Himachal Pradesh Court April 2011 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.
Yashpal Vs. Smt. Roshani Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-2011
1. This Regular Second Appeal was admitted against the current findings of fact recorded by the Courts below, on the following Substantial question of law:- 1. Whether the Courts below have misread and misinterpreted the oral and documentary evidence on record to hold the Will in question shrouded by suspicious circumstances, though is it proved to be executed under Section 63 of the Indian Succession Act and is a registered Will. 2.Yash Pal (plaintiff) on the basis of registered Will Ext.PW-2/A filed suit for possession and declaration with respect to suit property against Smt. Roshani Devi, Smt. Byasan Devi, Miss Veena Devi and Smt. Rattni Devi, defendants No.1 to 4, respectively.During the pendency of suit, Smt. Byasan Devi conceded to the case of the plaintiff and accordingly suit was partly decreed to the extent of 1/3rd share in the suit property.The remaining defendants contested the suit, inter alia, on the ground that the Will propounded by the plaintiff was fictitious, not va...
Nirmal Raj Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-2011
1. Petitioner was directed vide Annexure A-1 dated 3.12.2007 by the Principal, Government Senior Secondary School, Rampur Bushahr to deposit a sum of` 4,040/- for staying in the official accommodation allotted to the Principal.Petitioner filed reply to the same vide Annexure A-2 on 10.12.2007.He was called upon by the Principal to deposit a sum of ` 4,040/- and the same was to be recovered from the salary of the petitioner from the month of December, 2007 vide Annexure A-3 dated 14.12.2007. The operation of Annexure A-3 dated 14.12.2007 was stayed by the learned erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal on 3.1.2008.Surprisingly, therespondents without seeking permission of the Tribunal, decided to hold inquiry against the petitioner, as per communication dated 11.3.2008.Once the Tribunal had stayed the operation of Annexure A-3 dated 14.12.007, it was not open to the respondent-State to hold preliminary inquiry.Court deprecates this action of the respondent-State. 2. It appear...
Jaswant Singh Negi Vs. Rajinder Kumar and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-2011
1. This is a Regular Second Appeal under Section 100 C.P.C. filed by the original appellant Uday Singh Negi, now represented by his L.R. against the judgment and decree dated 1.7.2000 of the Court of learned District Judge, Kinnaur, reversing the judgment and decree passed by the learned Senior Sub Judge, Kinnaur, dated 10.12.1996, dismissing the suit of the plaintiff/respondent for permanent prohibitory injunction. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that respondent No. 1 hereinafter referred to as the plaintiff filed a suit for permanent injunction as against the appellant hereinafter also referred to as defendant No. 1 and in which the original proforma respondent Raj Kumar, now deleted, was impleaded as proforma defendant/defendant No. 2. 3. The facts as alleged by the plaintiff were that the plaintiff and proforma defendant were working outside since the plaintiff was posted at Delhi, while proforma defendant is presently deployed outside India in Sweden. It was alleged t...
Mohan Lal Thakur Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-27-2011
1. The petitioner has prayed mainly the following reliefs:(i) That the respondentsmay be directed to grant the pay scale of Rs.4020-6200 to the applicant w.e.f. the date of his regularization as Laboratory Assistant i.e. 15.11.2000 and to pay arrears thereof alongwith interest @ 18% per annum;(ii) That the applicant may also be held entitled to the regular pay scale w.e.f. the year 1991 when the applicant was appointed as Laboratory Assistanton daily wage basis, till the date of his regularization on the principleof “equal pay for equal work”. 2. The brief facts of the caseare that the petitioner was appointed as Laboratory Assistant on daily wage basis in the respondent-Corporationin the year 1991. The petitionerhad beendischarging the same and similar duties, which were being discharged by the regularly appointed Laboratory Assistants. The petitioner had been denied the regular pay scale of Laboratory Assistant to which he was legally entitled. The petitioner was regulari...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Jawahar Lal Jindal
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2011
1. The respondent was charge-sheeted, tried, convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code and in Cr.Appeal No.17-Cr.A/10 of 2006, filed by the convict, he was acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge, vide its detailed judgment passed on 19.8.2009, against which State has directed the present appeal. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully reappraised the evidence on record. 3. In short the prosecution case is that on 13.7.2002 at about 5.30 p.m., complainant PW1 Ram Saran was standing in front of his house and his son Ajay Kumar (7 years) was playing on the side of the road. In the meantime, a Car bearing registration No.HR-03C-9544 came from Paonta side in a high speed and hit Ajay Kumar causing grievous injuries to his right leg. The driver ran away from the spot. PW1 informed police. Police reached the spot and recorded statement of PW1 under Section 154 of ...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Ajay Kumar
