Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2009ACJ108,[2008(119)FLR1019],2008(2)ShimLC424
Rajiv Sharma, J.1. The present F.A.O. has been preferred against the award dated 6.8.2003 passed by the learned Commissioner under the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923.2. The brief facts necessary for the adjudication of this appeal are that respondents No. 1 to 4 (hereinafter referred to as the claimants for convenience sake) had filed petition under Section 22 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 for grant of compensation on account of death of Smt. Kamla Bhadur in an accident during the course of her employment when the Malgi Bridge under construction in Tehsil Suni suddenly collapsed on 11.12.1997. The respondents No. 5 and 6 filed joint replies. Respondent No. 7 has also filed reply to the claim petition. He has admitted that the deceased workman, who died on 11.12.1997 in the accident, was his employee. The appellant-Insurance Company has also filed reply to the claim petition. The learned Commissioner awarded a sum of Rs. 3,27,707/- as compensation amount in favour of the cla...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2008ACJ2058,2007(2)ShimLC489
Kuldip Singh, J.1. The insurer is in appeal, against award dated 14.8.2003, passed by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Bilaspur, in MAC Case No. 114 of 2000, awarding Rs. 1,00,000/-, compensation to claimant for damage to its building. The insurer has been directed to deposit the compensation within two months from the date of the award, failing which interest at the rate of 9% per annum, from the date of the award, shall also be payable. The parties are referred in the same manner, as in the impugned award.2. The facts in brief, as alleged in the petition are that petitioner-claimant is an association. The truck No. HIA 6835 on 24.7.2000 at village Bamta while crossing the toll tax barrier went out of control and rolled down about 25 feet and rested on the building of the petitioner causing damage to the building. The petitioner was earning Rs. 20,000/- per month, from the industry and as a result of damage to the building, the business of the petitioner suffered badly. The accident to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2008CriLJ4159
Sanjay Karol, J.1. The present appeal arises out of the judgment dated 18th May, 2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Kangra at Dharamsala, H. P. in S.C./S.T. No. 39-D/VII/06/2/20C7 titled as State of H. P. v. Om Raj convicting the accused for having committed an offence under Section 307 I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of seven years and fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default thereof to further undergo imprisonment of one year.2. The brief case of the prosecution is that on 11th August, 2006 Parshotam Lal (PW-1) had taken his animals for grazing from his house at village Duli, post office Kutharna, Tehsil and Police Station, Shahpur District Kangra, H.P. When he reached near the house of the accused, Reena Devi (PW-2) niece of the accused and grand daughter of PW-1 called him into the courtyard of the house. Parshotam Lal sat along side PW-2 and kept his 'Darati' (sickle) (Ext. P-1) besides him. Thereafter the accused came from...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2008ACJ2507,AIR2008HP67,2007(3)ShimLC335
ORDERDev Darshan Sud, J.1. This is defendants' appeal against the judgment of the learned District Judge allowing claim of the plaintiffs claiming the benefit of life insurance of the deceased Shri N.K. Seth.2. The undisputed facts are that the deceased Shri N.K. Seth had two policies of life Insurance for the total value of Rs. three lacs including accident insurance. Mr. N.K. Seth, husband of plaintiff No. 1 and father of plaintiff Nos. 2 and 3, met with an accident while driving his scooter on 24-4-1985 and as a result of the injuries sustained by him he died on 28-4-1985. He was employed as an Accountant in the State Bank of India. He was driving his scooter to his place of work on the ill-fated day when he suffered serious head injuries. He was treated at Indira Gandhi Medical College, Shimla and later on shifted to the PGI, Chandigarh, where he breathed his last on 28-4-1985. The plaintiffs claim that the appellants-defendants have wrongfully denied the insurance claim and, there...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Deepak Gupta, J.1. All the aforesaid appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment since they arise out of one judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track court), Kangra in sessions Trial No. 6 of 2004 decided on 8.11.2004. The prosecution storey, in brief, is that on 18.3.2003 at about mid night Raja Ram deceased, husband of complainant Pritama Devi, PW-1 had gone to his fields to drive out some stray cattle. He was returning home along the path towards the back of his house when dog of accused Kartar Singh started barking and attempted to bite him. Raja Ram raised a noise and pelted stones at the dog. Hearing this noise Pritama Devi, PW-1, her daughter Anjana and son Neeraj went to the lentil of their house from where they saw the accused persons Jaswant Singh, Surjit, Kartar, Kapil Dev, Rajnikant and Surinder Kumar giving beatings to Raja Ram. Thereafter, all the accused dragged Raja Ram towards their house and tethered his legs with a Citrus tree an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : II(2006)ACC806
