Uttaranchal Court April 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.
Ram Chandra and ors. Vs. State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-17-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2966
1. The appellants Ram Chandra, Anand, Kailash and Raju alias Taj Kumar have preferred this criminal appeal against the judgment and order dated 4-11-1988/15-11-1988, passed by I Additional Sessions Judge, Nainital, in Sessions Trial No. 116 of the 1987, State v. Ram Chandra and Ors. convincing the accused /appellants Under Section 302/34 I. P. C. and sentencing each of them to undergo life imprisonment.2. Brief facts of the case are that the accused /appellants Anand, Kailash and Raju @ Raj Kumar are the sons of accused/ appellant Ram Chandra. One Om Prakash owned four acres of land in the Khadar of Kosi river in the revenue estate of village Ramjiwanpur. Kaluwa, (deceased) was cultivating this land on the consideration of division of yield with Om Prakash. The accused /appellants took illegal possession over the said land. Kaluwa protested and the possession of the land was taken back from the accused/appellants. The accused/appellants were inimical towards the deceased Kaluwa for the...
Mangana Nand Vs. State of U.P. and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-17-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ3344
ORDERPrafulla C. Pant, J.1. Heard.This Revision, preferred under Section 397 read with Section 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, is directed against the judgment and order dated 4-10-1988, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dehradun in Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 1985, whereby conviction under Section 500 of Indian Penal Code, passed against the accused (present revisionist) by learned Munsif and Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun in Criminal Case No. 302 of 1984, is upheld.2. Prosecution story in brief is that the complainant-Pyare Mohan Labru (P. W. 1) is a manufacturer of ink. Accused/revisionist-Mangana Nand is a Postman. In July, 1982, a letter appears to have been sent by one Shri S. K. Goyal, Advocate, addressed to complainant-Pyare Mohan Labru, which was to be handed over by the accused/revisionist to him for delivery of the same. But the complainant Pyare Mohan did not receive the registered letter on which the Postman (accused), recorded the following report of the ...
Kundan Singh and anr. Vs. State of Uttaranchal
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-13-2006
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 S...
United India Insurance Co. Ltd. Vs. Anil Maikhuri and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-13-2006
Reported in: 2007ACJ1868
Rajeev Gupta, C.J.1. Mr. Pankaj Purohit, Advocate for the appellant.Mr. R.P. Nautiyal, Advocate for the respondent No. 1.None for respondent Nos. 2 to 5.2. Though the appeal is listed today for hearing on C.L.M.A. No. 4170 of 2006, with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties, the appeal is finally heard.3. This is insurer's appeal against the award dated 9.5.2005 passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court-IV, Dehradun in M.A.C.T. Case No. 50 of 2004.4. Claimant Anil Maikhuri claimed compensation of Rs. 15,30,000 for the death of his brother Sushil Kumar Maikhuri in motor accident when on 18.12.2003 his motor cycle bearing registration No. UP 07-E 3205 was dashed by the offending vehicle Ambassador car bearing registration No. UA 07-C 7637 resulting in serious injuries to Sushil Kumar Maikhuri, who was taken to Doon Hospital, where the doctors declared him dead. The claimant pleaded that the deceased Sushil Kumar Maikhuri was a ...
Moolwati and ors. Vs. Uttaranchal Road Transport Corporation
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-12-2006
Reported in: III(2006)ACC919
Rajeev Gupta, C.J.1. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Advocate on behalf of Mr. Ram Kishor Arya, Advocate for the appellants.Mr. A.N. Sharma, Advocate for the respondent.They are heard on admission.2. This is claimants' appeal for enhancement of the compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Udham Singh Nagar vide Award dated 13.1.2006 passed in MACP No. 213 of 2004.3. The mother and brothers of deceased Sunil Kumar claimed compensation of Rs. 5,51,000 (Rupees five lakh and fifty one thousand only) for his death in the motor accident on 1.9.2004 when the bus bearing registration No. UP. 15E 7863, in which he was travelling with his sister from Nazibabad to Haridwar, met with an accident due to the rash and negligent driving of its driver and resulted in serious injuries to Sunil Kumar leading to his death. The claimants further pleaded that Sunil Kumar used to earn Rs. 4,000 per month by selling clothes.4. Respondent Uttaranchal Road Transport Corporation contested the cla...