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2011
1. The present criminal appeal has come up for consideration after the leave to appeal has been granted under section 378 (3) of Code of Criminal procedure in reference to the judgment dated 5.6.2001 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kangra at Dharamshala in Sessions Case No. 5-N/VII/1999, thereby acquitting the accused/respondent for the offence under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ( in short the ‘NDPS’ Act) in reference to FIR No. 100 dated 15.4.1998 of Police Station, Nurpur. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 15.4.1998 at 4.50 PM, Inspector-SHO Jagan Nath Nirala along with ASI Roop Lal and police constables and witnesses Yudhister and Thuru were present in the investigation of the case, when a secret information was received that Ajay Kumar was selling ‘charas’ at his shop. On receiving such information, the party raided the shop of the accused/respondent and on search recovered 590 grams of ‘charas&rs...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Roshan Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2011
1. State has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 02.12.2000, passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur in Sessions Case No. 20 of 1998. 2. Case of the prosecution, in a nut-shell, is that F.I.R. No. 11 of 1998 was registered at Police Station, Hamirpur under Punjab Excise Act. The investigation was carried out by PW-8 Shri Mehar Chand, ASI Police Station Hamirpur. He came to know that a person named Badda, who was an accused in F.I.R. No. 10 of 1997, under Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, was hiding in the house of accused Roshan Singh. Mehar Chand (PW-8) accompanied by Constables Manoj Kumar, Balbinder Singh and Nand Lal, resident of Village Badu and Sanjeev Patial, resident of village Mohin, District Hamirpur, proceeded to the house of Roshan Singh. On reaching at the house of Roshan Singh, Shri Mehar Chand called him out of his house. On hearing the call of Shri Mehar Chand, Roshan Singh came out of his house. Constable Manoj Kumar asked Roshan Singh that whether ...
Pankeshwar Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2011
1. Petitioner was interviewed for the post of Laboratory Attendant on 20.02.2000. He was offered appointment letter on 8th March, 2000. He joined his duties in Government Senior Secondary School Barial on 13.03.2000. However, the services of the petitioner were terminated on 7th January, 2002. Petitioner and similarly situate persons assailed their termination orders by filing Original Applications No. 85, 86, 87, 99, 128, 129, 130 and 141 of 2002 before the learned erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal. The learned Tribunal allowed these original applications and termination orders of the petitioner and similarly situate persons were quashed and set aside vide judgment dated 1st March, 2002. However, the learned Tribunal has granted liberty to the respondent-department to hold an enquiry in the matter and take appropriate action in accordance with law. Respondent-State assailed the judgment dated 1st March, 2002, rendered in the above-cited Original Applications by way of...
Shri NalIn Bhandari and anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2011
1. This is a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for quashing the impleadment of petitioner Nalin Bhandari who is alleged to be the proprietor of M/s D.S. Foods Ltd. Village and post office Raison, Kullu, District Kullu, H.P. as an accused under Section 20-A of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act in short, ‘the Act’ vide order dated 14.1.2008 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class (1) Shimla in compliant case No. 2/3 of 09/04 RBT No. 102-3/09/04 titled State versus Sushil Kumar, under Section 16 (1) (a) (i) of the Act. 2. In short, facts giving rise to the present petition can be stated thus. On 17.4.2004, Shri L.D. Thakur, Food Inspector, posted in M.C. Shimla intercepted the premises of “Hotel Samrat Regency”, The Mall Shimla and found accused Sushil Kumar respondent No. 2 selling ‘Rohtang Natural Mineral Water’. He had exhibited eight bottles of one liter each for sale to the general public. (ii). The Food...
State of Himachal Pradesh and ors. Vs. Ravinder Kumar and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Apr-26-2011
1. This application has been filed by the State under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for condonation of delay in filing review petition against the judgment of this Court dated 27 th April, 2007 in CWP No. 569 of 2001, titled Ravinder Kumar vs. State of H.P. and others whereby the petition filed by the respondent was allowed and this Court issued directions to the State to acquire the land, the subject matter of the writ petition on the allegations in the petition as also taking into consideration the admission of the State that the land was under its occupation without acquisition. The review petition is barred by 1157 days that is to say three years and sixty two days. The reason for instituting the review after such a long lapse of time is sought to be explained by advancing the following reasons: (a) That as per the directions issued by this Court on 27.4.2007 the proceedings of acquisition of land comprised Khasra Nos. 725 and 736 of village Nati (Chintpurni), Amb, Distri...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »