Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Mar-25-2004
Reported in : 2005ACJ427
R.L. Khurana, J. 1. The above noted two appeals and cross-objections arising out of award dated 14.3.2003 of learned Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal (II), Solan (for short, 'the Tribunal'), are being disposed of together by this single judgment.2. A mule of respondent Amrit Kumar, hereinafter referred to as the claimant, was killed and his cart was damaged in a motor accident which took place on 27.4.2000 at about 11 a.m. near Satsang Bhawan on Nalagarh-Kalka Road.3. Appellant Kala in F.A.O. No. 215 of 2003 and respondent No. 2 in F.A.O. No. 593 of 2003 is the owner of the truck bearing No. HP 09-0567 which was involved in the accident while respondent No. 3 in both the appeals, that is, Rifiq Mohammad was the driver of the said truck. Appellant in F.A.O. No. 593 of 2003 insurance company is the insurer of the truck.4. The claimant approached the learned Tribunal by way of a petition under Section 166, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, 'the Act') seeking compensation to the tune of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Jul-15-2004
Reported in : III(2004)ACC714,2005ACJ309
V.K. Gupta, C.J.1. One of the grounds urged in this appeal for enhancement of the quantum of compensation as has been awarded by the Tribunal vide its judgment dated 15.10.2001 passed in M.A.C.C. No. 219-S/2 of 1998 is that the Claims Tribunal wrongly rejected the application of the appellant-claimant for permission to adduce additional evidence. I have seen the Tribunal's order dated 27.8.2001 and find that the claimant's prayer for permission to examine Dr. R.S. Yadav has been disallowed without properly appreciating the merits of the prayer. It appears that in a slipshod manner, the Tribunal disallowed the appellant's aforesaid prayer, despite the fact that the examination of Dr. R.S. Yadav as one of the claimant's witnesses was very highly relevant and material for proper adjudication of the issues involved in this case, especially for determining the quantum of compensation on the ground of, and related to the disability suffered by the claimant-appellant. Not only that the Tribun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-09-2004
Reported in : II(2004)DMC683
R.L. Khurana, J. 1. The appellant, Dr. Rajiv Jassi, hereinafter referred to as the accused, stands convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Solan, in Sessions Trial No. 25-K/7 of 2000 vide judgment dated 3.12.2001 for the offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to fine of Rs. 5,000/-. In default of payment of fine, the accused has been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months. 2. Prosecution story, in brief, may be thus stated. The deceased Dr. Suman Lata, daughter of PW 9 Ram Kishan, was married to the accused on 25.4.1998. The deceased at the relevant time was posted as a Dental Surgeon at Civil Hospital, Chail in District Solan, while the accused was posted as a Medical Officer in the Primary Health Centre, Gharuan in District Ropar (Punjab). 3. The relationship between the deceased and the accused became estranged immediately after marriage due to the demands for dowry being made b...
Tag this Judgment!