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.
Laxmi Vs. Daulat Ram and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2011
1. This appeal is directed against the award of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur dated 12.1.2011 whereby he dismissed the petition filed under Section 163-A as being not maintainable. 2. In fact the petitioners had earlier approached this Court by filing FAO No. 467 of 2002 and that case was disposed of in the following terms on 3.3.2009:- “Mr. Tara Singh Chauhan submits that as per the law laid down by the apex Court in Deepal Girishbhai Soni and others vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Baroda (2004) 5 SCC 385, the present petition filed under Section 163- A of Motor Vehciles Act was not maintainable since the income of the deceased was more than Rs.40,000/- per month. Therefore, he seeks to withdraw the original petition filed under Section 163-A of Motor Vehicles Act with liberty reserved to him to file an appropriate proceeding under the Motor Vehicles Act or any other provision of law. In case such proceedings are commenced within two months from today,...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Swari Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2011
1. The present Criminal Appeal has come up for adjudication after the grant of leave to appeal has been granted under Section 378 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure in reference to judgment dated 24.5.2001, passed by Learned Sessions Judge, Mandi, H.P., in Sessions Trial No.17 of 1998, under Sections 498-A and 306 of the Indian Penal Code acquitting the alleged respondents-accused. 2. The prosecution story, which emerges from the evidence led before this Court, is that Falaki Devi was married to Daulat Ram 7-8 years prior to the lodging of the report on 26.6.1997. One son was born from this wedlock and Daulat Ram husband of the deceased was serving at P.G.I. Chandigarh, while Falaki Devi was living in her in-laws' house alongwith Dunaju Devi. Dunaju Devi accused is the mother-in-law of the deceased, Chunju accused is Jeth of the deceased while Sawari Devi accused is Jethani and Amar Singh accused is brother of the father-in-law of Falaki Devi. It is in evidence that the deceased was...
Fayaz Ahmad Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2011
1. The convict has come in appeal against judgment dated 26/28.5.2010 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kullu in Sessions Trial No. 13 of 2008 whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two and half years and to pay fine of ` 25,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 420 read with Section 511 IPC. In default of payment of fine, the convict shall further undergo simple imprisonment for three months. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that Fayaz Ahmed and Rayees Ahmed approached the complainant Nirlep Singh, who was residing in hotel Paradise Shadow, Nehru Kund Manali on 20.5.2007 at about 5.15 p.m. They disclosed to the complainant that they were having one million Euro currency note and they wanted to exchange the same in Indian currency. Fayaz Ahmed had shown the currency note alongwith certificate of authenticity and copper zinc plate having engraved number of the said currency note. According to the prosecution, the value o...
Harinder Singh Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2011
1. Petitioner was employed as a Timber Watcher in the Forest Department of Himachal Pradesh, on 7 th January, 1998. Recruitment and Promotion Rules, copy Annexure A-2, provide for appointment of Timber Watchers to the posts of Forest Guards, on the basis of Limited Direct Recruitment. Out of the total posts of Forest Guards, 10 per cent are reserved for appointment of Timber Watchers, on the basis of Limited Direct Recruitment. 2. On 20 th December, 2002, a Memorandum, copy Annexure R-2, was issued by the Forest Department, per which 393 posts of Forest Guards were to be filled. Out of these 393 posts, 93 posts were reserved; 22 for Exservicemen, 59 for Home Guards and 12 for Sports Persons. These Ex-servicemen, Home Guards and Sports Persons were to be the persons not already employed in the Forest Department or the Forest Corporation. 300 posts were to be filled from amongst the Timber Watchers, on the basis of Limited Direct Recruitment Scheme, provided in the Rules, copy Annexure A...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Nandu and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2011
1. This appeal is directed against the judgement dated 7.5.1999 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Solan, in Sessions Trial No. 28-S/7 of 1998 whereby he acquitted the accused of having committed offences punishable under Sections 363, 366, 376, 368 IPC read with Section 34 IPC. 2. Briefly stated the case of the prosecution is that PW-2 Devinder Chopra is a retired Navel Officer. His wife retired as a lieutenant from the Military Nursing Service. After retirement they had settled at Chandigarh. There they adopted the prosecutrix when she was only about two months old. According to them she was born on 11 th September, 1985. Shri Devinder Chopra has two sons. One at the relevant time was an Admiral in the Indian Navy and the younger one was a Major in the Indian Army. Shri Chopra and his family alongwith the prosecutrix shifted to Parwanoo in the year 1990 when the prosecutrix was about 13 years old. It is alleged that on 12.7.1998 she had gone to attend some tuition, which was to ta...
Deepak Kumar Vs. Shyam Lal and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2011
1. This case depicts a shocking state of affair where both the brothers who have entered into a compromise are trying to back out from the same and are trying to mislead the Court time and again. 2. The present petitioner filed a Civil Suit No. 32/1 of 2009 claiming that he alongwith his brother Shyam Lal and mother Smt. Darshna Devi are the owners of the suit property and that the respondent-brother (Shyam Lal) had collected material on the suit land/spot and wants to raise construction on the same and also wants to grab the commercial portion of the property. 3. The stand of the respondent is that the property was earlier jointly co-owned but an agreement dated 12.3.2009 was entered into between the parties and in terms of this agreement the suit property fell to the share of the respondents. It is further submitted by the respondents that the construction is carried out on the third floor that is the roof of the 2 nd floor and not on the ground floor and the second floor over which ...
Oriental Insurance Company Vs. Smt. Parkasho Devi and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-16-2011
1. This appeal by the Insurance Company is directed against the award of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (II) Una, (MACT) whereby the Insurance Company has been held liable to satisfy the award. 2. The only question raised in this appeal is, whether the driver did not have a valid driving licence and, therefore, the insurance company could not be made liable to pay the awarded amount. 3. As far as the question of the validity of the driving licence is concerned, there can be no manner of doubt that the driving licence issued in favour of the driver was a fake licence. The driver while appearing in the witness box admitted in cross-examination that he had never gone to the motor Licensing Authority at Hamirpur, nor he had given any test. According to him, he had only paid money to an agent who had obtained the driving licence on his behalf. It is thus obvious that the driving licence issued in favour of the respondent was fake and this fact is proved from the evidence of the Licensing Cl...
Paras Ram and ors. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and anr.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2011
1. Material facts, necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that the petitioners were conferred the work-charge status in the year 1994. Their case, in a nutshell, is that they have not been paid the revised pay scales as per Annexures A-5 and A- 6, dated 20 th January, 1998 and 1 st September, 1998. 2. The case of the respondent-State, in a nutshell, is that as and when the higher pay scale to the category of Mate will be released by the State Government, the petitioners shall be entitled to the higher pay scale. 3. I have heard learned Advocates appearing on behalf of the parties and gone through the pleadings carefully. 4. A bare perusal of Annexure A-5 makes it abundantly clear that the pay-scale of the category of Mate was revised from ` 770-1410 to ` 2520-4140 with the initial start of ` 2620/-. This notification was issued on 20 th January, 1998. Thereafter, another notification was issued on 1 st September, 1998 whereby the pay scale of Mate was revised from ` 770-14...
Sunita Kaushal Vs. H.P.S.F.C. and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2011
1. Heard and gone through the record. 2. Petitioner was appointed as Stenographer in Himachal Pradesh State Forest Corporation, in November, 1987, on the basis of a written test conducted, after the posts were advertised. Respondent No.3 also appeared in that test and passed the same. However, his merit was assessed lower than that of the petitioner. 3. In the year 1988, a tentative Seniority List, copy Annexure A-1, was circulated, in which petitioner’s name figured at Sr. No.14, while that of respondent No.3 figured at Sr. No.24. Again, a tentative Seniority List was circulated, in which petitioner’s name figured at Sr. No.11 and that of respondent NO.3 at Sr. No.20. Final Seniority List was prepared and circulated in the year 1988. Copy of the Final Seniority List is Annexure A-3. In this List, however, petitioner was placed at Sr. No.18, while respondent No.3 was placed at Sr. No.11. Thereafter, respondent No.3 was promoted to the post of Senior Scale Stenographer, vide...
Jai Dev Chauhan Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and ors.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: May-13-2011
1. Petitioner joined the Indian Army on 9 th June, 1966. He was discharged on 30 th June, 1990. He was appointed against the post reserved for Ex-serviceman as J.B.T. Teacher and he joined as such on 30 th September, 1993. He gave his option to provide him the benefit under the Demobilized Armed Forces Personnel (Reservation of Vacancies in H.P. State Non-Technical Service) Rules, 1972 (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules” for convenience sake) towards pay fixation and seniority. Same was granted to the petitioner towards pay fixation and seniority. He was given the benefit of approved military service of 21 years and 21 days and the deemed date of appointment as J.B.T. Teacher was 9 th September, 1969. The State Government has taken a decision on Punjab pattern to grant higher pay scale to the J.B.T. Teachers who had acquired higher qualification between 13 th December, 1958 to 27 th September, 1979 vide Annexure A-6, dated 29 th November, 1991. Petitioner made a represe...