Court : Himachal Pradesh
Reported in : AIR2010HP39
ORDERSanjay Karol, J.1. In terms of the present application, the appellant-wife is seeking permission to withdraw her consent recorded on 20-4-2009 with a further prayer that the matter be heard on merits.2. The application is opposed by the respondent-husband.3. The marriage between the parties was solemnized as per Hindu customary rites on 8-12-1980. The parties could not pull along. On 17-1-2001 respondent-husband filed a petition for dissolution of marriage by a decree of divorce under Section 13 (1)(ia) & (ib) of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The petition was opposed by the wife. In terms of judgment and decree dated 16-2-2004, the District Judge allowed the petition and dissolved the marriage on the ground of cruelty.4. The same was assailed by the wife by filing the instant appeal. The appeal was admitted on 28-4-2004 and came up for hearing on 24-2-2009 when learned Counsel for the parties prayed for an adjournment to enable the parties to work ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Deepak Gupta, J.1. The following questions have been referred for decision to the Full Bench:1. What meaning should be assigned to the phrase 'any property of a third party' occurring in Section 147 and 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988?2. Whether the goods of a consignor/consignee being carried in a goods vehicle can be termed to be property of a third party?2. The claimants in both these appeals filed Claim Petitions before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Shimla under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') in which compensation was claimed for loss of goods being carried in a truck. In both the cases, the owner of the goods was travelling alongwith the goods in the truck.3. In FAO No. 97 of 1999, the learned Tribunal awarded compensation for the personal injuries suffered by the owner but rejected the claim with regard to the goods being carried in the vehicle.4. In FAO No. 209 of 1999 the claim was only with regard to the goods being...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellant/ Insurance Company under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' against the award passed by the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (I), Kangra at Dharamshala, dated 21.2.2005, passed in Claim Petition No. 18-K/II of 2003, titled Raksha Devi v. Jai Chand and Ors. This judgment shall also dispose of the appeal filed by the owner and the driver of the vehicle challenging the findings of the learned Tribunal, whereby the Insurance Company was held entitled to recover the award amount from the owner of the vehicle.2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the respondent No. 1 Raksha Devi, hereinafter also referred to as the claimant, filed a claim petition under Section 166 of 'the Act' for the grant of compensation. It was alleged by the claimant that she was going alongwith others to Deotsidh on a pilgrimage to Baba Balak Nath Temple. They were going in a Tempo bearing No. HP 40 3713 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This appeal by the National Insurance Company Limited under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) is directed against the award of the learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Kullu in Claim Petition No. 36 of 2002 decided on 1.10.2004. A collision of bus No. HP-47-0372 belonging to Himachal Road Transport Corporation (HRTC) took place with bus No. HP-345401 owned by Sh. Mohinder Pal and driven by Dhani Ram. It was insured with appellant National Insurance Company. The HRTC filed a claim petition claiming compensation of Rs. 1,07,280/- on account of the damage suffered to the bus and the loss incurred by the HRTC due to the fact that the bus could not be run for about one month when it was stationed at the Divisional Workshop at Mandi. The learned Tribunal on the basis of the evidence held that the HRTC had spent Rs. 9,101/- on the spare parts and Rs. 14,296/- on labour charges and Rs. 2300/- for retrieving the bus. Thus, the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This judgment shall dispose of a civil writ petition filed by the petitioner/Board for issuance of appropriate directions to the respondents in the nature of certiorari for quashing of the proceedings initiated by the respondents as against the writ petitioner.2. Briefly stated, the fact facts of the case as alleged by the writ petitioner are that the petitioner/Board was constituted after the Punjab Reorganization Act, 1966, was passed and the petitioner/Board is having its Hydel Project situated in Village Shanan at Jogindernagar. It was alleged that respondent No. 1 initially issued one notice through its Assistant Environment Engineer, Bilaspur, on 29.7.1998, wherein it was alleged that the petitioner's unit was running without the control of the State Pollution Control Board under the provisions of the Water and Air Acts. It was also alleged in the notice that the petitioner's unit was discharging sewage and the petitioner was directed to obtain sanction from the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
V.K. Ahuja, J.1. This is an appeal filed by the appellants/claimants under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act against the award of the Court of learned Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Hamirpur, dated 21.6.2005, for enhancement of the amount. This judgment shall also dispose of another appeal No. 442 of 2005 filed by the appellant/Insurance Company praying that the amount of compensation granted is not in accordance with the evidence and settled principles of law and the Insurance Company be held not liable to pay the amount in question.2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act was filed by the appellant hereinafter referred to as the claimants Rakesh Kumar and Prashant, for grant of compensation. It was alleged by the claimants that Smt. Sunita Devi (now deceased) wife of appellant/claimant Rakesh Kumar and mother of claimant Prashant, was going in a Jeep No. HP-552244 from Piplu and at near High School Kot, respondent N...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Deepak Gupta, J.1. Both the matters are being disposed of by a common order since identical questions of law and fact are involved in the same.2. Civil Suit No. 15 of 2009 has been filed by 31 plaintiffs. According to the plaintiffs they are owners of flats/plots/houses in New Shimla. Notices have been issued to them by the defendant Himachal Pradesh Housing & Urban Development Authority (HIMHUDA). In these notices issued separately to each of the plaintiffs separate amount was demanded from each of the plaintiffs on the ground that the cost of land acquired by the defendant for setting up of the colony known as 'New Shimla' has been enhanced by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh in proceedings under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The plaintiffs allege on various grounds that the defendant is not entitled to recover this amount from the plaintiffs. In para 11 of the plaint it is submitted that the plaintiffs are filing one single suit and they are not giving individual details with re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Kuldip Singh, J.1. The petitioner has assailed Annexure PA dated 23.1.1989 imposition of penalty of stoppage of 5 increments with cumulative effect, Annexure PB communication dated 3.4.1991 informing the petitioner that his appeal against the order dated 23.1.1989 has been dismissed, Annexure PC order dated 22.3.1995 dismissing the representation of the petitioner which was filed before the Principal Chief Conservator of Forests in pursuance to order dated 22.11.1994 passed by the erstwhile Tribunal in O.A. (M) No. 443/1994.2. The pleaded case of the petitioner is that he was Forest Guard in Forest Range , Urla, Tehsil Joginder Nagar, District Mandi and was posted at Check Post (Forest) Ghatasani in February, 1986, he was charge-sheeted by Divisional Forest Officer, Mandi vide Annexure PD memo dated 30.8. 1986 with the allegations of misconduct, mis-behaviour, negligence and connivance in smuggling of timber in Truck No. HID 6127, dereliction of duty and doubtful integrity. The alleged...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Deepak Gupta, J.1. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner Reliance Infrastructure Limited (here-in-after referred to as RIL) has prayed for the issuance of an appropriate writ for quashing the decision taken by the State of Himachal Pradesh on 25.11.2008 in respect of the two hydro-electric projects, namely, Jangi Thopan and Thopan Powari of 480 MW each alongwith the letter of award in favour of respondent No. 4 (M/s Brakel Corporation NV (here-in-after referred to as Brakel). The petitioner has also prayed that respondent No. 4 and respondent No. 5 M/s Brakel Kinnaur Power Limited (here-in-after referred to as M/s Brakel Kinnaur) be restrained from entering into any other agreement on the basis of the decision dated 25.11.2008. The petitioner also prayed that the aforesaid hydro-electric projects be awarded to them.The Factual Matrix:2. The State of Himachal Pradesh issued an advertisement in October, 2005, which was a global invitation inviting bids for implementation of Hydr...
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!