior to her. The petitioner alleged that one Smt. Indira Sharma who was at Sr. No. 43...

Ramji Dass Vs. State of H.P.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2009(2)ShimLC465

Kuldip Singh, J.1. This appeal has been directed against the judgment dated 15.1.2009 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solan in Sessions Trial No. 6-NL-/7 of 2008/06 convicting and sentencing the appellant under Section 376 IPC for a period of seven years and fine of Rs. 25000/-. In default of payment of fine, the appellant shall undergo further imprisonment for one year. The amount of fine on realization shall be paid as compensation to victim.2. The prosecution case in brief is that appellant was prosecuted for offence punishable under Section 376 IPC on the allegations that somewhere in the end of December 2005, he went to the house of PW 10 prosecutrix at about 2. p.m. situated in village Dungi Plate (Tikkar) and committed rape on her when she was alone in the house. The appellant after committing rape left the house of the victim and threatened her that in case she would reveal the incident to anyone he will kill her. The prosecutrix reported the matter to the police v...

Sh. Ramesh Kumar Vs. Sh. Chamel Singh

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Sanjay Karol, J.1. The present petition has been filed under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure assailing the order dated 8.12.2008 passed by the Additional District Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, H.P. in Civil Misc. Appeal No. 9-N/14 of 2008 whereby the order passed by the Civil Judge (Junior Divison), Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P. in Civil Misc. Application No. 48/6 of 2007, dated 17.5.2008 stands affirmed.2. Petitioner is referred to as the plaintiff and the respondent is referred to as the defendant.3. The plaintiff filed Civil Suit No. 40/1 of 2007, titled as Ramesh Kumar v. Chamel Singh in the Court of Civil Judge (Junior Division) Nahan, District Sirmaur, H.P. seeking permanent prohibitory injunction. Alongwith the suit the plaintiff filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 C.P.C. alleging that the plaintiff is co-owner of the land comprised in Khata Khatauni No. 1/1, Khasra No. 103/2, measuring 11.1 bighas, situated at Mauja Devni, Parg...

Jamna Devi and ors. Vs. Secretary Iph and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') is directed against the award of the Commissioner, Workmen's Compensation, H.P.PWD, South Zone, Shimla dated 4.8.2005 whereby he has rejected the petition filed by the claimants for grant of compensation on the ground that the claimants have failed to prove any causal connection between the death of the workman and the employment.2. The undisputed facts of the case are that the claimants are the widow and children of deceased Narpat. The deceased Narpat was working as Helper/Keyman in the Irrigation and Public Health Department at the Pump House. On 17.12.1996 he suffered a stomach ache. According to the claimants, the stomach ache arose because of some accident due to stress and strain of work whereas according to the respondents, stomach ache was a natural disease and had no connection with the employment of the deceased. This appeal was admitted on the following q...