Uttaranchal Court August 2004 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Kamal Jindal and ors. Vs. Vinod Kumar and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-16-2004
Reported in: 2006ACJ42
P.C. Verma and B.S. Verma, JJ.1. This appeal has been preferred under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, (in short 'the Act') against the judgment and award dated 29.11.2001 passed in M.A.C. Case No. 61 of 2000, Kamal Jindal v. Vinod Kumar, by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, I.F.T.C. Dehradun (in short 'the Tribunal'), whereby learned Tribunal has allowed the claim petition and has awarded Rs. 5,20,000 as compensation in favour of the claimants-appellants along with interest at the rate of 9 per cent per annum, as mentioned in the impugned order, under Section 166 of the Act. Aggrieved, the claimants-appellants have come up in appeal challenging the quantum of compensation, on the ground that learned Claims Tribunal has failed to appreciate the evidence regarding income of the deceased and the findings of the learned Claims Tribunal are erroneous.2. Brief facts, giving rise to the present appeal, are that on 10.3.2000 at 3 p.m., Vinod Kumar Jindal was g...
Shambhoo Lal and ors. Vs. Tasleem Beg and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-12-2004
Reported in: 2006ACJ666
P.C. Verma and B.S. Verma, JJ.1. This is an appeal filed under section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 against the judgment and order dated 11.5.1990 passed by First Additional District Judge/Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Nainital in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 54 of 1989 under section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and Motor Accident Claim Case No. 55 of 1989 under section 92-A of the aforesaid Act for interim compensation, whereby both the claim petitions have been dismissed by the Tribunal.2. Brief facts of the case are that the accident took place on 19.1.1989 when the deceased Dinesh s/o Shambhoo Lal was coming on cycle with Rajendra s/o Ram Kumar for harvesting fodder for the animals. When they reached at Budha Bridge at about 4.30 p.m., they were hit by truck No. URW 144 on account of rash and negligent driving of driver Abdul Rahf which was coming from Tanakpur. At the time of accident the deceased was on cycle on the left side of the road. After being hit by ...
Ganga Dass Vs. State of Uttaranchal
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-11-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ2365
J.C.S. Rawat, J. 1. This is a Criminal Jail Appeal against the judgment and order dated 30-5-2001 passed by Sri Ashok Kumar, the then Sessions Judge, Chamoli in Sessions trial No. 18 of 1993, State v. Ganga Dass, whereby the learned Sessions Judge has convicted and sentenced the appellant Under Section 328, I.P.C. to undergo R.I. for 5 years, and a fine of Rs. 2000/- (Rupees two thousands). In default of payment of fine the appellant was ordered to undergo S.I. for one year.2. The facts, in brief, are that Govind Singh (FW-1) lodged a written report on 16-6-93 at 12.10 p.m. at P. S. Ukhimath, District Chamoli that in the evening of 14/15-6-93 eight persons stayed in room No. 1 of his Hotel (Rana Hotel). They prepared their food themselves. Ganga Dass and Smt. Vedmati and others stayed and Ganga Dass (appellant) booked the room in his name. Smt. Vedmati and Ganga Dass prepared the food of all persons. At about 12 (night), Badri Prasad Tiwari (PW-4) started shouting that they were under ...
Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Gomti Devi and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-10-2004
Reported in: II(2005)ACC14
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Both these appeals arising out of the same judgment and award passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Dehradun in Case Nos. 251 of 1981 and 252 of 1981.2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to the present appeals are that respondents have filed claims petition for the grant of compensation under M.V. Act, with the allegations that on 5th April, 1981 at 9.30 a.m. Diwan Singh along with his two cousins namely Ghanshyam Singh and Govind Singh was going on a bicycle on General Mahadev Singh Road towards Mohabe Wala in Dehradun. When they reached near a grove known Chaman Lal Wala Bag a military Truck No. VD-24885 which was driven rashly and negligently hit the bicycle riders. Due to the injuries sustained in the accident Ghanshyam Singh and Govind Singh had expired and Diwan Singh sustained grievous injuries. The legal heir of Ghanshyam Singh filed claim petition for grant of compensation for Rs. 1,50,000/- and legal heirs of Govind Singh filed claim petition fo...
Bhotiya Janjati Sangharsh Samiti, Now Bhotiya Jan Kalyan Samiti Vs. Dr ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-09-2004
Reported in: 2005(2)AWC1517(UHC)
P.C. Pant, J.1. This contempt petition has been moved under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act. 1971 for punishing the opposite parties for alleged wilful disobedience of Court's order dated 8th May, 2003, passed by Division Bench of this Court in Writ Petition No. 1654 (M/B) of 2001.2. Brief facts giving rise to the petition are that the petitioner is a body looking after the interest of the tribals of Dharchula and Munsiary of District Pithoragarh and filed a Writ Petition No. 50718 of 1999 before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad (now transferred to this Court under U.P. Re-organisation Act, 2000) claiming the relief therein that the Notification dated 24.6.1967, by which six communities including Bhotiyas were declared Scheduled Tribes under order of the President of India (copy of Notification as Annexure-1 to the contempt petition) be made applicable to all the residents of 'Bhot' area of the tehsil Dharchula and Munsiary. In other words, the petitioner sought that ...