Commissioner of Income-tax Vs. Nainital Bank Ltd.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-05-2006
Reported in: [2006]284ITR48(Uttaranchal)
P.C. Verma, J.1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 has been preferred against the order dated November 25, 2004, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow, in Income-tax Appeal No. 4/Alld of 1999 for the assessment year 1995-96, by which the Tribunal has dismissed the appeal filed by the Department.2. The brief facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are that in the computation of income the appellant (respondent herein) showed the interest on G. P. notes amounting to Rs. 5,45,31,276 which had not been included in the chargeable interest. The contention of the respondent was that interest on securities and bonds were outside the interest-tax Act as this was not interest on loans and advances. The Assessing Officer did not accept this contention and relying on the Board's Instruction No. 1923 dated March 14, 1995, as well as Notification No. S.O. 2557 dated September 11, 1995 (see [1996] 217 ITR 5), stated that any amount chargeable to income-tax...
Commissioner of Income-tax and anr. Vs. District Excise Officer
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-05-2006
Reported in: [2006]284ITR22(Uttaranchal)
P.C. Verma, J.1. Appeals Nos. 35/2001, 37/2001 and 39/2001 have been filed by the appellants against the common order dated May 3, 2000, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'D' New Delhi (in short 'the ITAT'), in I.T.A. Nos. 376, 377 and 378/D of 1997, respectively (assessment years 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1994-95), whereby the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has dismissed the cross-objections of the Revenue on the agreement of the parties that the issue involved in the present cross-objections stands covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Tribunal in I.T.A. Nos. 162 to 165 (Delhi) of 1998 dated March 29, 2000.2. Appeals Nos. 55/2003, 56/2003, 57/2003 and 58/2003 have been filed by the appellants against the common order dated August 1, 2001, passed by learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench 'D', New Delhi in I.T.A. Nos. 378, 377, 376 and 379/Delhi of 1997, respectively, for the financial years 1991-92, 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1994-95, ...
National Insurance Company Ltd. Vs. Kunwari Devi and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-05-2006
Reported in: IV(2006)ACC53; 2008ACJ900
B.S. Verma, J.1. This appeal under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short the Act) is directed against the judgment and award dated 6.10.1999, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/District Judge, Chamoli (in short the Tribunal) in Motor Accident Claim Petition No. 23 of 1997 Smt. Kunwari Devi v. Jaspal Singh Negi and Ors. whereby compensation of Rs. 25,000 has been awarded in favour of the claimant for the injuries sustained by her along with interest @ 10% per annum from the date of claim petition till the date of payment as mentioned in the impugned order.2. Brief facts of the case giving rise to the present appeal are that Smt. Kunwari Devi, the claimant, sustained injuries in a motor vehicle accident on 1.4.1997 due to rash and negligent driving by the driver of Truck No. U.P. 08/3179 Tata-608 at about 9 p.m. near Chenagaad Guptakashi Basukedar motor road. In the accident, the claimant became permanent disabled and she was admitted in the hospital since 2.4....
Jayanand Nautiyal Vs. State of Uttaranchal
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Apr-03-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ2823
1. This criminal appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the judgment and order dated 8-1-2001, passed by Sessions Judge, New Tehri in Session Trial No. 4 of 1997, convicting the accused/ appellant Jayanand Under Section 302, I.P.C. and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life.2. Brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 24-10-1996 at about 9.30 p.m. when Nagendra Dutt and his wife Smt. Sushila Devi were sleeping in their house, they came out for urinating and while they were urinating, accused/appellant (hereinafter called the 'appellant') came there and stabbed Nagendra Dutt on his neck by a knife. Upon this Nagendra Dutt and his wife cried. On hearing their cries, Brijendra Dutt, the brother of Nagendra Dutt came out at the chowk of the house and saw Nagendra Dutt bleeding from his injuries and having caught hold of accused Jayanand. Nagendra Dutt told him in the presence of witness Bishambhar Dutt that accused Jayanand had stabbed him with his knife. In the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›