Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-11-1992
Reported in : AIR1993HP84
ORDERDevinder Gupta, J.1. The election of respondent No. 1, the returned candidate from Hamirpur Parliamentary constituency is under challenge in this Election Petition. Nominations for filing papers to the Lok Sabha from 4-Hamirpur Parliamentary constituency commenced on 20th April, 1991. Last date for the same was 26th April, 1991 and the dates for scrutiny and withdrawal were 27th and 29th April, 1991, respectively. The polling was held on 20th May, 1991. Counting of votes could not commence on 26th May, 1991, due to the assassination of Mr. Rajiv Gandhi and was deferred to I6th June, 1991. The counting commenced on 16th June, 1991 at Hamirpur, Una, Bilaspur and Dehra simultaneously. The result was declared on 17th June, 1991. Respondent No. 1 secured 2,05,970 votes as against the petitioner, who secured 2,02,232 votes. Respondent No. 1 was declared duly elected having won the election with a margin of 3738 votes. Respondents No. 2 to 16 were the other candidates who contested the e...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Nov-30-1992
Reported in : AIR1993HP71,I(1994)DMC308
Devinder Gupta, J. 1. Appellant has come up in appeal against the judgment and decree of District Judge, Hamirpur, dated 31st October, 1987 dismissing his petition seeking to have the marriage dissolved by a decree of divorce. 2. The parties to the petition are working as teachers. They were married on 21st November, 1968, but there is no child of this marriage. The parties could not pull on together despite the fact that efforts were made to have the matter reconciled. Ultimately, the appellant on 14th November, 1983 filed a petition under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') praying for a decree for Restitution of Conjugal Rights against the respondent. It is not disputed that on 9th January, 1985 the said petition was dismissed as not pressed. On the same day an application under Section 13B(1) of the Act was moved jointly by the parties seeking to have the marriage dissolved by a decree of divorce by mutual consent. Copy of the said petit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Apr-28-1992
Reported in : (1993)ILLJ99HP
Leila Seth, C.J.1. I have had the advantage of reading the judgments of both my learned brothers, which they are about to deliver. Since the various decisions of the Supreme Court and the High Courts as well as the provisions of law and the facts have been dealt with in detail in the said judgments, I do not intend to repeat them. However, the following conclusions can be culled out from the various decisions and provisions.1. A mere demand made to the Government cannot become an industrial dispute without it being raised by the workmen with their employer.2. If such a demand is made to the Government it can be forwarded to the management and if rejected, becomes an industrial dispute.3. Though it is apparent that for a dispute to exist there must be a demand by the workmen on the employer, this demand need not be in writing, unless the matter pertains to a public utility service, in view of the provisions of Section 22 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947.4. The demand need not be sen...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Oct-14-1992
Reported in : 1993CriLJ1061
V.K. Mehrotra, J.1. On a reference made by the District and Sessions Judge, Mandi, Kullu and Lauhal and Spiti Districts at Mandi, through letter of 19 December, 1991 addressed to the Registrar of this Court, the present proceedings were initiated against respondent Nawal Thakur of village Bhutti in Tehsil and District Kullu (H.P.). The reference of the District and Sessions Judge is one under Section 15(2) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971. The District and Sessions Judge had been requested by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu, through his letter of 8 November, 1991 to make a reference to this Court.2. Nawal Kishore instituted a criminal complaint No. 375/1 of 1991 against S/Shri Shanta Kumar (at present the Chief Minister of Himachal Pradesh), Maheshwar Singh son of Mohinder Singh, Rupi Palace, Kullu and Roop Singh (the then Forest Minister, Himachal Pradesh) under Sections 120-B/379/447/420/427/395/109, I.P.C. on 28 August, 1991. He filed another complaint the next da...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-06-1992
Reported in : AIR1993HP7,II(1992)DMC142
