Court : Uttaranchal
Reported in : 2012CrLJ289(NOC)
u.c. dhyani, j 1. in the instant case, the criminal law was set into motion by one bashir khan s/o nizam ali r/o ward no.10, kichha who had lodged a complaint with the inspector in-charge kotwali, kichha, district udham singh nagar on 30.06.2000 stating that his daughter smt. bhuri was married to ahmad hasan s/o shaukat r/o ward no.17 kichha some 09 months ago. her husband ahmad hasan and her mother-in-law rahasan w/o shaukat demanded dowry and also used to commit marpeet with her. smt. bhuri used to complain about the same but the father persuaded his daughter to reconcile. on 30.06.2000 at around 4:00 p.m. her mother-in-law blamed her for having illicit relations with another man. the mother-in-law poured kerosene oil and set her on fire. on her hue and cry the neighbours tried to come to her rescue and brought her to the government hospital kichha. she was referred to bareilly (higher centre). but she breathed her last on way to bareilly. her dead body was lying at government hospital, kichha. 2. on the basis of this complaint (ext. ka-1) chik fir (ext.ka-9) was prepared and crime no. 131/2000 was registered against the accused ahmad hasan and rahasan in respect of offence punishable under section 304-b ipc. investigation of the case was taken up by ms. vimla gunjiyal, circle officer. she inspected the spot, prepared site plan (ext. ka-12), took the statements of the witnesses and submitted charge-sheet (ext.ka-10) against the accused persons. the copies of the prosecution .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
b.s. verma, j.1. learned counsel for both the parties are ready to argue the writ petition finally at the admission stage.2. by means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 22-9-2008 passed by the civil judge (senior division) haridwar in s.c.c. suit no. 2 of 1998 and the order dated 8-10-2009 passed by the district judge haridwar in revision no. 28 of 2008 dayalu ram v. rajendra kumar sharma (annexure no. 5 and 7 to the petition respectively. by the order dated 22-9-2008, the suit of the plaintiff-respondent for recovery of arrears of rent and for ejectment was decreed against the petitioner on the ground of material alteration and subletting as mentioned in the order. by the order dated 8-10-2009, the revision filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the decree was modified only to the extent that the defendant shall pay rent @ rs. 50/- per month from 5-9-198 till the till date of delivery of possession to the plaintiff-respondent.3. briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that the respondent-plaintiff filed s.c.c. suit no. 2 of 1998 against the petitioner dayalu ram for recovery of arrears of rent as well as on the ground of material alteration and subletting. it has been alleged by the plaintiff-respondent that he is the owner of the disputed building and the defendant was the tenant in the disputed accommodation @ rs. 50/- per month and he was liable to pay the water tax .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
1. this appeal, preferred by the appellants u/s 374(2) of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as cr.p.c.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 23.2.1998 passed by the additional sessions judge, roorkee in sessions trial no. 188 of 1995, state v. naresh & ors., whereby each of the accused appellants, viz., naresh, kalwa, smt. bimla, suresh and smt. sommi have been convicted under section 498-a, 304-b and 201 of indian penal code, 1860 (for short, ipc) and each of them has been sentenced to r.i. for 3 years along with fine of rs. 500/- each u/s 498a ipc, in default to undergo two months additional r.i., 10 years r.i. u/s 304-b ipc and 2 years r.i. along with fine of rs. 500/- each, in default to undergo two months additional r.i. u/s 201 ipc. all the sentences have been directed to run concurrently. however, co-accused rupa died during the period of trial and hence, trial against her was abated by the trial court vide order dated 22.1.1998.2. the prosecution case, in brief, is that pw1 rampal lodged an fir in ps bhagwanpur on 30.1.1995 at 4.10 pm with the averments that his daughter mamtesh (now deceased) was married with naresh on 20.5.1994 as per hindu rites. in the marriage he has spent rs. 50,000/-.after some days, in-laws of mamtesh have started to demand cash money in dowry and have also started to harass mamtesh physically and mentally and have also started to beat her. this fact was disclosed by mamtesh to him when she has come to .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
1. these petitions have been filed by the petitioners challenging the judgment and order dated 24.04.2007 passed by prescribed authority, kotdwar, district-pauri garhwal in rent case no. 11 of 2005 ratnamber dutt joshi and others vs. abdul raseed (deceased) and others and in connected cases and judgment and order dated 08.01.2010 passed by the district judge, pauri in misc. rent appeal no. 16 of 2007 and in the connected appeals. 2. since in all these writ petitions, common question of law is involved to be decided by this court therefore, all these petitions have been consolidated and are being disposed of by a common judgment. writ petition no. 144 of 2010 (m/s) shall be the leading case. 3. brief facts of the case, which emerge out from the record of writ petition no. 144 of 2010 (m/s), are that petitioner and one digambar prasad kainthola were partners in the firm known as m/s kainthola medicos, since its inception in the year 1984. the firm is the tenant in the shop situated at badrinath marg, kotdwar, district pauri garhwal since 1984. it is stated that originally predecessor of respondents, namely, pitambar dutt joshi was the landlord of the shop in dispute and after his death, his widow smt. kalpeshwari devi and respondents became joint owner-landlords of the shop in dispute. as smt. kalpeshwari devi also died, now the respondents have become joint owners of the shop in dispute. at the time of beginning of tenancy, smt. kalpeshwari devi was the owner of the shop in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
Reported in : 2006(3)AWC2704(UHC)
prafulla c. pant, j.1. this appeal, preferred under section 100 of code of civil procedure, 1908, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 17.11.1981, passed by 1st additional district judge, nainital, in civil appeal no. 145 of 1980, whereby judgment and decree passed by trial court in civil suit no. 76 of 1979, has been upheld.2. brief facts of the case are that plaintiff-appellant is a tenant in a shop situated in mohalla bhawani ganj, haldwani. the defendant-respondent no. 1 is the owner-landlord of the building. defendant-respondent no. 2 is nagar palika, haldwani. the plaintiff instituted civil suit no. 76 of 1979 seeking relief of injunction against the defendants restraining them from demolishing the shop in question. it is pleaded in the plaint that the shop is in good and durable condition. it is further pleaded that before institution of the above suit, defendant no. 1 pressurized the plaintiff to vacate the shop and instituted a small cause suit no. 17 of 1974 for his eviction. however, the said s.c.c. suit was dismissed and the revision filed by the defendant no. 1 in said round of litigation, was also dismissed on 28.5.1977. thereafter it is pleaded that the defendant no. 1 in collusion with defendant no. 2 got issued a notice dated 21.4.1979 under section 263 of u.p. municipalities act, 1916, to demolish the building in question alleging that the same is in a dangerous condition. lastly, pleading that plaintiff cannot be ousted from the shop where in .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
Reported in : 2003CriLJ2598
irshad hussain, j.1. this is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 3-4-2001 passed by the sessions judge, dehradun convicting and sentencing the appellant-mukesh under section 304b of i.p.c. to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years for causing dowry death of his wife smt. tara devi. by the said judgment other co-accused hari singh, smt. mam kaur and km. manju, the father, mother and sister respectively of the said appellant were acquitted of the charges under sections 498a, 304b and section 4 of the dowry prohibition act, 1961. appellant was also not held guilty and acquitted of the charges under section 498a, i.p.c. and section 4 of the dowry prohibition act.2. written f.i.r. of the case, ext.ka. 1 was filed by informant om bahadur, p.w. 1, the father of the victim on 14-2-1994 at about 15 : 30 hours at police station, kotwali dehradun. the prosecution case disclosed by the said f.i.r. is that informant's daughter tara devi and appellant-mukesh while working together in a drug factory fell in love and got themselves married about five months before the occurrence. on 13-2-1994 at about 9.30 p.m. informant was told by some one that his daughter tara devi had been set to fire by the appellant and other family members, the father, mother and sister of the appellant. the informant went to the residence of the accused-appellant where he was informed that his daughter had been admitted in hospital. he rushed to the hospital where he found tara devi lying unconscious .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Dehradun
c.c. pant, member this consumer complaint, under section 12 read with section 18 of the consumer protection act, 1986 has been filed by shri satnam sardul singh s/o late shri sardul singh, r/o sunargaon, athoorwala, tehsil rishikesh, district dehradun (hereinafter to be referred as complainant ) against shri arbal singh s/o shri bagad singh r/o gram jhabrawala, doiwala, tehsil rishikesh, district dehradun (hereinafter to be referred as opposite party ), alleging deficiency in service on the part of the opposite party in constructing his house. the complainant has prayed for the following reliefs in his consumer complaint:- i. the opposite party be directed to indemnify to the complainant with the entire amount spent on construction of the house i.e., rs. 15,36,209/-. ii. the opposite party be directed to indemnify with 40% increase as rise in cost of construction due to inflation and price rise i.e, say rs. 6,14,483/-. iii. the opposite party be directed to indemnify the complainant for a sum of rs. 2,00,000/- for demolition and clearing the site of debris. iv. the opposite party be directed to indemnify the complainant for an additional sum of rs. 2,00,000/- because the complainant will have to shift in rented premises for getting the house newly constructed. v. the opposite party be directed to indemnify the complainant for a sum of rs. 5,00,000/- towards mental harassment caused to complainant and his family by callous attitude shown by the opposite party. vi. the opposite .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