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal by the claimant under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, is directed against the award of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (II), Mandi in Claim Petition No. 76 of 2001 decided on 27.11.2003.2. The facts necessary for disposal of the case are that admittedly the claimant Binu Ram met with an accident involving Car No. DAV-125 on 2.5.1999. The finding on the issue of negligence has not been challenged before me. The only questions to be decided are with regard to the quantum of compensation and the liability of the Insurance Company, if any, to pay the compensation.3. In the claim petition it was urged that Binu Ram prior to the accident was working as coolie. After the accident, the claimant had received extensive treatment at Karsog and IGMC, Shimla. It was also stated that after the accident he cannot work as coolie and he is unable to earn any amount whatsoever.4. The owner did not deny the accident, though negligence on the part of the driver was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2007CriLJ3029,2007(3)ShimLC415
V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellants against the conviction and sentence imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solan vide his judgment dated 24-7-2006 and the appellants were convicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven years each and were further sentenced to pay fine of Rs. 20.000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34, IPC. In default of payment of fine both the appellants were ordered to further suffer simple imprisonment for one year each. It was further directed that the amount of fine on reasliazation from the appellants to be paid to the injured.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 12-5-2005 at about 2 a.m. a statement under Section 154, Cr.P.C. was made by Sunil Kumar P.W. 1 before a police officer. He stated that on 11-5-2005 at about 10-30 p.m. he along with Raman Kumar P.W. 2 came to the tea shop of Bish Ram after doing agriculture work and Bish Ram and one Gopal Singh were already si...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : 2009ACJ735,2008(2)ShimLC439
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal and cross-objections are directed against the award of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal-II, Kangra at Dharamshala, H.P. dated 20.9.2003 whereby the claim petition filed by the appellant (hereinafter referred to as the claimant) has been partly allowed and compensation of Rs. 1,14,000/- has been awarded. Aggrieved by the said award, the claimant has filed the present appeal praying for enhancement of compensation. Respondent No. 1, who is owner-cum-driver of the vehicle involved in the accident has filed the cross-objections in which the award has been challenged on two grounds, firstly, that the findings of the learned Tribunal that the accident occurred due to rash and negligent driving of respondent No. 1 is illegal and secondly that the compensation awarded is highly excessive.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the claimant filed a claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 before the learned Motor Acciden...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This Revision Petition is directed against the judgment dated 9.9.2002 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla. By the impugned judgment the learned Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal filed by the accused on merits but reduced the sentence to 3 months. He modified the judgment of the learned trial Court whereby the accused had been convicted for committing offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 IPC and was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a term of three months for the offence punishable under Section 279 IPC, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term of four months for the offence punishable under Section 337 IPC and to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a term of six months for the offence punishable under Section 338 IPC. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. The prosecution case is that on 6.2.1999 at about 4 p.m. the accused Mohd. Shaffi was driving Maruti car bearing registration No. HP-02-1323 near the main bus st...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
V.K. Ahuja, J.1. The aforesaid two appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment, as both the appeals have been filed under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', against the award passed by the Commissioner, Workmen Compensation, dated 30.3.2005, vide which the learned Commissioner has awarded a sum of Rs. 4,27,582/-, alongwith interest, as against the Insurance Company. FAO No. 224 of 2005 has been filed by the appellant/Insurance Company and FAO No. 454 of 2005 has been filed by the appellant/claimant against the aforesaid award of the learned Commissioner.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that an application under Section 22 of the Act was filed by the claimant as against respondent No. 1 being the owner and as against the Insurance Company, who was impleaded as respondent No. 2 (appellant in FAO No. 224 of 2005), being the insurer of the vehicle. The claimant alleged that he was working as a driver on Tanker No. PBW-7847 ...
Tag this Judgment!