ORDERKamlesh Sharma, J. 1. The petitioners are aggrieved of the order dated 15-7-1988 of Special Marriage Officer, Shimla (Urban), Sub-Division, Shimla, appointed under the Special Marriage Act, whereby he has refused to solemnise their marriage under the Special Marriage Act on the ground that since petitioner No. 1 is a permanent resident of Germany, it is not possible to transmit acopy of notice to Marriage Officer of the District within whose limit, petitioner No. 1 permanently resides, as provided under Section 6(3) of the Special Marriage Act. He has assumed that no marriage Officer under the Special Marriage Act has been appointed in Germany by the Government of India. The order dated 15-7-1988 of Special Marriage Officer, Shimla, was challenged before the District Judge in appeal filed under Section 8(2) of the Special Marriage Act, but it has been dismissed as not maintainable vide judgment dated 25-8-1988 passed by the District Judge, Shimla. Now, by way of this petition unde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Oct-13-1992
Reported in : 1993CriLJ499
V.K. Mehrotra, J.1. Respondent Shri M. S. Mandyal (at present posted as Additional District and Sessions Judge, Shimla) was posted as Sub-Divisional Judi-cial Magistrate, Palampur in the month of July, 1981. On July 7, 1981 head constable Bidhi Singh (petitioner before us) escorted some under-trial prisoners for their production in the Court of Shri Mandyal along with some constables. The under-trial prisoners were produced in hand-cuffs before the learned Magistrate. It is said that on seeing that the under-trial prisoners were brought before him hand-cuffed, the learned Magistrate lost his temper and abused Bidi Singh by uttering the words 'non-sense' and 'bloody fool'.2. On July 22,1981 applicant Bidhi Singh filed a complaint in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate. He alleged that by his conduct in the open Court Shri Mandyal had intentionally insulted the complainant Bidhi Singh and had given provocation to him, knowing that it was likely to cause the complainant to break pu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Jul-07-1992
Reported in : I(1993)ACC418,1993ACJ998
Kamlesh Sharma, J.1. These eleven appeals [F.A.O. (MVA) Nos. 160 to 169 of 1983 and No. 1 of 1986] and nine Cross-objections (Nos. 27 to 33 of 1984, 286 of 1983 and 139 of 1986) are being disposed of by a common judgment as these arise out of a common award (except No. 1 of 1986) as well as common accident. The appellant in all the appeals is the Himachal Road Transport Corporation who owned bus No. HPS 7697 which unfortunately met with an accident. The respondents, except the respondents in F.A.O. Nos. 167 of 1983,168 of 1983 and 1 of 1986, are the legal heirs of those who died in the accident. The respondents in F.A.O. Nos. 167 of 1983,168 of 1983 and 1 of 1986 have themselves suffered injuries in the accident. Cross-objections have also been filed in all the appeals except in F.A.O. Nos. 161 of 1983 and 169 of 1983.2. On 28th February, 1981, at 8.15 a.m., the ill-fated bus No. HPS 7697 stalled its journey from Kotgarh to Rampur. Its driver was Prem Singha and conductor was Sanjiv Ku...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Dec-15-1992
Reported in : I(1993)ACC606,1993ACJ489
Devinder Gupta, J.1. Question of law arising for determination in the two appeals being common, the same are being disposed of by a single judgment.2. On 28th May, 1986, Havildar Rajinder Parshad took army jeep on duty from Yol to Alhilal. Major General Ram Krishan, VSM (Retd), Ex-Col. Commandant Assam Regiment, who had come to visit Yol Camp, under his own arrangement, took lift in the said jeep for going to Palampur, being on way from Yol to Alhilal: Near Aria, bus HIC 516, driven by Nand Kishore, respondent No. 5 and owned by Unemployed Graduate Bus Service, respondent No. 4, came from the opposite direction. According to the claimants, it was being driven rashly and negligently at a very high speed. While it was downhill and on wrong side, it struck against the jeep, as a result of which the jeep was pushed back to the hillside. Consequent to this impact, one side of the jeep was blocked by the hillside and the other by the bus, resulting in breaking out of fire and ultimately burn...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : May-27-1992
Reported in : I(1993)ACC75,1992ACJ1089
V.K. Mehrotra, J.1. We have heard learned counsel for the parties further today and feel that, in the circumstances of the present case, the finding recorded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Solan to the effect that the case was not a fit one for condoning the delay in the presentation of the claim petition deserves to be set aside.2. Deep Ram, appellant, was travelling in a bus of the H.R.T.C. bearing registration No. HIE 72 along with his wife from Bilaspur to Kotla. This was on February 4, 1988. An accident took place near Danoghat. In it Deep Ram sustained a number of injuries. The driver of the bus also died in it.3. After remaining in the hospital at Shimla for about 11 days, Deep Ram was discharged on February 15, 1988. The case of Deep Ram is that he remained unconscious for a period of about 5 days after the accident. Several injuries, which are mentioned in the discharge slip (marked 'X'), were found on the person of Deep Ram for which treatment was given to him.4. The...
Tag this Judgment!