Rahul Sharma Vs. Dhanesh Gupta
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-07-2004
Reported in: 2005(1)ARC511
Rajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri Sharad Sharma, learned Counsel for the revisionist and Standing Counsel for the respondent.2. By the present revision, the revisionist has prayed for setting aside the order dated 22.11.2002 passed by Mr. Ramesh Chandra Maulakhi, Judges Small Cause Courts/A.D.J./Second Fast Track Court District Dehradun.3. Briefly stated, a suit was filed before the Judge Small Cause Courts by the plaintiff/respondent praying for eviction of the applicant in respect of the premises No. 78 Akash Deep Colony, Dehradun.4. According to the case of the plaintiff, an agreement was executed on 7.11.1997, between the plaintiff and the defendant by virtue of the said agreement the premises was let out to the defendant for a period of 11 months w.e.f. 7.11.1997 on a monthly rent of Rs. 3,400/-. Paragraph No. 2 and 3 of the plaint are quoted below:-'That vide agreement dated 7.11.1997 between the plaintiff and the defendant, the said premises was let out to the defendant for a period...
U.P. State Road Transport Corporation and anr. Vs. Presiding Officer, ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-06-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)AWC2574(UHC)
P.C. Pant, J.1. These petitions have been filed on behalf of the U. P, State Road Transport Corporation (for the sake of brevity ('Corporation') under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the three awards passed by the Labour Court, Dehradun whereby directions were issued that the workmen concerned be given designation of Clerk and to pay the pay scale thereto.2. Brief facts in all the three petitions are more or less similar. In each petition the workman (respondent No. 2) got referred disputes to the Labour Court, Dehradun through appropriate Government for decision on the question if the workmen (concerned) are entitled to the designation of the Clerk and the pay scale thereto. Mr. Arun Singh Kushwaha, represented by respondent No. 2, a Union of the Roadways employees, in Writ Petition No. 184 (M/S) of 2002 was a Driver in the petitioner's Corporation, whose services were utilized to meet casual exigencies on the clerical post. However, it is alleged in the petition that...
Umapati Bhatt Vs. State of Uttaranchal and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-06-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)AWC2577(UHC)
P. C. Pant, J.1. This writ petition has been moved under Article 226 of Constitution of India for mandamus directing the respondents to give the benefit of service rendered by the petitioner with M/s. Teletronix Limited, Bhimtal for the purposes of calculation of pension, etc.2. Brief facts of the case are that petitioner had been in service with M/s. Teletronix Limited, Bhimtal, a Government undertaking upto 31.3.1996, i.e. the cut off date to relieve the employees under the retrenchment scheme formulated in implementation of Government order dated 30.12.1995. The retrenched employees including the petitioner were re-employed/readjusted in various posts lying in various departments of the State Government. The petitioner was appointed as lower division clerk with District Education and Training Institute, Bhimtal, Nainital under said scheme. The conditions of re-employment are contained in Government order dated 30.12.1995 and that of 26.2.1996. Para 6 of the Government order dated 26...
Rajesh Sharma and anr. Etc. Vs. State of Uttaranchal and Etc.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: 2005CriLJ2646
J.C.S. Rawat, J.1. Appellants - Nisar Khan alias Guddu, Gulzar Khan alias Pappu, Bhura alias Shakil, Rajesh sharma and Navin Sharma, all the five, were convicted under Sections 148, 302 read with 149 IPC and also under Section 25 Arms Act. Each of them were sentenced to undergo RI for three years under Section 148 IPC and RI for three years under Section 25 Arms Act with fine of Rs. 1000/-. Appellants -- Nisar Khan alias Guddu, Gulzar Khan alias Pappu and Bhura alias Shakil were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment under Section 302 read with 149 IPC and fine of Rs. 10,000/-. Appellants Navin Sharma and Rajesh Sharma were sentenced to death under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC. It. was further directed that all the sentences would run concurrently.2. A Government appeal has also been preferred against the judgment and order dated 9-5-2002 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nainital in S. T. No. 96/2000 whereby the accused Nisar Khan alias Guddu, Gulzar Khan alias Pappu and ...
Vikram Prasad and ors. Vs. Vice Chancellor, G.B. Pant University of Ag ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-05-2004
Reported in: 2004(3)AWC2571(UHC)
P. C. Pant, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by seven petitioners under Article 226 of Constitution of India for mandamus directing the respondents to pay the sanctioned scale of salary (Rs. 1640-2900) to the petitioners with effect from 22.7.1995.2. Brief facts of the case are that G. B. Pant Agriculture & Technology University was created under the U. P. (Agriculture & Technology) University Act, 1958. The University runs various projects relating to agricultural research under the auspices of Indian Council of Research, New Delhi. In said projects various research assistants were engaged by the University and many of them including the petitioners were absorbed in the pay scale and designation of technical assistants in the University. It is alleged in the petition that the funding of the agriculture research was done by the Central Government through I.C.A.R. with the State Government at the ratio of 80:20% respectively. The sanctioned pay scale of the technical assistants, a...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »