Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 1994ACJ1183
A.L. Vaidya, J.1. The present appeals, preferred by the Himachal Road Transport Corporation (in short, 'the Corporation') and by the claimants, along with cross-objections, are the result of a motor accident which took place on 26th July, 1980, in between 5.00 and 5.30 a.m. near railway crossing between Jabli and Dharampur on Kalka-Shimla National Highway. The bus owned by the Corporation with No. HPK 1464 was on night service coming from Dharamshala to Shimla. It started from Dharamshala at about 7.00 in the evening on 25th July, 1980. This bus was of a long route and, accordingly, two drivers used to operate it. One Hukam Chand, driver, drove the bus upto Ropar. However, according to the claimants, he brought the bus upto Kiratpur and handed it over to Ramesh Kumar, the second driver. The bus when reached near the place of accident it rolled down out of the road resulting in causing fatal injuries and other injuries to various occupants of the bus. This accident has been attributed t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : I(2008)DMC176,2008(1)ShimLC198
Dev Darshan Sud, J.1. This is the husband's appeal against the judgment of the learned District Judge, Solan, dismissing the petition filed by him under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) praying for divorce on the ground that the petitioner has been treated with cruelty and as such the marriage be annulled by a decree of divorce. The petition was resisted by the respondent on a number of grounds and she had expressed her willingness before the learned trial Court to live with the husband. She was asked to be present in this Court, and, she again expressed her desire to live with her husband. No reconciliation could be effected despite the best efforts made by me.2. This is a rather unfortunate case where petition for divorce has been filed before the learned District Judge by the parties after a period of more than 21 years of marriage. The parties to this petition have one son who is now employed and happily settled in life The allegations...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2007ACJ1874,AIR2007HP34,2007(1)ShimLC258
ORDERDeepak Gupta, J.1. The only question which arises for decision in this appeal is whether the amount deposited by the appellant-owner from time to time in pursuance to an award passed by a Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) has first to be adjusted towards interest or costs or to the principal amount as awarded by the Tribunal.2. The law is well settled that under the provisions of Order 21 of the Code of Civil Procedure the payments, if any, made by the JD have first to be adjusted towards the amount of costs and interest and only thereafter towards the principal amount due unless the parties have agreed and specified to the contrary, This position of law has been settled by the Apex Court in Meghraj v. Mst. Bayabai : [1970]1SCR523 wherein has been held as follows:The normal rule in the case of a debt due with interest is that any payment made by the debtor is in the first instance to be applied towards satisfaction of interest and thereafter to the principal.3. In the present ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(1)ShimLC80
Sanjay Karol, J.1. The appellant, beneficiary of the acquisition proceedings, is aggrieved with the order dated 21.5.2003 passed by the Additional District Judge, Solan, H.P. in Petition No. 1-S/4 of 2000 titled as H.P. Housing Board v. Ram Karan and Ors. for the reasons that its application filed under Section 28-A(3) read with Section 18(2)-A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') stands dismissed.2. Primarily, the question which arises for consideration before this Court is as to whether the beneficiary's application under Section 28-A(3) of the Act, in effect being restitution proceedings, is maintainable or not and as to whether the claimants who have received the amount pursuant to an Award passed under Section 28-A are entitled to retain the amount received in excess of the final determination of the market value in an appeal under Section 54 of the Act or Article 136 of the Constitution of India.3. For the public purpose, namely, establishment ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : [2008]142CompCas915(HP)
ORDERDeepak Gupta, J.1. The following two interesting questions of law arise for decision in the aforementioned appeal:1. Whether the company judge exercising powers under Section 20(2) of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, is bound by the recommendations/opinion of the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction ('the BIFR') under Section 20(1) of the SICA recommending winding up of the company?2. What is the procedure to be followed by the company judge while proceeding with the winding up of the sick industrial company, under Section 20(2) of the SICA?2. It is not necessary to give the detailed facts of the case. The appellant is a company duly incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having its head office at village Missarwala, post office Majra, tehsil Paonta Sahib, district Sirmour. By the year 1990, the company had lost all its equity and could not pay the instalments of loans raised from the financial institutions. The plant of the company w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1980HP42
