Uttaranchal Court June 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.
Ratan Singh Vs. State of Uttaranchal
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-30-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ746
ORDERJ.C.S. Rawat, J.1. This revision has been directed against the judgment and order dated 4-9-1988 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Ahnora. The trial Court had convicted the revisionist Under Sections 7/16 of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 and sentenced the revisionist to undergo rigorous imprisonment of six months with a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in case of failure to deposit the amount of fine, to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one month.2. Brief facts for the disposal of this revision are that the Food Inspector B.N. Dongal had taken the sample of mustard oil from the shop of the revisionist on 10-5-1988 at about 12.00 noon in the Village Kunwanli, District Almora. The said oil was purchased by the Food Inspector after making the necessary formalities as provided under the Act and the rule of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act. Thereafter, he sent the sample to the Public Analyst for analysis. The public analyst vide its report dated 17-6-1985 found that t...
Janardan Vs. Lila Rani Bakshi and 5 ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-26-2006
Reported in: I(2007)ACC253
B.S. Verma, J.1. The present appeal by the owner of the vehicle, under Section 110D of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (for short the Old Act) is directed against the judgment and award dated 30.6.1982 passed by the then Motor Accident Claims Tribunal/I Additional District Judge, Nainital (for short the Tribunal) passed in Claim Petition No. 139 of 1979, Smt. Lila Rani Bakshi and Ors. v. Janardan and Ors., whereby a compensation of 96,000 was awarded to the claimant along with interest @ 6% per annum. Out of this amount, sum of Rs. 50,000 was payable by the Insurance Company and the remaining 46,000 was ordered to be paid by the owner and driver of the vehicle jointly and severally.2. Relevant facts necessary for a just decision of the appeal are that claimant-respondents, who are legal heirs of the deceased filed a claim petition before the learned Tribunal for compensation of Rs. 13,50,000 for the death of Ravinder Nath Bakshi in a vehicular accident which occurred on 3.7.1979 between K...
Dehradun Tea Company Ltd. Vs. State of Uttaranchal and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-26-2006
Reported in: [2006]148STC56(Uttra)
J.C.S. Rawat, J.1. This is a revision petition filed under Section 11(1) of the Trade Tax Act against the judgment and order dated April 19, 2005 passed by the Trade Tax Tribunal, Dehradun. The learned Tribunal reversed the findings of the first appellate authority and restored the judgment of the assessing authority.2. Brief facts for the disposal of this appeal are that the revisionist deals in sale of tea leaves grown in his own garden and he also purchased some tea leaves from East Hope Town Company, Dehradun for the assessment year 2000-2001 and he also submitted that he had no purchase tax liability on the turnover. He indicated in the said turnover the purchase of the tea from East Hope Town Company and he also submitted that the purchase tax is not liable to be taxed on the said purchase. The assessing authority did not accept the said turnover and levied the purchase tax on the resale of the tea leaves after getting it processed from East Hope Town Company. Feeling aggrieved b...
Arif Khan @ Agha Khan Vs. State of Uttaranchal
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-26-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ4564
J.C.S. Rawat, J.1. This is an appeal against the judgment and order dated 9-11-2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/II Fast Track Court, Udham Singh Nagar in Special Sessions Trial No. 20 of 2003.convicting and sentencing the appellant to 10 years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,00,000.00 (one lac) under Section 20/22, of the Narcotic Drugs & Psy-chotropic Substances, Act (for the short N.D.P.S. Act). It was further directed that in default of payment of line to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years.2. Brief facts for the disposal of this appeal are that the raiding party headed by Harish Mehra, S.H.O. P.S. Kichha and other police officials were on patrol duty at Pul Bhatta Chovvki. The secret informant gave an information that a person has got down near the railway crossing and he had some illegal articles and he is going towards Chowki Pul Bhatta. Thereafter the police raiding party immediately proceeded towards the place of incident. When they r...
Dharmawati Devi and ors. Vs. Gurbachan Singh and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-26-2006
Reported in: II(2007)ACC109
P.C. Verma, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the judgment and order dated 21st February, 1990, passed by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Nainital (hereinafter referred as 'the Tribunal') in Motor Accident Claim No. 41 of 1981, Smt. Dharamawati Devi and Ors. v. Gurucharan Singh and Ors., whereby the claim petition was dismissed by 'the Tribunal'.2. Brief facts of the case are, that on 25th November, 1980, at about 1.30 p.m. Karan Singh was standing on the Kachhi Patri of road near the east of Lok Bastra Ekkai Haripara and persuaded the farmers not to supply sugarcane to the factory. one tractor bearing registration No. UTF 6339 driven by Gurcharan Singh-opposite party No. 1 in a very rash and negligent manner came there and crushed the deceased. The claimant claimed Rs. 15,00,000 as compensation. At the time of accident, the deceased was practising lawyer. He was aged 46 years arid his professional income was Rs. 1,000 and by agriculture and other income...
