Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-15-1976
Reported in : AIR1976HP75
R.S. Pathak, C.J.1. This is a claimants' first appeal directed against the order of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kangra Division dismissing their petition for compensation under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939.2. Daya Ram was employed as a truck driver by the respondents Tani Ram, Smt. Raj Kumari, Jagmohan and Chain Lal. They owned Truck No. HIM-4934, which was insured with the Oriental Fire & Life Insurance Company Limited. On February 18, 1968, Daya Ram was driving the truck from Mehatpur to Bahi Kharialti in the Tahsil of Hamir-pur. At Talmehra, at about 6 O'clock in the morning, the truck met with an accident. It overturned and Daya Ram was killed. His widow Smt. dayatri Devi, his daughter Neelam and son Papu filed a claim on May 3, 1968 before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act for compensation from the employers and the Insurance Company. The respondents resisted the claim on the ground that the Tribunal had no ju...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-23-1976
Reported in : AIR1977HP1
C.R. Thakur, J.1. This appeal has arisen out of a suit brought by Smt. Lila Wati widow of Duni Chand and her sons and daughters against Paras Ram and his sons for possession of the lower flat of house situate in Chowk Bazar, Solan, and for recovery of Rs. 900/- on account of use and occupation and future mesne profits. In order to appreciate the facts of the case it will be better to give the pedigree-table of the parties and which is as under: BHUJA MAL | ------------------------------------- | | | Sawan Ram Munshi Ram Paras Ram (died isssueless) | (Defdt. No1 I) Duni Chand | | | ---------- | Saroj, Krishna, Usha | Surendara (Daughters) | Anil Kumar, Lalit Kumar'(sons)| Lila Wati (Window) | | --------------------------- | | Basheshar Nath Som Nath (Defdt. No.3) (Defdt. No.2)Till 1937 according to the plaintiffs the three brothers, Sawan Ram, Munshi Ram and Paras Ram constituted a joint Hindu family and in that year a partition was effected between these three brothers and a mutation ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : May-26-1976
Reported in : AIR1977HP41
C.R. Thakur, J. 1. This execution second appeal has got a chequered history. Subedar Mast Ram and others fileda suit for declaration to the effect that the land comprised in Khasra No. 1346/3 was the Shamilat Tikka land of the residents of village Larha, in tehsil Hamirpur and that Khyali Ram had taken unlawful possession of the same and they, therefore, prayed for possession of the same as a consequential relief. This suit was filed by them in a representative capacity on 16-10-1952. The suit was decreed on 18-8-1953. The decree-holders took out execution proceedings on 4-8-1960. The judgment-debtor also filed objections under Section 47, Civil Procedure Code which were dismissed and in consequence of the execution possession of the land was delivered as also the costs amounting to Rs. 534.77 were recovered from the judgment-debtor and paid to the decree-holder. The judgment-debtor went in appeal to the court of the District Judge against the dismissal of his objection petition which ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-29-1976
Reported in : AIR1977HP35
D.B. Lal, J.1. These are six Execution Second Appeals and have been directed against the judgment of the District Judge, Solan who has upheld in appeal the judgment of the Senior Sub-Judge and thereby dismissed the objections of the appellant preferred under Section 47 of the Civil Procedure Code, The facts arising out of these appeals are not controverted and may, in brief, be stated as follows.2. Under the Punjab Co-operative Societies Act, 1961, a dispute arose between the appellant and the respondent in respect of certain demand placed by the respondent upon the appellant and such disputes were referred to arbitration and awards were given against the respondent. Under Section 63 (a) of the Act the awards were deemed to be a decree of a civil court and were executed in the same manner as decree of such court. Accordingly the execution was solicited in the Court of the Senior Sub-Judge and after the necessary step of attachment etc., the property belonging to the appellant was likel...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-03-1976
Reported in : AIR1976HP54
D.B. Lal, J.1. This is an application on behalf of the respondents wherein they have sought for a certificate of fitness for appeal to Supreme Court under Article 133 (1) of the Constitution. Brief facts of the case from which the present application emerges may now be stated. Messrs. Himachal Shoddy Mills Limited filed a writ petition against the Union of India, the Textile Commissioner, and the State Trading Corporation, wherein they called upon the respondents not to withhold the allocation of unserviced raw material to which the petitioners were entitled. It is to be recalled that by an order made by the respondents the allocation of unserviced law material was suspended to the petitioners, with the consequence that the mill was likely to be closed. The main contention of the petitioners was that the statutory provision was not observed while suspending the raw material and that a principle of natural justice was involved because neither a show cause notice was given nor the petiti...
Tag this Judgment!