Uttaranchal Court March 2006 Judgments

Chandra Devi and ors. Vs. Diwan Singh and ors.

Court: Uttaranchal

Reported in: I(2007)ACC262; 2007ACJ1412

Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal preferred under Section 110-D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, is directed against the judgment and award dated 29.7.1983, passed by M.A.C.T./District Judge, Pithoragarh in M.A.C. Case No. 14 of 1981, whereby a sum of Rs. 23,466 has been awarded with interest at the rate of 6 per cent per annum thereon as compensation to the claimants-appellants.2. Brief facts of the case are that a claim petition under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 was moved by claimants Chandra Devi, Saraswati Devi and Lal Singh, before the M.A.C.T./District Judge, Pithoragarh. As per the claim petition on 5.11.1980, Kedar Singh Negi (deceased) boarded the bus registration No. UPD 188 at Tanakpur on his way to Pithoragarh. At about 11.30 a.m. a truck registration No. UTF 4293, owned by respondent No. 4 was coming from opposite direction towards Tanakpur. It appears that when the aforesaid bus and the truck were crossing each other an accident took place. It is allege...

Commissioner of Income Tax and anr. Vs. Hyundai Heavy Industries Co. L ...

Court: Uttaranchal

Reported in: [2007]291ITR450(Uttaranchal)

P.C. Verma, J.1. All these appeals involving connected issues were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.2. Appeal No. 448 of 2001 (Old No. 326 of 2000) has been filed by the appellants against the judgment and order dated February 17, 2000, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (in short 'the ITAT') in I.T.A. No. 8751(Del) of 92 (assessment year 1989-90), whereby the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has allowed the appeal filed by the assessee in part.3. Appeals Nos. 473 of 2001, 474 of 2001 and 475 of 2001 have been filed by the appellants against the common order dated May 3, 2000, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (in short 'the ITAT') in I.T.A. Nos. 2494 of Del of 93 (assessment years 1986-87, 1987-88 and 1988-89), 5612 of Del of 91 and 5467 of Del of 91 respectively (both assessment years 1987-88 and 1988-89), whereby the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has dismissed the cross objections of the Revenue on the agreem...

Jagat Singh Rawat Vs. Motor Accident Claims Tribunal and ors.

Court: Uttaranchal

Reported in: II(2006)ACC473

Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal, preferred under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, is directed against the judgment and award dated 16.8.1997. passed by M.A.C.T./District Judge, Pauri Garhwal in M.A.C. Case No. 3 of 1996, whereby the claim of the claimant was allowed for an amount of compensation to the tune of Rs. 1,25,000 and the appellant, owner of the vehicle, has been directed to pay the same.2. Brief facts of the case, are that on 1.12.1995 at about 1.30 p.m., Smt. Anita Devi was travelling in Jeep registration No. U.P. 07-D/491 from Village Paubo to Notha. Said vehicle was being driven rashly and negligently by respondent No. 1, Jagat Singh, who was owner as well as driver of the said vehicle, resultantly, the vehicle fell in a gorge and Anita Devi died in the accident. She was aged 27 years a at the time of her death. Claimant No. 1, husband of the deceased and claimant Nos. 2, 3 and 4, minor children of the deceased filed claim petition alleging that the deceased...

Mangal Singh Vs. State of Uttaranchal

Court: Uttaranchal

Reported in: 2007CriLJ824

J.C.S. Rawat, J.1. This is an appeal directed against the judgment and order dated 28th January, 1981 passed by the Sessions Judge, Chamoli in Session Trial No. 4 of 1980; State v. Mangal Singh convicting the appellant under Section 328/511, I.P.C. and 315/511, I.P.C. and sentencing him two years R.I. under both the counts separately. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment and order, the present appeal has been preferred.2. Brief facts for the disposal of this appeal are that Smt. Kalpi Devi who was the wife of Bhup Singh had given birth to three chidren and thereafter the husband of Kalpi Devi, i.e., Bhup Singh got himself operated. Thereafter, Smt. Kalpi Delvi developed illicit relationship with the appellant-Mangal Singh with the result she got pregnant by him. The accused-appellant attempted to administer poison to her but she did not take the entire quantity and only consumed a part thereof. Subsequently, in the afternoon of 6-9-1978, she met with the appellant in Silani Dhar Pata...

Akhtar Alias Pappu Vs. State of Uttaranchal and ors.

Court: Uttaranchal

Reported in: AIR2006Utr59

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.1. Mr. Amrish Agarwal and Mr. Sanjeev Kumar, Advocates for the petitioner.Mr. N. C. Gupta, Standing Counsel for respondent No. 1,Mr. B. D. Upadhyaya, Advocate for respondents Nos. 2 and 3.They are heard.2. Petitioner Akhtar @ Pappu has filed this writ petition for the following reliefs:I. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents Nos. 1 & 2 to pay the compensation of Rs. 15,48,000/- to the petitioner on account of death of his son caused by electric shock due to negligence of respondents.II. Issue any other writ, order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.III. Award the cost of the writ petition to the petitioner throughout.3. The learned Counsel for respondents Nos. 2 and 3 placing reliance on the dictum of the Apex Court in the case of SDO, Grid Corporation of Orissa Ltd. and Ors. v. Timudu Oram reported in MANU/SC/0445/2005 : AIR2005SC3971 has raised a preliminary...

