Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1991HP35
bhawani singh, j.1. this revision under section 24(5) of the himachal pradesh urban rent control act, 1987 (briefly 'the act'), is against the order dated 27-4-1989 passed by appellate authority (i), shimla, confirming the order dated 31-8-1989 passed by the rent controller (2), shimla. eviction of the petitioner from the premises in dispute has been ordered by both the authorities under the act, hence the petitioner has challenged the same by way of this revision petition.2. briefly stated, the facts are that the landlords (hereinafter referred to as 'the respodents') are the owners of the building known as 'rattan deep, talbot cottage', the mall, shimla. the petitioner is a tenant under them. he is in occupation of a big room measuring 14' x 11: 6' on the first floor with a kitchen 6' 1' x 6'.6' and toilet-cum-bath 6'.7' x 6'.6' on a monthly rent of rs. 23.75 paise in addition to the municipal taxes.3. the respondents filed a petition under section 14 of the act for the eviction of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner was in arrears of rent from 1-3-1977 to 21-7-1987 amounting to rs. 2683.75 along with 8 per cent municipal taxes, totalling rs. 214.72 and interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum rs. 772.92 paise; the total coming to rs. 3671.39 and that the respondents bona fide required the premises for their own use and occupation and they had not vacated any such residential building without sufficient cause in the urban area of shimla within five years of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 1989CriLJ383
r.s. thakur, j.1. on september 23, 1986, padam dev and ishwar lal addressed a written complaint to one of us (hon'ble the chief justice) whereby they alleged certain acts of harassment and high-handedness committed by the police personnel, namely, girdhari lal, a. s. i., surinder kumar and hem raj, constables against them. having taken into consideration all the material facts and circumstances of the case, the letter was registered as a writ petition.2. shri ishwar lal, one of the petitioners, has been running a tailoring shop in jungabazar for the last 15 to 20 years and was also having a residential house near his shop where he has been living with his family members all these years. the other complainant, padam dev, was working with him in the tailoring shop in august 1986. respondent girdhari lal, at the relevant time was posted as a.s.i. in-charge, police post, junga, while the other two respondents, surinder kumar and hem raj were serving as constables in the said police post under him. according to the petitioners, the respondent police officials have adopted a hostile posture towards the petitioners and that through abuse of their official position, they have committed such acts of misfeasance and malfeasance against the complainants as to make their lives highly insecure and thus miserable. these acts are described as under:1) on august 1, 1986, said hem raj and surinder kumar constables came to the shop of ishwar lal and dragged the petitioner padam dev to the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1990HP91
orderbhawani singh, j.1. this revision petition has been moved by shri mahadeo rao, tenant, against his judgment of appellate authority (rent act) in c.m.a. no. 67-s/14 of 1983 whereby the judgment of the rent controller (ii), shimla, in case no. 91-2 of 1980 has been affirmed and the tenant have been evicted from the premises in dispute. this is how the matter has been brought here by the tenant challenging the impugned decision.2. briefly, the facts are that the landlord initiated an eviction petition before the rent controller, shimla, stating therein that he is the owner of shop no. 86 (western portion) towards power house at sanjauli, shimla. the premises are of non-residential nature and mahadeo rao was the statutory tenant on payment of rs. 40/- per month as rent, inclusive of taxes. the allegations, on the basis of which eviction has been sought, pertain to the non-payment of rent from 1-8-1979 to 31-8-1980 totalling rs. 538.80, inclusive of interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum, and that the tenant had sub-let these premises to mansha ram, after coming into force of the himachal pradesh urban rent control act, 1971, in the year 1979, without the written consent of the landlord and that the tenant had ceased to occupy the premises for a continuous period of 12 months prior to the institution of the petition and it is mansha ram, who has been in possession of these premises since then. on the other hand, the objections of the tenant, inter alia, are that the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : [1993]200ITR517(HP)
