Himachal Pradesh Court May 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.
Vatna Alias Wattan Chand and anr. Vs. Charanu Alias Charan Dass and or ...
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-30-2011
1. This case depicts a depressing state of affair which shows how judicial proceedings can linger on for decades together, because the Presiding Officers show total lack of control over the proceedings and give adjournments to the parties just for the asking. 2. The plaintiffs filed a suit on 17.2.1993 for permanent injunction praying that the defendants be restrained from making any interference or taking forcible possession of the suit land. 3. Notice of this suit was issued on 18.2.1993 and same date. On 20.4.1993 counsel appeared for all the defendants and sought time to file written statement/reply. The matter was adjourned to 8.6.1993 and again time was sought to file written statement/reply and thereafter the matter was adjourned to 18.8.1993. On this date, a statement was made that defendant No.8 had died. The learned Court below did not ask the other defendants to file the written statement, but proceeded with the matter only in respect of bringing on record the legal represen...
Bhola Ram Vs. Tara Chand Ghal
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-30-2011
1. The petitioner is aggrieved by his conviction under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act whereby he has been sentenced for three months’ simple imprisonment and to pay a compensation amounting to ` 70,000/- with fine of ` 5000/- and in default of the payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. 2. The case of the complainant was that he and the accused were known to each other and they were on visiting terms. The petitioner was constructing a house in his village for which purpose he required money and a sum of ` 60,000/- was accordingly lent to him on 7.12.2005.In order to repay this debt, the petitioner herein issued cheque No. 508505 dated 8.6.2006 for ` 60,000/- from his account No. SF3112, payable on the Himachal Gramin Bank Gadsa Branch. When this cheque was presented for encashment on 6.11.2006, it was dishonoured with the remarks “insufficient amount” in the account of the petitioner. The defence as usual under Section 138 of the A...
Surender Paul Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-30-2011
1. By means of this petition, the petitioner has challenged the order dated 30.4.2007 passed by the Director Consolidation in proceedings under Section 54 of the H.P. Land (Consolidation and Fragmentation) Act, 1971 whereby he rejected the revision petition filed by the petitioner. 2. It is not disputed that the petitioner is owner of land measuring 1-17-10 bighas comprised in Khasra No.316/2 old (393 new) situate in Muhal Shgila Kipper/341 Illaqua Pandoh, Tehsil Sadar, District Mandi. It appears that when consolidation proceedings were going on a number of residents of the area stated that there is a path-Pagdandi (village path) which may be shown with a red line and that the villagers would have no objection and their conflicts will be resolved.Admittedly, the petitioner was not a signatory to such a document. On the basis of such a statement a path was shown through the land of the petitioner. He challenged the same before the Director of Consolidation, who rejected the same on the ...
Sanjay Kumar Vs. Kiran Kumari
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-30-2011
1. The parties are present in Court. I have talked to Smt.Kiran Kumari and her father in detail. She has stated in clear and in no uncertain terms that she is reluctant to join the company of her husband. I have also talked to her husband for half an hour. The father of the respondent is also unwilling to send his daughter with the appellant. 2. This appeal is taken up for final hearing today. The appellant instituted this appeal against the judgment and decree of the learned District Judge, Mandi, dismissing the petition for divorce instituted by the appellant herein on the allegations that the marriage between the parties was solemnized on 12.12.2002 in District Mandi in accordance with Hindu rites and custom. The allegation is that after the solemnization of the marriage, she told the appellant that there is temple `Mata Ka Rath’ in her parental house which has a large following and resultantly huge income from offerings. The proposal put forth by the respondent was that the a...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Pratap Singh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-30-2011
1. State has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 01.01.2005, rendered by the learned Special Judge (Forests), Shimla in Corruption Case No. 65-S/7 of 03/95, whereby respondents Pratap Singh, Prem Chand Thakur, J.S. Parihar and Mohan Singh, who were charged with and tried for offences, under Sections 218, 420, 467, 468, 465, 471 and 120- B of the Indian Penal Code, Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 4, 5 & 6 of the H.P. Prevention of Corrupt Practices Act, 1983, have been acquitted. 2. Case of the prosecution, in a nut-shell, is that respondent J.S. Parihar, while working as Executive Engineer, Prem Chand as Junior Engineer and Mohan Singh, Head Draftsman, allotted the work for construction of retaining wall for providing space above stone crusher at Jhakri for `22447/-. PW-3 Rama Nand, while investigating F.I.R. No. 25/90, noticed certain irregularities in the work of Jhakri Division.He has requested the superior...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. J.S. Parihar and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-30-2011
1. State has filed this appeal against the judgment dated 18.12.2004, rendered by the learned Special Judge (Forests), Shimla in Corruption Case No. 81-S/7 of 03/96, whereby respondents J.S. Parihar, Parkash Chand, Mohan Singh and Ranjit Singh Thakur, who were charged with and tried for offences, under Sections 218, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Sections 4, 5 & 6 of the H.P. Prevention of Specific Corrupt Practices Act, 1983, have been acquitted. 2. Case of the prosecution, in a nut-shell, is that respondent J.S. Parihar, while working as Executive Engineer, Parkash Chand as Junior Engineer and Mohan Singh, Head Draftsman, allotted the work for construction of retaining wall RD-9 to RD-18 meters for the site development of Type-I Quarter Block No. 15 at Jhakri for `81321/-. PW-4 Rama Nand, while investigating F.I.R. No. 25/90, noticed certain irregularities in the wo...