Kapoor Gramo Udhyog Vs. Chairman, Khadi and Village Industries Commiss ...

Court: Uttaranchal

Reported in: AIR2006Utr75

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.1. Mr. Lok Pal Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.Mr. Sudhir Singh, Advocate for respondents Nos. 1 & 2, Mr. N. C. Gupta, Standing Counsel for respondents Nos. 3 & 4. They are heard.2. The petitioner has filed this writ petition for the following reliefs.i. issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the demand letter dated 24-10-2002 contained annexure No. 5 and citation dated 22-11-2002 contained annexure No. 7 to this Writ Petition.ii. issue a writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2 to refer the dispute to the Tribunal constituted by the Central Govt. to redress the dispute between the petitioner and the Respondent Nos. 1 & 2.iii. Cost of the writ petition be awarded in favour of petitioner against the respondent Nos. 1 & 2.iv. Any other relief which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstance of the case may be passed in favour of petitioner.3.The petitioner is challenging ...

Sanjay Verma Vs. Haryana Roadways

Court: Uttaranchal

Reported in: II(2007)ACC182; 2008ACJ151

Rajeev Gupta, C.J.1. They are heard.2. This is claimant's appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/Addl. District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar vide Award dated 12.6.2000 passed in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 201 of 1999.3. Claimant Sanjay Kumar Verma claimed compensation of Rs. 53,00,000 (Rupees fifty-three lakh only) for the injuries suffered by him in the motor accident on 12.8.1998 when the bus bearing registration No. HR07 PA 0197, in which he was travelling, met with an accident due to rash and negligent driving of its driver and fell in a ditch resulting in multiple injuries to several bus passengers including the claimant. The claimant further pleaded that he used to earn Rs. 5,000 per month from his shop and, on account of the injuries suffered by him in the accident, the lower part of his body has become paralysed rendering him unfit to pursue his occupation.4. Respondent Haryana Roadways, while admitting the fact of the accident, ...

Nirmala Bhandari Vs. Mangal Singh Bhandari

Court: Uttaranchal

Reported in: 2(2006)DMC182

Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal, is preferred by defendant (wife) against the judgment and decree dated 29.6.2005, passed by the learned District Judge, Bageshwar in Original Suit No. 6 of 2005, whereby the decree of divorce has been granted dissolving the marriage between the parties. (There is no Family Court established at Bageshwar.)2. Brief facts of the case are that appellant (wife) got married with respondent (husband) five years before the presentation of the divorce petition, according to Hindu rites and rituals. For some time after the marriage they lived together and two daughters Km. Rajani and Km. Hema were born out of the wedlock. Out of the two siblings, Km. Rajani (elder one) is handicapped. It is alleged in the divorce petition by the respondent (husband) that leaving the handicapped child with him, the appellant (wife) left to her parents' house about a year before presentation of the petition. It is stated in the petition that the parties are not in collusion. In ...

Rakesh Mohan Purohit Vs. Laxman Singh Rawat

Court: Uttaranchal

Reported in: IV(2006)BC16

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 20.02.2003, passed in Civil Appeal No. 1 of 2001, whereby judgment and decree dated 20.07.2000 passed by Trial Court, in Civil Suit No. 111 of 1998 was confirmed.2. Brief facts of the case are that a suit was filed by plaintiff/respondent for recovery of Rs. 78,500 from the defendant/appellant. As per the plaint case, the plaintiff is a retired Range Officer and defendant's father was his colleague. On 10.09.1995, defendant took a loan of Rs. 50,000 from the plaintiff through Cheque No. 27307 dated 10.9.1995 and executed a pronote and a receipt. According to the plaintiff, the defendant purchased a vehicle by a loan taken from a bank and for repayment of said loan to the bank, the aforesaid amount was taken from the plaintiff. However, when on 29.01.1998, the plaintiff demanded repayment by sending a notice, the defendant failed to repay th...

Mahendra Singh Vs. State Overruled

Court: Uttaranchal

R.S. Chauhan, J.1. This appeal arises cut of the order dated 26.8.2006, passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge (Fast Track), No. 4, Bharatpur, whereby the learned Judge has rejected the application of the appellant for appointment of Receiver/Administrator for managing the affairs of Guru Nanak Senior Secondary School and Guru Harkishan Public School.2. The brief facts of the case are that respondent No. 5, the Guru Singh Sabha Shiksha Samiti (henceforth to be referred to as 'the Society', for short), is a registered society under the Rajasthan Societies Registration Act, 1958, having Registration No. 81/78-79 and has its Head Office at Bharatpur. According to the Constitution of the Society, the object of the Society is to impart education to children, to teach them discipline, to encourage feeling of nationalism amongst them, to teach them about the Punjabi language, etc. For this purpose, the Society runs two schools in Bharatpur, namely the Guru Nanak Senior Secondary...