Reported in : AIR2007Utr83
orderrajesh tandon, j.1. heard sri v.k. bisht, sr. advocate assisted by sri sushil vashisth, counsel for the revisionist and sri chandra-mauli and sri suresh bhatt, counsel for the respondent.2. by the present civil revision filed under section 115 of the code of civil procedure, the revisionist has prayed for setting aside the order dated 1st may, 2001 passed by the civil judge, junior division, nainital.3. briefly stated, suit was filed by the applicant being suit no. 540 of 1996 by sri ravindra kumar agarwal against m/s. cheema papers mills praying for a decree of an amount of rs. 100,893.00 as well as the decree for pendente lite and future interest.4. in another suit (suit no. 540 of 1996), the plaintiff ravindra kumar agarwal has claimed in paragraph 8 of the plaint that vide invoice no. 9/6 april, 1992 paper weighing 437 kg. was supplied to various firms and the consumers have complained to the plaintiff ravindra kumar about the bad quality of papers, when he sought to receive the payment of the invoice. paragraph 8 of the plaint is quoted below:8. that vide invoice no. 9 dated 6-4-1992 paper weighing 4397 kilogram was supplied to m/s. vindhyavasini corrugator (p) ltd., basti; and vide invoice no. 16 dated 8-4-1992 paper weighing 9396 kilogram was supplied to m/s. sohni packagers (p) ltd., allahabad, and vide invoice no. 23 dated 11-4-1992 paper weighing 10741 kilogram was supplied to m/s. jamuna fabricators, allahabad. consumers concerned complained to the plaintiff .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
Reported in : II(2005)DMC653
j.c.s. rawat, j.1. this criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant ram singh against the judgment and order dated 20.3.2002 passed by shri v.k. jain, the then sessions judge, almora in session trial no. 51 of 2000 convicting and sentencing the appellant for the offence under section 304b, ipc for 7 years r.i. and under section 498a, ipc for a period of 3 years r.i. both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.2. brief facts, which rise to this appeal are that a report was lodged by shri balwant singh, the uncle of the deceased smt. radha devi, with the naib tehsildar on 31.1.2000 alleging that the marriage of his niece radha devi was solemnized with the appellant ram singh in village kankhola about 2 years back. soon after the marriage the appellant and her mother-in-law smt. bhagwati devi had been torturing her with cruelty in connection with the dowry and he was demanding an amount of rs. 50,000/- and t.v., etc. she had been telling this fact to her grand-mother smt. jasoli devi (p.w. 2) to her. on 29.1.2000 the appellant along with some residents of village kankhola came on a jeep at about 9.30 p.m. and they informed balwant singh (p.w. 4) that the appellant and the deceased were quarrelling there. the appellant also accompanied them but he remained in the jeep. they asked him to accompany with them. he accompanied with the appellant and other persons to the house of deceased radha devi. he did not find his niece there. in the next morning it was found that .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Uttaranchal
Reported in : I(2007)DMC708
j.c.s. rawat, j.1. this is a criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 13.12.2001, passed by mr. ram das, the then sessions judge, bageshwar in s.t. no. 2/2001, whereby the appellant-kundan singh was convicted and sentenced to undergo r.i. for a period of ten years under section 304b, i.p.c. both the appellants were convicted and sentenced to undergo r.i. for a period of two years under section 498a, i.p.c. however, the appellant-mohan singh was acquitted from the charge under section 304b, i.p.c. all the sentences would run concurrently.2. brief facts of the prosecution case are that a report was lodged on 24.8.2000 at the patti patwari by one anand singh rana alleging therein that the marriage of his daughter-smt pushpa devi was solemnised three years ago with the appellant kundan singh according to hindu rites and customs. immediately after the marriage, her husband used to assault her on account of demand of dowry and the 'jeth' and 'jethani' of his daughter i.e. mohan singh and smt. kamla devi respectively also used to harass smt. pushpa devi by giving her physical and mental torture. whenever smt. pushpa devi came to her parental house, she used to narrate her parents the entire story about the dowry demand. it was further alleged in the fir that smt. kamla devi used to say the deceased that they would not keep her in the matrimonial house because smt. pushpa devi (deceased) was not having a child. the investigation was taken up as usual which culminated into .....
Tag this Judgment!