Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(1)ShimLC401
Kuldip Singh, J.1.The appellants in this appeal have assailed judgment, decree dated 29.8.1997 passed by learned District Judge, Mandi in Civil Appeal No. 11/92, reversing judgment, decree dated 26.12.1991 passed by learned Sub Judge 1st Class, Karsog in Civil Suit No. 68 of 1988. (SNR) 116 of 1991 (KSG).2. The facts, in brief, are that respondents had filed a suit for declaration and injunction that they are owners in possession of land comprised in khewat No. 102, khatouni No. 119, khasra No. 195, Muhal Baroti/70, measuring 4-12-16 bighas, Tehsil Sundernagar which they had purchased from Dlumbi Devi vide registered sale deed dated 30.12.1980 along with land comprised in khewat No. 103, khatouni No. 120, khasra No. 193, situated in the same village which they had purchased from Sunder through registered sale deed dated 14.1.1981. The further case of the respondents is that they are owners in possession of the suit land but Assistant Collector 1st Grade, Sundernagar had issued a show c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2008(I)ShimLC24
Surinder Singh, J.1. The appellant has assailed the judgment and decree passed by the learned Single Judge in Civil Suit No. 65 of 1996 decided on May 23, 2001, whereby the suit was dismissed.Case of the Plaintiff.2. The brief facts giving rise to the instant appeal are that the appellant hereinafter called the plaintiff was a sole proprietor of rice mill running under the head and style of 'M/s. Vikarant Enterprises', at village Deoli in Tehsil Nalagarh, District Solan, which was financed by Punjab National Bank (proforma defendant). As per the terms and conditions of the financial assistance, the plaintiff and the Bank (proforma defendant) aforesaid got the building, plant, machinery and stock insured with the defendants-United India Insurance Company Limited, Ropar branch (respondents No. 1 and 2), hereinafter called the defendants, covering the risk of earthquake, fire and floods, for which two separate insurance policies were taken, one in respect of the building, plant and machin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2009(1)ShimLC445
Surjit Singh, J.1. The present cross objections, registered at No. 67 of 2001, in FAO No. 488 of 2000, have been referred to a Larger Bench, i.e. Division Bench by the Hon'ble Chief Justice, who while sitting as Single Judge, even though deciding the main appeal i.e. FAO No. 488 of 2000 felt that question involved in the cross objections needed to be considered by D.B. From the judgment of the Hon'ble Chief Justice, it appears that when the FAO 488/2000 and cross objections were being heard together, a question was raised by the claimants, who filed the present cross objections, that the deceased, being an Engineer in Government service, was likely to reach higher levels in service career, both in terms of status and salary and, therefore, his likely future increase in salary/income was also required to be taken into account, while determining the multiplicand, i.e. to say the figure of annual loss of dependency.2. Hon'ble Chief Justice not only referred the cross objections to the Lar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Deepak Gupta, J.1. A short but interesting question arises for decision in the present appeal.2. The undisputed facts of the case are that truck No. HR-37-A-3532 met with an accident on 21st May, 2004. The said truck was owned by respondent No. 7 Ajay Kumar and was being driven by respondent No. 8 Sh. Rehman Khan. The truck was insured with the appellant-National Insurance Company. Respondents No. 1 to 6 who are the wife, minor children and parents of one Sh. Surinder Kumar filed a claim petition before the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-I, Sirmaur, District at Nahan for the grant of compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act').3. According to the allegations made in the petition, deceased Surinder Kumar was traveling in the said truck as a labourer. He sustained grievous injuries on his head and died as a result thereof. The Insurance Company denied the insurance of the vehicle. It also took the plea that in case the veh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2007ACJ923,2007(1)ShimLC30
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. An award was passed on 27th February, 2003 by the learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Mandi in Claim Petition No. 36 of 1998 relating to and arising out of the death of Dr. N.C. Sharma in an accident involving his official jeep and a truck tipper No. PB-110-9313. The petitioner Sukhbir Singh in this petition was respondent No. 1 in the aforesaid Claim Petition. Respondent No. 2 herein Ashok Kumar was respondent No. 2 in the Claim Petition. Respondent No. 1 - National Insurance Company was the 3rd respondent in the Claim Petition. Petitioner and respondent No. 2 were the owner and the driver respectively of the truck tipper No. PH-110-9313.2. In the written statement filed by respondent No. 1 - National Insurance Company in answer to the Claim Petition, it was alleged and pleaded that the driver did not possess a valid and effective driving licence at the time of the accident. Based on the pleadings of the parties, following five issues were framed by the Tribuna...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2008ACJ869,AIR2008HP49,2008(1)ShimLC182