Rajinder Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-30-2011
1. The petitioner has been convicted for offences under Sections 279 and 304A IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and fine to the tune of ` 500/- for the commission of offence under Section 304-A IPC and in default of payment of fine, one month simple imprisonment. No separate sentence was imposed upon the petitioner for offence under Section 279 IPC. The learned Court had noted that since the offence arose out of the same act, therefore invoked Section 71 of the IPC. 2. In appeal, the conviction and sentence of the petitioner herein have been affirmed. 3. The prosecution case is that FIR 270/96 dated 4.11.1996 was registered with Police Station Sundernagar on the allegations that on 4.11.1996 PW10 Jieunu alongwith his wife PW3 Darshanu, daughter Kumari Babli and Lekh Raj were going to village Sakroha to attend some function.While they were waiting for the bus near Bus Stand Sundernagar at the exit point at about 12.15 PM, the accused came there by in a truck ...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Parkash Dass
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-30-2011
1. The present criminal appeal has come up for consideration after the leave to appeal has been granted under Section 378 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in reference to judgment dated 17.9.2001, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, HP, thereby acquitting the accused/respondent for the offence under Section 20 of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that on 10.1.2001, the accused was traveling in Jeep No.HP-34-4892, from Kullu to Allahabad. On way near Bilaspur, the Jeep, which was being driven by Hari Krishan, was checked up by the police at about 2.45 P.M. and ten persons, including driver and accused, were found in the jeep. Out of whom, six were ladies and four were gents. A bag containing Charas, being carried by the accused on his lap was recovered from the possession of the accused, in which Charas was kept in a polythene envelope. The Charas was weighed and the same was found 1 Kg. 225 gms.Out of which, two ...
Ravinder Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-30-2011
1. The petitioner in the petition has prayed mainly the following reliefs:- (i) That the respondents be directed to allow the applicant to continue as Para Teacher in the concerned school, i.e. GMS, Gawanoo, Distt. Sirmaur, H.P. (ii) That the respondents may be directed to pay the applicant the arrears of his salary with effect from June, 2006 with interest 12% P.A. with all consequential benefits. (iii) That any other relief deemed proper in the circumstances may also be granted to the applicant. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the petitioner was selected as Para Teacher (TGT,NM) for appointment in Govt. Middle School, Gawanoo under complex Govt. High School, Bhatgarh. The petitioner submitted his joining to the Headmaster Govt. High School, Bhatgarh on 20.5.2004. It has been stated that Para Teacher Policy framed by the State was challenged in the High Court and thereafter the matter went upto the Supreme Court. The respondent No.2 in this context took the stand that Para Tea...
Bikram Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-27-2011
1. In the year 1999, there was a vacancy of Panchayat Sahayak, in Gram Panchayat Bhakera, District Hamirpur. Process for filling that vacancy was initiated. One Kehar Singh, who happened to be a relative of Up Prahdan of the said Panchayat, was selected. He, however, did not report for training, which was required to be undergone before appointment. His selection was challenged by respondent No.6 Jagat Ram, on the ground that Up Pradhan of the Panchayat, who was his relative, had taken part in the selection process. Erstwhile H.P. State Administrative Tribunal, before which that selection was challenged, allowed the claim of respondent No.6 and quashed the selection of said Kehar Singh. Direction was given to the Panchayat to consider the case of respondent No.6 for appointment as Panchayat Sahayak, according to his merit and in case he was found fit he was to be given seniority from the date from which similarly situated persons had been appointed. Thereafter, notices were issued to t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »