Himachal Pradesh Court September 2011 Judgments

Hpseb and Another Vs. M/S. Jawalaji Alloys Steel Pvt. Ltd. and Another

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2012AIR(HP)70

Deepak Gupta, J. Oral: 1. The short question which arises for consideration in this case is whether the Chief Electrical Inspector had the jurisdiction to entertain the petition and decide the dispute regarding which appeal/reference was filed before it by respondent No.1 M/s Jawalaji Alloys Steel Pvt. Ltd (hereinafter referred to as the consumer). 2. According to the H.P.State Electricity Board (hereinafter referred to as the Board) the consumer at a time when peak load restrictions were in force had violated the peak load restrictions and therefore, was liable to pay peak load charges. The consumer filed a petition under Sections 32 and 24 of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) before the Chief Electrical Inspector (CEI) claiming that the demand raised by the Board was unlawful and illegal. An objection was raised by the Board that the CEI had no jurisdiction to entertain the petition. The Chief Electrical Inspector held that he was entitled to decid...

H.P. State Electricity Board and Another Vs. Vishwas Sharma and Anothe ...

Court: Himachal Pradesh State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Shimla

Chander Shekhar Sharma, Presiding Member: This revision petition is directed against the order, dated 15.6.2011, passed by District Forum, Shimla, in an application for grant of interim direction in Complaint No.171/2011. It appears that this application has not been registered by the Fora below as it does not ;depict any M.A. No. whereby the Forum below had directed the petitioner to restore the electricity connection in the demise premises of the complainant where the complainant was alleged to be running a shop. Parties are hereinafter being referred to as per their status in the complaint. Facts of the case as they emerge from the complaint are that the complainant is beneficiary of electricity connection provided in Shop No.2 of Sheela Bhawan, Lihantoo Building, near Bus Stand, Sanjau, Shimla, and is a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 and opposite party No.3 is the landlord of the premises where the complainant is running his business of ready-made garments for the...

State of Himachal Pradesh Vs. Rameshwar Dass

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Reported in: 2012CrLJ292(NOC)

SURINDER SINGH, J (oral): 1. The Learned Trial Court acquitted the respondent/accused for the offences punishable under Sections 279, 337, 338 and 304-A of the Indian Penal Code and also under Section 184 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 in Cr. Case No. 104-I/97/ 272-II/97 decided on 13.9.2004. The State felt aggrieved by the acquittal of the respondent/accused, as such filed the present appeal. Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? 2. Heard and gone through the evidence on record. 3. The case of the prosecution as emerges from the evidence on record can be stated thus. On 19.10.1996 at around 1:30 PM, a Haryana Roadways bus bearing registration No.HR-0-3-8681 was being driven by the respondent/accused allegedly in a rash and negligent manner and near the place known as Dhaliara, it rolled down and fell into a deep gorge causing simple as well as grievous injuries to its passengers, namely Santosh Kumari, Kehar Singh, Jagdish Singh, Rakesh, Tek Singh, Me...

Raj Kumar Garg Vs. Raj Kumar and Another

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Rajiv Sharma, J. SUIT FOR SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE. 1. Plaintiff has instituted a suit for specific performance of agreement dated 24.08.2006. According to the plaintiff, he entered into an agreement with the defendants on 24.08.2006, for purchasing the land to the extent of 65 bighas, comprised in Khata No. 1, Khatoni No. 1 to 4, total Khasra Nos. 25, as per Jamabandi for the year 2001-2002, in which the defendants have share to the extent of 75 bighas out of total land, measuring 174. 13 bighas, situated in village Char, Pargana Lachrang, Tehsil Kausali, District Solan, H.P. The total sale consideration for purchasing the land to the extent of 65 bighas was fixed at Rs.48 lacs and out of the total land, a sum of Rs.4 lacs was paid to the defendants, which was acknowledged by them. The remaining sale consideration was to be paid by the 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? No. plaintiffs on or before 23.04.2007, by which date, the sale deed was to...

State of H.P Vs. Paras Ram

Court: Himachal Pradesh

Sanjay Karol, J. 1. For an offence, which is alleged to have been committed on 1/2.9.1999, accused was put to trial. In terms of judgment dated 20.1.2001 passed by Sessions Judge, Kinnaur Sessions Division at Rampur Bushahr, in Sessions Trial No.1 of 2000, titled as State of H.P. vs. Paras Ram, accused stands acquitted of the charged offence. 2. It is the case of the prosecution that deceased Hansu Devi alias Ishwari Devi was married to accused Paras Ram some time in the year 1971-72. Accused was serving in the armed forces and retired in March 1999. In the year 1992, accused had physically assaulted his wife as a result of which she was hospitalized. With the intervention of real brothers of the deceased Sh. Dasmi Ram (PW-1) and Sh. Daulat Ram (PW-7) and also an independent witness Sh. Raftar Singh (PW-19), accused had entered into a compromise. He not only apologized but admitted his guilt and by way of written compromise (Ext.PW-1/D/Ext.PW-13/A) agreed not to subject his wife to fur...

Saran Dass Vs. Smt. Chinta Mani and Others

Court: Himachal Pradesh

V.K. Sharma, J. (Oral) 1. Order dated 7.3.2009 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Shimla, H.P. allowing an application under Order 22 Rule 3 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (in short ‘CPC’) and thereby ordering to bring on record legal representatives of the sole deceased appellant is under challenge in the present revision petition under Section 115 CPC. 2. Factual matrix is as follows. 3. The suit for grant of a decree of declaration and perpetual prohibitory injunction filed by the petitioner herein, Shri Saran Dass as plaintiff against the predecessor-in-interest of the respondents herein, namely, late Shri Shital Singh being the defendant was decreed by the learned trial Court as under:- “In view of my issuewise finding, the suit of the plaintiff is ordered to be decreed. The plaintiff is declared to be owner in possession of share of Dwarku Devi in suit land to the extent of share comprised in khata No. 18/28 measuring 49...