Deepak Gupta, J.1. By this judgment the aforesaid four appeals are being disposed of since they arise out of the same accident and involve common questions of law. 2. On 17.2.2001 at about 11.00 p.m. an accident took place between jeep No. HP-12-1711 and truck No. HIS 9211. A number of claim petitions were filed and the learned Tribunal held that the accident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of Jagtu, driver of the truck which was owned by Bahadur Singh. Compensation was awarded and the Insurance company was held liable to pay compensation. 3. The dispute raised by the Insurance Company is that on the date of accident the truck was not insured with it. The admitted facts are that a cover note was issued by the appellant-Insurance Company in favour of Bahadur Singh, owner of the truck No. HIS 9211 whereby truck was insured w.e.f. 21.4.2000 to 20.4.2001. The payment of premium was made by Bahadur Singh, owner of the truck, vide cheque No. 989130, dated 19.4.2000, Ex.PW-3/...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2009CriLJ1922,2009(1)ShimLC271
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This Appeal by the State is directed against the judgment dated 17.1.2002 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Hamirpur. By the impugned judgment the learned Sessions Judge allowed the appeal filed by the respondent-accused and set-aside the judgment of the learned trial Court whereby the accused has been convicted of having committed offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC and undergosimple imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- under Section 279 IPC and also to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/- and further to undergo simple imprisonment for two months under Section 338 IPC. In case of default of payment of fine the accused was to undergo simple imprisonment for two months under each count. The substantive sentences were directed to run concurrently.2. The admitted facts are that on 25.8.1994 the accused was driving a mini Motor Cycle on a Dangri-Kangoo road. It is also not disputed that the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2009ACJ2249
Sanjay Karol, J.1. The present appeal arises out of the impugned award dated 28.7.2004 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Shimla, H.P. in M.A.C. Case No. 80-S/2 of 1999 titled as Raju v. Jasbir Singh, awarding compensation of Rs. 2,20,000 to the claimant who sustained injuries and permanent disability to the extent of 45 per cent on both the lower limbs.2. The claimant has filed the present appeal seeking enhancement of compensation awarded by the Tribunal.3. Claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 was filed by the appellant Raju (hereinafter referred to as 'the claimant'), averring that he was travelling in truck bearing registration No. HP 07-2202 being driven by Shyam Lal, respondent No. 2 (hereinafter referred to as 'the driver') and owned by Jasbir Singh, respondent No. 1 (hereinafter referred to as 'the owner'). On 11.3.1999 due to the driver's rash and negligent driving the vehicle met with an accident in which the claimant sustained injuries...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2008(I)ShimLC45
Sanjay Karol, J.1. This regular second appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 5th January, 1994 passed by District Judge in Civil Appeal No. 179 of 1982 titled as Om Prakash v. Jagan Nath, whereby the judgment and decree dated 23rd March, 1982 passed by Sub Judge, 1st Class, Dharamsala has been set aside.2. For the purpose of convenience, the appellant herein is referred to as the 'plaintiff' and the respondent is referred to as the 'defendant'.3. The appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law:1. What is the effect of H.P. Tenancy and Land Reform Act, 1972 in the present suit?2. Whether Courts below has no jurisdiction to try the present suit, if so its effect?3. Whether the suit is not maintainable in the present form, if so its effects?4. Whether the Full Bench Judgment of this Hon'ble High Court Chunia v. Jindu has been wrongly and improperly applied to the present case, if so its effects?4. The plaintiff filed a suit for declaration that he is the o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1972HP37
M.H. Beg, C.J.1. Each of the two petitioners before us complains of denial, on similar grounds, of admission into the Medical College. Simla, run by the Government of Himachal Pradesh (hereinafter referred to as the College). As questions of fact and law common to both the cases arose, they were connected and argued together, and will be disposed of by a single judgment.2. Both petitioners, about 17 years In age at the time of applying for admission, submitted that they had complied with the conditions given in the Rules contained in the prospectus of the college for the year 1970-71 so that they were entitled to be considered for admission by the Selection Board.3. The prospectus for 1970-71 gives the objectives of the teaching programme of the college as follows:--'1. To enable the students to prepare for general practice of medicine together with an understanding of the patient as an individual who is an integral part of the society.2. To help develop firm foundations of scientific ...
Tag this Judgment!