Skip to content

Uttaranchal Court March 2006 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.

Mar 20 2006

Nathoo Ram (Since Deceased) by L.Rs. Vs. Smt. Rameshwari Devi and ors.

Court: Uttaranchal

Decided on: Mar-20-2006

Reported in: AIR2006Utr44; 2006(2)AWC1727(UHC)

Prafulla C. Pant, J. 1. This second appeal, preferred under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 3.9.1981, passed in Civil Appeal No. 4 of 1979 whereby, judgment and decree passed by the trial court on 19.12.1978 in Original Suit No. 26 of 1975, is confirmed. 2. Brief facts of the case are that plaintiff/appellant filed a suit for partition of house detailed at the foot of the plaint, on the ground that the plaintiff has 1 /3 share in the property left behind by his deceased father Tika Rarn. The parties are related with each other by the following pedigree: Tika Ram (died in 1951) | ----------------------------------------------------- | | | Nathoo Ram (son) Paras Ram (son) Harish Chand (son) (plaintiff) (died in 1968) (defendant No. 5) | | Smt. Rameshwari Devi Widow Def. No. 1 | -------------------------------------------------------- | | | Arun Kumar (son) Km. Suman Km. Nisha Defdt. No. 2 Defdt. No. 3 Defdt. No. 4Propert...


Mar 10 2006

Ratan Singh Mehar Vs. Upkhand Adhikari, Vidyut Vitran Upkhand Pratham ...

Court: Uttaranchal

Decided on: Mar-10-2006

Reported in: II(2006)ACC493; 2007ACJ69

Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal preferred under Section 30 of the Workmen's Compensation Act, 1923 is directed against the judgment and award dated 20.9.1999, passed by the Workmen's Compensation Commissioner, Pithoragarh in Workmen Compensation Case No. 22 of 1997 (36 of 1997), whereby the claim of appellant has been dismissed by the said authority.2. Brief facts of the case are that on 13.6.1995, the appellant who was working as a lineman with the U.P. State Electricity Board, was repairing the electricity line in Malla Garkha, District Pithoragarh. While he was discharging his duties, he got injured due to the electric current shock and had to remain admitted in the hospital. Due to the injuries received in the accident, his left hand was amputated below elbow. As such, he became permanently disabled. The claimant-appellant was 53 years old at the time of the accident. His salary was Rs. 4,255.80 per month. No compensation was paid to him on account of injuries suffered by him, a...


Mar 06 2006

Chandra Mohan Khurana Vs. Neeta Khurana

Court: Uttaranchal

Decided on: Mar-06-2006

Reported in: AIR2006Utr47; I(2006)DMC780

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 31.7.2002 passed by learned Additional District Judge/1 st F.T.C., Hardwar in Civil Appeal No. 74 of 1998, whereby he has confirmed the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court in Original Suit No. 78 of 1991, between the parties. (The suit appears to have been decided prior to creation of Family Court at Hardwar). 2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant-Shri Chandra Mohan Khurana, instituted a suit under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, for a decree of divorce against the respondent. The appellant got married to the respondent on 20.10.1988, at Hardwar, according to Hindu rites. It is pleaded in the petition that after the marriage, parties lived together till March 1989. According to the husband, he discharged his duties as a husband towards wife but wife used to quarrel with him and at times used to stay away in th...


Mar 06 2006

Madan Mohan Kukreti Vs. Geeta Bhawan and anr.

Court: Uttaranchal

Decided on: Mar-06-2006

Reported in: AIR2007Utr32

ORDERPrafulla C. Pant, J.1. This Second appeal, preferred under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 27-1-2004. passed by the District Judge, Pauri Garhwal in Civil Appeal No. 12 of 2002, whereby Judgment and decree passed in Original Suit No. 45 of 1998 is confirmed.2. Brief facts of the case arc that plaintiff/respondent instituted as suit for ejectment and mesne profits against the defendant/appellant from room No. 248/249, Block. II, of the Geeta Bhawan, Swargashram (Rishikesh). Plaintiff/respondent's case in the plaint was that, it is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, which is a public charitable institution. On 19-1-1990, defendant/appellant was appointed as Technical Officer and to facilitate him to discharge his functions in the said capacity, he was allowed to stay in aforementioned rooms as a licensee. It is further pleaded in the plaint that the defendant/appellant was provided a ga...


  • Next ›

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial