Himachal Pradesh Court June 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.
Chottu Ram Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2011
SURINDER SINGH, J:1. Appellant has challenged his conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Court in case RBT No.23-AR/3 of 2009/2010, on 19.3.2011, whereby he has been convicted for the offence punishable under Section 20 (b) (ii) (B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, in short ‘the Act’, and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- with default clause and also to pay a fine under Section 192 of the Motor Vehicles Act, for not having in his possession the Registration Certificate, Insurance and Driving Licence. The vehicle of the appellant was also ordered to be confiscated to the State or as dealt with as per the law.2. Precisely, the prosecution case as emerges from the prosecution evidence can be stated thus. On 20.2.2009, a police party headed by PW8 S.I. Gurbachan Singh was on patrolling duty in their official vehicle No.HP-34A-8833, being driven by HHC Babu Ram. At about 9 p...
State of H.P. and Another Vs. Kapil Dev
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-29-2011
V.K. Sharma, J. (Oral) The scope of Section 25F read with Section 25B and Section 25G of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short 'the ID Act') is under consideration in the present petition, under Articles 226/227 of the Constitution of India, filed by the employer against the workman challenging the award dated 21.12.2010 of the learned Presiding Judge, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Shimla, H.P. (Camp at Mandi) in Reference No. 15 of 2003, in Shri Kapil Dev vs. The Executive Engineer and another. 2. The impugned award dated 21.12.2010 arose on the following reference by the appropriate government: “Whether retrenchment of Shri Kapil Dev son of Shri Dhani Ram (workman) daily rated Beldar by SDO, IPH, Sub Division, Nirmand, District Kullu, in March, 1999, without complying with the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, is proper and justified? If not, to what relief, backwages, seniority, service benefits and compensation the workman is entitled?” 3. T...
Bhikam Ram Vs. Satya Devi
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-27-2011
DEEPAK GUPTA, J.1. This appeal by the husband is directed against the judgement and decree dated 14.11.2008 whereby the learned trial Court dismissed the petition filed by the husband for grant of divorce on the grounds of desertion and cruelty.2. The undisputed facts are that the parties got married in the year 1976 as per Hindu rites. At the time of the filing of the petition the husband was 49 years of age. Now, he is 56 years old. The allegation of the husband was that the wife used to torture, neglect, abuse, insult and humiliate him and only wanted his property. It was further alleged that in April, 1999 the respondent deserted the petitioner and started living separately in the same house. She separated her mess and started living in two separate rooms and kitchen and had not cohabited with the petitioner since 1999 till the filing of the petition. Another allegation was that the wife had filed an application under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. claiming compensation despite the fac...
Smt. Hardei Vs. AmIn Chand and Others
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-23-2011
DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (Oral)1. This Appeal by the defendant is directed against the judgment and decree dated 25th August, 1999 passed by the learned District Judge, Bilaspur whereby he dismissed the appeal of the defendant and upheld the judgment and decree dated 12.12.1989 decreeing the suit of the plaintiff.2. The undisputed facts are that the suit land was originally owned by Pala Ram . It is also not disputed that Pala Ram entered into an agreement to sell the suit property to Sh.Tulsi Ram, original defendant No.1 for a sum of Rs.400/-. From the facts proved on record it is apparent that out of this amount of Rs.400/-, Rs.290/- was paid at the time when the agreement was entered into between the parties. The proposed vendee was also put in possession of the suit land, though some dispute has been raised as to whether it was Tulsi or Sunder who was in possession. Be that as it may, there is no manner of doubt that the plaintiff has not been found to be in possession of the suit land.3. ...
State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Devinder Singh and Others
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-22-2011
SURINDER SINGH, J. (Oral)1. The State felt aggrieved by the acquittal of the respondents, hereinafter to be referred as ‘the accused persons’, recorded by the learned trial Court, in Criminal Case No.15/2 of 2001, decided on 29th October, 2003, for the offences punishable under Sections 41, 42 of the Indian Forest Act and Sections 379 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, hence the State is in appeal before this Court.2. In short, the prosecution story can be stated thus. During the intervening night of 5th/6th October, 1999, PW9 Sub Inspector Chura Mani had put a Naka at forest-check-post, Chandol, with the help of his subordinate police officials as well as the officials of the Forest Department, including PW11 Rajesh Kumar Block Officer. At about 3.40 am, a Maruti Car bearing registration No.DDD-5099 came from the side of village Sanaura. It was signaled to stop nearby forest check post. It was slowed down, the driver gave 2/3 dippers to pass a signal to vehicle No.HPA-868...
Jyoti Parkash Vs. Kamal Kant
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-22-2011
DEEPAK GUPTA, J (Oral) 1. The following interesting question of law arises for determination in this petition: Whether once a suit has abated, a Court is powerless to issue an injunction under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure? 2. The facts necessary for decision of this case are that deceased Kishan Chand filed a suit, in January 2006, against Jyoti Parkash (the present petitioner), hereinafter referred to as the defendant. The suit was filed for declaration that the plaintiff is owner in possession of the land. During the pendency of the suit Kishan Chand died on 4th October, 2008. Thereafter, his son Kamal Kant filed an application under Order 39 Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short ‘the Code’), praying that the defendant be restrained from raising any construction over the suit land. The defendant was proceeded ex-parte and an order was passed on 7th November, 2009, whereby he was directed to maintain status quo qua the suit land d...
Saroj Garg Vs. State of H.P. and Others
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-21-2011
Justice Sanjay Karol, J. The writ petition is filed with the following reliefs:- “i) That the respondents-department may kindly be directed to cancel the tender process dated 2.4.2011 (annexure P-4) and grant the tender in favour of the petitioner being lowest bidder. ii) That the tender process dated 2.4.2011 with amended conditions may kindly be quashed and setaside. iii) That the record pertaining to this case may kindly be called for, for the kind perusal of this Hon’ble Court. iv) That the writ petition may kindly be allowed with cost. v) That any other reliefs, which Hon’ble Court deem just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioners and against the respondents.” 2. On 14.3.2011 the District Ayurvedic Officer, District Sirmaur at Nahan, H.P. issued notice inviting tenders (Annexure P-3) for the supply of “cooked/prepared diet to the indoor patients of District Ayurvedic Hospital, Nahan for the...
James Albert Vs. State of Hp
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-20-2011
SURINDER SINGH, J (Oral). 1. Appellant has challenged the judgment of his conviction and sentence passed by the learned Special Judge in Sessions Trial No.46/2008, decided on 18th September, 2010, for the offence punishable under Section 20 of the Narcotic Drugs Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, in short “the Act”, for allegedly keeping in his possession 820.64 grams of Charas in the recovered stuff weighing 2 Kgs. 2. In short, the prosecution story as emerges from the evidence on record can be stated thus. On 27th July, 2008, PW11 Sub Inspector Pawan Kumar was Incharge of Police Post, Mani Karan. He alongwith PW1 Constables Joginder Singh, Vijay Kumar, PW2 Arun Kumar and Govind Krishan were on traffic checking between villages Goj and Kasol. Around 7.00 pm, taxi bearing registration No.HP-01K-0344 came from the side of village Kasol. Police stopped it for checking and asked about the name of the driver. After disclosing his name, he (PW4) informed the police that he was p...
Yuv Raj Vs. State of H.P.
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-17-2011
DEV DARSHAN SUD, J. 1. This petition has been preferred by the petitioner herein challenging the order dated 4.3.2011 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Shimla, rejecting the application filed by the petitioner herein claiming that he was a Juvenile on the date when he committed the offence and the case is not triable by the Court, but by the Board under the Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, (hereinafrer referred to as the `Act’). 2. The petitioner is being tried for offences punishable under Section 302 IPC which was registered against him vide FIR No.107/2010, dated 8.5.2010 in Police Station, Sadar, Shimla. On an application having been made under Section 49 of the Act, it has been stated that the accused was born on 17.7.1994 in Tihri Gharwal in Uttrakhand. The father of the accused is a Nepali migrant labourer. In these circumstances, the petitioner was never admitted in any School in India nor is there any documentary ev...
Arun Kumar Vs. Prakash Chand Gupta
Court: Himachal Pradesh
Decided on: Jun-17-2011
RAJIV SHARMA, J. 1. Petitioner has challenged the judgment dated 3.5.2007 passed by the Appellate Authority (II), Shimla in Rent Appeal No. 10-S/13 (b) of 05/03. 2. Material facts necessary for the adjudication of this petition are that respondent-landlord (hereinafter referred to as ‘landlord’ for convenience sake) is the owner of shop No.1, Lahauri Market, building No. 142-145/1, Lahauri Market, Lower Bazar, Shimla. He purchased this shop in the year 1980 by way of sale deed on 21.11.1990 Ex.PW-8/A. Petitioner-tenant, Arun Kumar, and proforma respondent-tenant, Manohar Lal were inducted as tenants in the shop in the year 1971. Rent deed was entered between the landlord and tenants on 17.11.1971 vide Ex.PW-8/B. The shop at that time was owned by Faquir Chand. The eviction of the tenants was sought on the following grounds: i) It is alleged that the tenants sublet the premises to M/s Vijay Crockery and Tent House and the tenants have parted with the possession. The possessi...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- Next ›
- Last »