V.P. Gupta, J. 1. This regular first appeal has been filed by Prabhu appellant against the award, dated 5th Oct., 1967 given by the Additional District Judge, Mandi.2. The brief facts of the case are that land measuring 15-6-0 bighas situate in village Purana Nagar, Tehsil Sundernagar, District Mandi, was acquired in the year 1961, and an amount of Rupees 44,072-14 P. was assessed as its compensation. The Land Acquisition Collector referred the matter for apportionment, under Section 30 of the Land Acquisition Act, to the District Judge, because Prabhu appellant claimed himself to be a tenant-at-will of the land. The claimof Prabhu, who was also a co-owner inthe acquired land, with respect to tenancy was denied by the other co-owners. The Additional District Judge, Mandi, who had to decide this reference framed the following issues on 1st August 1964 :'1. Whether Lagnoo, Narpat & Param Dev & Bholu have also a share in the tenancy rights with Prabhu? O. P. Lagnoo etc.2. Relief.' Another...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : (2007)IILLJ765HP,2007(1)ShimLC70
Surjit Singh, J.1. Through the present writ petition the petitioner has sought quashing of orders dated 3rd July, 1997 and 20th August, 1998, whereby he has been ordered to be removed from the service of respondent No. 1, by way of punishment. In the alternative a direction has been sought for holding fresh inquiry in which the writ petitioner should be afforded an opportunity to engage a defence assistant of his choice.2. Brief facts leading to the presentation of this writ petition are that the petitioner was initially employed as Clerk-cum-Cashier with respondent No. 1. Thereafter he was promoted as Head Clerk and then as Assistant Manager. In the year of 1988 he was posted in the capacity of Assistant Manager in Kaza Branch of respondent No. 1 - Bank. On further promotion, he was posted as Branch Manager in Kaza Branch itself on 27th August, 1990. He remained posted as such in the said Branch up to August, 1993. On 27.10.1993 the petitioner was placed under suspension for certain a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2008(I)ShimLC81
V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This judgment shall dispose of the LPA filed against the judgment of learned Single Judge, dated 14.11.2006, passed in CWP No. 46 of 2000.2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent was employed as Deputy Manager with appellant No. 1. He was posted as Branch Manager at Sera Branch from July 1994 to July 1996. During this period, he was alleged to have committed a number of acts of misconduct for which his explanation was called, which was not found to be satisfactory. Hence he was charge-sheeted. The charges as against the respondent were as under:Charge No. IYou violated Bank's laid down instructions in regard to sanction of loan to your relative, self and others.Charge No. IIYou misutilised your official position in granting advance to certain borrower, in excess of your, discretionary power. You also did not report the irregularity to your Controlling Authority.Charge No. IllYou committed various acts of omission and commission while handling certain transact...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2007(2)ShimLC340
V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant against the judgment of the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Shimla, dated 30th August, 2006, vide which the appellant was held guilty under Sections 342 and 376 I.P.C. and was sentenced as under:(i) 376 IPC Imprisonment for 7 years and fine of Rs. 1,000/-. Indefault of payment of fine, to suffer imprisonment for3 months.(ii) 342 IPC Imprisonment for 6 months.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that a report was lodged with the police on 12.5.2004 at about 12.10 p.m. by one X (name not mentioned) that she is living with her parents near Sankat Mochan and her father is serving at Shimla. The prosecutrix alleged she was a student of 10th class studying at Lakkar Bazar, Shimla and on the night intervening 28/ 29.4.2004, she had gone to the marriage of sister of her friend where one boy met her about whom she learnt that he was bua's son of her friend. The said boy named Naresh took her phone num...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 3(2005)ACC386
Deepak Gupta, J.1. The appellant Chetan, a minor, was aged about 11 years at the time of the accident. He was a student of Class-VII. On 16.4.1996, when he was travelling with his parents on a scooter, the same met with an accident with Bus No. HP-22-0581 owned by the Himachal Road Transport Corporation and driven by Shri Ramesh Kumar, respondent No. 3.2. As a result of the accident, the claimant suffered serious injuries, in which his pelvis was fractured and he also suffered fracture of the inferior pubic ramii. He was initially taken to the hospital at Namhol on 16.4.1996, from where he was referred to the District Hospital at Bilaspur. The Doctors at District Hospital, Bilaspur referred him to the Indira Gandhi Medical College and Hospital, Shimla, where he remained admitted from 17.4.1996 to 6.6.1996. During this period he underwent surgery in that hospital. Three of his teeth were also broken in the accident.3. The claimant being a minor filed the present claim petition before th...
Tag this Judgment!