Himachal Pradesh Court January 2010 Judgments

Kummo Devi Vs. Jai Pal

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: AIR2010HP39

ORDERSanjay Karol, J.1. In terms of the present application, the appellant-wife is seeking permission to withdraw her consent recorded on 20-4-2009 with a further prayer that the matter be heard on merits.2. The application is opposed by the respondent-husband.3. The marriage between the parties was solemnized as per Hindu customary rites on 8-12-1980. The parties could not pull along. On 17-1-2001 respondent-husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under Section 13 (1)(ia) & (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petition was opposed by the wife. In terms of judgment and decree dated 16-2-2004, the District Judge allowed the petition and dissolved the marriage on the ground of cruelty.4. The same was assailed by the wife by filing the instant appeal. The appeal was admitted on 28-4-2004 and came up for hearing on 24-2-2009 when learned Counsel for the parties prayed for an adjournment to enable the parties to work ...

Sh. Jagdish Chand Sharma Vs. Sh. Bachan Singh and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Deepak Gupta, J.1. The following questions have been referred for decision to the Full Bench:1. What meaning should be assigned to the phrase 'any property of a third party' occurring in Section 147 and 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988?2. Whether the goods of a consignor/consignee being carried in a goods vehicle can be termed to be property of a third party?2. The claimants in both these appeals filed Claim Petitions before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shimla under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') in which compensation was claimed for loss of goods being carried in a truck. In both the cases, the owner of the goods was travelling alongwith the goods in the truck.3. In FAO No. 97 of 1999, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation for the personal injuries suffered by the owner but rejected the claim with regard to the goods being carried in the vehicle.4. In FAO No. 209 of 1999 the claim was only with regard to the goods being...

Jiwan Mehta Vs. Emmbros Metal Pvt. Ltd. and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal is directed against the order of the Company Law Board (here-in-after referred to as the CLB) dated 20th November, 2007, whereby it rejected the petition filed by the appellant under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 (here-in-after referred to as the Act) against Emmbros Metal Pvt. Ltd and others. The allegation in the claim petition was that the respondents No. 2 and 3 have in an illegal manner reduced the share holdings of the petitioner for their own benefit and to the detriment of the other share holders. According to the petitioner, he was wrongly removed from the directorship of the Company. On this basis it was prayed that action be taken against the respondents and suitable orders be passed in terms of Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956.2. The appellant and respondents No. 2 and 3 are real brothers. Late Shri T.D. Mehta had six sons, namely Mr. Jiwan Mehta (petitioner), Mr. Mohinder Mehta, Mr. Ramesh Mehta, Mr. Raj Mehta...

Jagdish Ram (Deceased) (Through L.Rs.) and Promila Kanta Vs. Karam Cha ...

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Dev Darshan Sud, J.1. Both these appeals are being dsiposed of by this judgment as they arise out of the same judgment of the learned District Judge and involve the same questions of law on which they were admitted for adjudication.2. Karam Chand, Ramesh Chand, Bal Kishan, Tilak Raj, sons of Ram Chand (respondents/plaintiffs) instituted the suit out of which these appeal arise against Pramila Kanta, Tribhuwan Nath and Jagdish Ram (appellants/defendants) praying for decree of declaration that they are in possession as tenants of the land measuring 29 kanals 18 marlas comprised in Khewat No. 206, Khatauni No. 374, Khasra Nos. 32/10/2, 11/2, 12, 13 and 14 as per jamabandi for the year 1985-86 situated in village Nangal Kalan, Sub-Tehsil Haroli, District Una and the entry changed from Kharif 1987 in the name of defendant No. 1 as Khud Kasht in the revenue record is illegal, null and void and ineffective against their rights. Consequential relief in the nature of decree for permanent prohib...

Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Teknika Components

Court: Himachal Pradesh

V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench(A), Chandigarh, hereinafter referred to as the ITAT, dated 13.12.2005, vide which the appeal filed by the assessee was allowed and the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax, hereinafter referred to as the CIT, ordering fresh assessment by the Assessing Officer, was set aside.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee/respondent filed return for the assessment year 2000-01. The assessee declared taxable Income of Rs. 1,72,980/- after claiming deduction under Section 80IA amounting to Rs. 89,74,875/-. It was observed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee is a partnership firm consisting of two partners namely Smt. Bhupinder Kaur and Smt. Manjeet Kaur having 1/2 share each. During the year under consideration, the assessee firm derived income from manufacture and sale of main shaft of watches, latch links for MCBs and weighing ...

Brestu Ram Vs. Jalpu Ram

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Dev Darshan Sud, J.1. This is the plaintiff's appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge dismissing the suit for possession of the suit land and in the alternative for grant of maintenance at the rate of Rs. 2000/- per month for his maintenance.2. The plaintiff instituted the suit on the allegations that the defendant is the pichlag son of the wife of plaintiff Nirtu Devi i.e. son born to her from her previous marriage. He pleads that the respondent-defendant had been visiting his house and in September, 1986 he assured that he would lookafter the plaintiff and his day to day needs in case the suit land was gifted to him. In case of the defendant not honouring the commitments made, the plaintiff would be entitled to revoke the gift deed and would be entitled to immediate possession of the suit property. The plaintiff pleaded that he executed a registered gift deed on 1.10.1996 (Ext.Pl) gifting the suit land to the respondent-defendant with this condition and s...

State of H.P. Vs. Manohar Lal and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Surinder Singh, J.1. The acquittal of the respondents, for the offences punishable under Sections 354, 452, 324, 325 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, passed by the learned trial Court in Case No. 28/ 2 of 2001, on 29.6.2002, has been challenged by the State in this appeal.2. In brief, the prosecution story can be stated thus. On 27th February, 2001, around 3 p.m., there was some marriage ceremony in the house of a co-villager of the complainant PW1 Sharda Devi. Her husband and children had gone there, but she was alone in her house. It is alleged that the respondents finding her alone, entered in her house and asked about her welfare. She objected their entry and asked them as to how they dare to enter into her room. On this, respondent Manohar Lal grappled with her and caught hold of her breasts. When she tried to wriggle out from his clutches, his co-accused Tarsem followed the pursuit. She raised hue and cry. On hearing the commotion, PW2 Roshan Lal maternal un...

United India Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Raksha Devi and ors.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant/ Insurance Company under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' against the award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I), Kangra at Dharamshala, dated 21.2.2005, passed in Claim Petition No. 18-K/II of 2003, titled Raksha Devi v. Jai Chand and Ors. This judgment shall also dispose of the appeal filed by the owner and the driver of the vehicle challenging the findings of the learned Tribunal, whereby the Insurance Company was held entitled to recover the award amount from the owner of the vehicle.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondent No. 1 Raksha Devi, hereinafter also referred to as the claimant, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of 'the Act' for the grant of compensation. It was alleged by the claimant that she was going alongwith others to Deotsidh on a pilgrimage to Baba Balak Nath Temple. They were going in a Tempo bearing No. HP 40 3713 ...

Smt. Kamni Vs. Sh. Bhagat Ram and anr.

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Dev Darshan Sud, J.1. The wife has appealed against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan, dissolving the marriage of the appellant and respondent No. 1 under Section 13(1)(i) of the Hindu Marriage Act (hereafter referred to as the Act) on the ground that the appellant had adulterous relations with proforma respondent No. 2 Rakesh Kumar alias Shalu, son of Shri Joginder Singh.2. Shri Bhagat Ram, respondent No. 1/petitioner pleaded that he was married to the appellant on 3.1.1990 at Mandi according to Hindu rites and ceremonies. Four children, namely Kumari Divya, aged 13 years, Kumari Bhanu, aged 11 years, Master Anurag aged 9 years and Kumari Shakshi, aged 6 years were born out of this wedlock. Kumari Divya and Anurag are living with him whereas Kumari Bhanu and Kumari Shakshi are living with his in-laws. He pleaded that after solemnization of marriage, the appellant herein developed illicit sexual relations with respondent No. 2 with whom sh...