leila seth, c.j.1. the first thirteen writ petitions pertain to the taxability of various allowances, e.g., dearness allowance, house rent allowance, city compensatory allowance, special compensatory allowance, compensatory allowance, hill compensatory allowance, capital allowance, hill and fuel allowance and special compensatory allowance for remote areas.2. it is pertinent to mention that the question of not taxing dearness allowance was not pressed by the petitioners. on the question of house rent allowance, the respondents have conceded that it is not to be included in the total income to the extent prescribed as per the provisions of section 10(13a) of the income-tax act, 1961, read with rule 2a of the income-taxrules, 1962. consequently, we are not dealing with the question of taxability of dearness allowance and house rent allowance.3. the main contention of the petitioners which are associations of employees and employees working in simla and its suburbs, as asserted in the writ petitions, is that these allowances are neither 'salary' nor 'perquisites' as defined in section 17(1) and (2) of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), and, consequently, cannot be included in the total income under the head 'salary' for the purpose of income-tax assessment. further, they do not have 'the character of income within the meaning and scheme of the income-tax act' and are, 'therefore, not includible in total income'. consequently, it is prayed that their .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : (2000)ILLJ544HP
d. raju c.j.1. this batch of writ petitions is being dealt with together since they involve identical question of law as to the maintainability of a claim petition under section 33-c(2) of the industrial disputes act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the act) for computation of the minimum bonus secured under the payment of bonus act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the bonus act). the details of individual facts in each of these cases do not really matter for the appreciation and adjudication of the points raised except in two cases, namely in c.w.p. no.544 of 1993 and 647 of 1998. for the sake of record, the skeletal factual details in c.w.p. no. 4/92, c.w.p. no.544 of 1993 and c.w.p. no. 647 of 1998 alone may be adverted to.c.w.p. no.4 of 19922. this writ petition has been filed seeking for the issue of a writ of certiorari to call for and quashing the order of the presiding officer, labour court dated july 6, 1991 made in application no. 1 of 1991 filed by the respondents-workers under section 33-c(2) of the act for computation of the minimum bonus payable under the bonus act and the orders passed thereon, whereunder the labour court held that the respective applicants are entitled to be paid minimum statutory bonus within the time stipulated therein. the various other applicants before the labour court who are arrayed as respondents in these writ petitions are serving in different categories either in the himachal pradesh state electricity board or the himachal pradesh .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : [2000]246ITR762(HP)
c.k. thakker, c.j.1. this petition is placed before the full bench pursuant to an order dated december 8, 1999, passed by a division bench in c. m. p. no. 439 of 1999. the said order reads as under :'heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.the sum and substance of the submission made for the petitioners by learned counsel appearing is that the division bench which rendered the decision reported in rudra and co. v. union of india , has not properly construed the provisions contained in the explanation to section 206c of the income-tax act, 1961, as amended and had the explanation been properly construed, the conclusion arrived at by the learned judges of the division bench could not have followed. as long as the judgment of the division bench stands, it is not given to another division bench to go behind the same to lay down any different proposition of law.in view of the above, the claim for granting interim order as prayed for could not be countenanced since acceding to the request for the grant of interim order would amount to nullifying and rather ignoring the earlier division bench judgment. hence, the c. m p. shall stand dismissed.since the submission of learned counsel involves the consideration of the correctness or otherwise in the earlier division bench judgment reported in rudra and co. v. union of india , it is just and necessary to avoid duplication of the hearing, the matter is straightaway placed before the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 1990CriLJ2511
orderbhawani singh, j.1. by this petition under section 482 of the code of criminal procedure and article 227 of the constitution of india, the petitioner, acharya rajneesh of bombay, challenges the issuance of notice dated 4-2-1986 by the additional chief judicial magistrate, kullu, under sections 295-a and 298 of the penal code in a complaint moved by complainant naval thakur under sections 292, 293, 295-a of the penal code.2. the essential facts, giving rise to this petition, are that the complainant, a resident of village badah in tehsil kullu, moved a complaint against the petitioner alleging that he has been closely associated with certain yogic asthanas and yoga ashram under the guidance of acharya prakash dev. further, he stated that he has been associated with the mahabudhi society of india, new delhi, and has been engaged in meditating and practically practising the yogic ashnas preached by the saints and seers of india. he was greatly influenced by the teachings of swami vivekananda and others to the world.3. the further allegation is that the complainant visited span motel on 11-12-1985 at the residence of the petitioner on his birthday and the complainant, after having been shown by the police, sat there to watch him. the complainant sought an interview with the petitioner through his private secretary to find out the truth of the teachings of the petitioner but he was not given any appointment, although the secretary of the petitioner had promised him to do so. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 1974CriLJ556
d.b. lal, j.1. this is an appeal by om prakash kumar, sanitary inspector, cantonment board, kasauli against the judgment dated 30th january, 1971 of the sessions judge, simla, whereby he has been convicted for the offence under section 302, indian penal code and has been sentenced to imprisonment for life. the prosecution case was that the accused om prakash kumar was married to the deceased janak kumari in february, 1968. thereafter on 22nd september, 1968 he got his posting as sanitary inspector in the cantonment board of kasauli. in january, 1970 janak kumari had pregnancy of nearly full term. the accused took leave from 27th january, 1970 to 1st february, 1970, as he had taken his wife to his own village kharwan. he fell sick there and the couple decided to return back to kasauli where they reached on 3rd february, 1970.on 4th february, 1970 the accused found janak kumari suffering from cough and cold and he went to dr. bhatley who was in sub-charge of the cantonment general hospital, kasauli, and obtained from him medicines which included cough mixture, some tablets and a powder. the accused returned to his house at about 9-15 p.m. on 4th february, 1970 and both husband and wife took their dinner. they had prepared tea and had taken that tea as the last thing in the night. thereafter the accused slept in the same room.on the morning of 5th february, 1970 the accused woke up at about 7 a.m. and attempted to wake up his wife, but she did not respond. the accused suspected .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : [2001]113TAXMAN55(NULL)
thakker, c.j. this petition is placed before the full bench pursuant to an order dated 8-12-1999, passed by a division bench in cmp no. 439 of 1999. the said order reads as under:'heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel appearing for the respondents.the sum and substance of the submission made for the petitioners by the learned counsel appearing is that the division bench which rendered the decision in rudra & co. v. union of india , has not properly construed the provisions contained in the explanation to section 206c of the income tax act, 1961, as amended and had the explanation been properly construed, the conclusion arrived at by the learned judges of the division bench could not have followed. as long as the judgment of the division bench stands, it is not given to another division bench to go behind the same to lay down any different proposition of law.in view of the above, the claim for granting interim order as prayed for could not be countenanced since acceding to the request for the grant of interim order would amount to nullifying and rather ignoring the earlier division bench judgment, hence, the cmp shall stand dismissed.since the submission of the learned counsel involves the consideration of the correctness or otherwise in the earlier division bench judgment in rudra & co.'s case (supra), it is just and necessary to avoid duplication of the hearing, the matter is straightaway placed before the full bench consisting of three judges on .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : [2006]133CompCas351(HP),[2006]65SCL19(HP)
arun kumar goel, j.1. this is a petition filed under sections 433,434 and 439 of the companies act, 1956, with a prayer to compulsorily wind up the respondent-company, namely, m/s. himachal futuristic communication limited having its registered office at 8, electronics complex, chambaghat, solan, h.p.2. admitted facts of the case are that both, ie., m/s. haryana telecom limited, also a company incorporated under the companies act, 1956, having its registered office at kherishadh, district rohtak, haryana (hereinafter referred to as the 'petitioner-company'), and m/s. himachal futuristic communication limited, having its registered office at 8, electronics complex, chambaghat, solan, h.p. (hereinafter referred to as 'the respondent'), were having business dealings. during the course of their such business dealings, petitioner, who is manufacturer of polythene insulated jelly filled cables (hereinafter referred to as 'plif cables') supplied these cables to the respondent. these in turn were supplied by the respondent to hfcl infotel limited.3. at the time of hearing, it was not disputed between the parties that goods of the value of rs. 7,14,15,554 were supplied by the petitioner to the respondent. against those, payments have been made from time to time. now the trouble starts. petitioner claims a balance outstanding from the respondent in the sum of rs. 98,37,982. whereas, no amount is due and payable according to the respondent. rather, as per the respondent, amount is .....
Tag this Judgment!