Umesh Maheshwari and Etc. Vs. State of Uttaranchal and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-20-2006
Reported in: 2007CriLJ1690
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. These two Habeas Corpus petitions have been moved by the petitioners challenging the detention orders dated 21st of July, 2005 (Annexure No. 2 to the writ petitions), passed under Section 3 of the National Security Act, 1980, by the District Magistrate, Udham Singh Nagar.2. We heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.3. Brief facts, as narrated in the writ petition No. 13 of 2005, filed on behalf of petitioner Umesh Maheshwari, are that the petitioner Umesh Maheshwari alias Umesh Pahalwan is a named accused in crime No. 1565 of 2005 under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for brevity hereinafter the IPC), registered with Police Station Kashipur, District Udham Singh Nagar. He is in jail in connection with said crime. The role assigned in the First Information Report (for brevity hereinafter FIR) to this petitioner is of exhortation to another accused in the murder of one Manoj Chaudhary, Vice Chairman of Nagar Palika Parishad, Kas...
Erbis Engineering Co. Ltd. Vs. State of Uttaranchal and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-16-2006
Reported in: 2006(3)AWC2604(UHC)
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. By means of this writ petition, moved under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought writ in the nature of certiorari quashing letter No. 15P/Upkaran Kray/12/2005/10013 dated 20th March, 2006 (copy Annexure-8 to the writ petition) issued by respondent No. 2, cancelling the alleged acceptance of tender of the petitioner regarding purchase of Echo Cardiography machines. A mandamus has also been sought commanding respondent Nos. 1 and 2 not to purchase said machine from anyone else except from the petitioner.2. We heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.3. Brief facts of the case, as narrate in the writ petition, are that petitioner deals in supply of medical equipments manufactured by Thoshiba', which is a Japanese company. Respondent No. 2, Director General, Medical Health and Family Welfare, Uttaranchal invited tenders for supply of different machines including Echo Cardiography machines vide tender notice dated 14t...
indra Singh Vs. State of U.P. and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-08-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Utr24
ORDERRajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri L. K. Tiwari, Advocate for the petitioner and Standing Counsel for the State.2. By the present writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the order dated 10th February, 1992 (Annexure No. 2 to the writ petition).3. Briefly stated, an auction notice was issued by the respondent No. 2 on 22nd August, 1991 inviting the tender. 23/24th September, 1991 was fixed for holding the auction in order to grant mining lease for different areas for the year, 1991-92. The petitioner participated in the auction held on 23rd September, 1991 and the bid of the petitioner was highest and was accepted for October, 1991 up to 30th September, 1992 October, 1991 up to 30th September. 1992 for an amount ofRs. 4,40.000/- by the respondent Nos. 1 and 2. A letter was received on 10th February, 1992 for execution of the lease deed and the payment of the stamp duty of 63,800/-.4. The submission of the petitioner is that the deed having been execute...
Surendra Singh Vs. Shakuntala Devi and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-08-2006
Reported in: 1(2007)DMC635
J.C.S. Rawat, J.1. This writ petition has been filed with the prayer to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned judgment and orders dated 29.3.1993 and 9.1.1992 passed by the Sessions Judge, Chamoli, Gopeshwar and Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chamoli, Gopeshwar respectively (Annexure I and II).2. Brief facts of the case are that on 5.8.1987 the respondent No. 1 Smt. Shakuntala Devi filed an application before the Magistrate under Section 125, Cr.P.C. against her husband-Surendra Singh. It was alleged in the application under Section 125, Cr.P.C. that the marriage was solemnised in between the respondent No. 1 and petitioner in the year 1982. Thereafter, she was discharging her matrimonial obligations towards the petitioner and she was residing with him. Later on, when she fell ill and the petitioner asked her parents to take in their house for medical treatment. Thereafter, the petitioner took her back to her parental house. The petitioner did n...
Bhupal and anr. Vs. State
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-07-2006
Reported in: 2006CriLJ4463
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal, preferred under Section 374(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred as Cr. P.C), is directed against the judgment and order dated 20-7-1985, passed in Sessions trial No. 96 of 1984, by the then, learned Sessions Judge. Nainital, whereby Bhupal (appellant No. 1) is convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred as I.P.C.) and Vinod Kumar (appellant No. 2) is convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C., and each one of them is sentenced to imprisonment for life.2. According to the prosecution, facts of the case are that P.W. 1, Mangal Sen (informant) and both the accused appellants Bhupal and Vinod Kumar are residents of Mohalla Maheshpura of Kashipur. The deceased Kallu was also resident of the same Mohalla. He was maternal uncle of Mangal Sen (P.W. 1). Appellants Bhupal and Vinod Kumar were friends. Accused appellant No. 1, 'Bhupal used to run a gambling den inside his hous...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›