Uttaranchal Court August 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.
Sarnu and anr. Vs. Fagania and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-28-2006
Reported in: 2007(1)AWC112
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal, preferred under Section 96 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 9.5.1988, passed in Original Suit No. 8 of 1986, by the learned District Judge, Tehri Garhwal, whereby said suit is decreed with costs for perpetual injunction against the defendants (appellants) restraining them from creating any obstruction over land in dispute against the right of plaintiffs (respondents) to use it as a pathway. The trial court has further decreed the suit for Rs. 3,000 as damages.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.3. As per the plaint case, the plaintiffs are residents of village Moliya, Patti Upli Ramoli, District Tehri Gahrwal. From the period of their ancestors it is alleged that they were using the plot No. 1356 situated in Semalhari Tok, owned by the defendants No. 1 and 2 as pathway for reaching to the plots owned by them (plaintiffs). It is further pleaded by the plaintiffs ...
Poorna Nand Vs. Smt. Prakashwati
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-23-2006
Reported in: AIR2006Utr76
Prafulla C. Pant, J. 1. This appeal, preferred by the plaintiff (present appellant) under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 19-12-1977, passed by learned District Judge, Dehradun in Civil Appeal Nos. 162 of 1976 and cross objection No. 55 of 1977, whereby the appeal and cross objections are dismissed, affirming the judgment and decree dated 28-8-1976, passed in Suit No. 85 of 1975. The trial Court had dismissed the suit for specific performance of contract and decreed for recovery of Rs. 2,500/- paid to the defendant as part consideration by the plaintiff and further directed that plaintiff should restore the possession of land in suit to the defendant.2. I heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire record.3. Brief facts of the case are that plaintiff-- appellant filed suit for specific performance of agreement to sell land in question and in alternative for recovery of damages from the defendant-- resp...
Ram Kumar and Etc. Vs. Virender Singh and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-21-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Utr6
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. These appeals, preferred under Section 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. are directed against, the judgment and decree dated 21-1-2004, passed in Civil Appeal No. 167 of 2001 by the then learned Additional District Judge/Fast Track Court 11, Dehradun, whereby the said appeal is allowed and Original Suit No. 747 of 1995 is decreed for specific performance of contract under agreement of sale.2. I heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.3. Brief facts of the case arc that plaintiff instituted the suit No. 747 of 1995 with the pleadings that defendant Rain Kumar executed an agreement dated 5-6-1995 to sell his land to the plaintiff Virender Singh for Rs. 42,000/-, and got the same registered. Out of the sale consideration of Rs. 42,000/-, it is alleged In the plaint that Rs. 10,500/- was received by defendant Ram Kumar at the time of instituting the agreement, and Rs. 20,500/- was paid prior to the execution of the agreement. The rest of ...
Rajendra Prasad Nautiyal and Etc. Vs. Krishna Kumar Bangwal and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-21-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Utr1
ORDERRajesh Tandon, J.1. Heard Sri Paresh Tripathi counsel for the petitioners, Sri M.C. Pant counsel for the respondent No. 1, Sri Jitendra Chaudhari counsel for Bar Council of U.P. Sri Arvind Vashist counsel for Bar Council of Uttaranchal.2. By the present writ petitions, the petitioners have prayed for a writ of certiorari quashing the judgment and order dated 28.6.2005 passed by the Election Tribunal Bar Council of Uttaranchal, Dehradun in Election Petition No. 1/2004 'Krishna Kumar Bangwal v. Dharmveer Singh and Ors.3. Briefly stated the election for the first Bar Council of Uttaranchal was held in the last week of April 2004 and there were total 73 candidates who filed nomination papers. The total vote cast in the said election were 4734 and the counting of the same was done from 3.5.2004 to 11.5.2004. After counting of the votes, the petitioners were declared to be elected as a member Bar Council and thereafter notification was published in the gazette. The respondent No. 1 file...
Dr. Biswas Chandra Harris (Decd.) Through L.Rs. Vs. Shambhu Dutt Joshi ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-19-2006
Reported in: 2006(4)AWC3539
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal, preferred under Section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against Judgment and decree dated 14.12.1973, passed in Civil Appeal No. 59 of 1969 (N) by the learned District Judge, Kumaun, Nainital, whereby said appeal was dismissed with costs, confirming the judgment and decree dated 26.6.1969, passed in Suit No. 52 of 1966 by the then Munsif, Nainital, dismissing the suit for ejectment of the defendant and recovery of arrears of rent.2. I heard learned Counsel for the parties at length and perused the entire record.3. Brief facts of the case are that as per the plaint case, house No. 51 situated in Mohalla Sakahawat Ganj, Haldwani (district Nainital) alongwith the compound appurtenant thereto, earlier belonged to one Sheikh Zamir Ahmad and Shambhu Dutt Joshi (defendant) was his tenant in six rooms with toilet, kitchen and two verandahs of the said house on rent at the rate of Rs. 8.33 per month. On 11.10.1965, plaintiffs Dr. B. C. Harri...
Commissioner, Sales Tax Vs. Agrawal GraIn Agency
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-19-2006
Reported in: (2007)8VST217(NULL)
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This revision, preferred under Section 11(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, is directed against the judgment and order dated August 7, 1991, passed in Second Appeal No. 16 of 1990 for the assessment year 1984-85 by the Sales Tax Tribunal, Bench-Haldwani.2. The question of law involved in this revision is as under:Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Sales Tax Tribunal has erred in law in dismissing the appeal filed by the revisionist holding that there was no liability on the part of the dealer to pay interest under Section 8(1) of the U.P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, in respect of tax for which no exemption was allowed 3. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.4. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent is dealer in foodgrains and oil-seeds and was a purchasing commission agent of rice polish for the solvent plant. The matter relates to the assessment year 1984-85. The dealer disclosed his turnover to the tune of Rs. 15,35,003.95 and deposit...
State of Uttaranchal Vs. Kalyan Singh
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-17-2006
Reported in: II(2007)DMC431
J.C.S. Rawat, J.1. The present revision has been filed by the State against the judgment and order dated 22.11.1997 passed by Mr. Shailendra Saxena, the then Sessions Judge, Pauri Garhwal in Sessions Trial No. 57 of 1997 by which he had discharged the respondent-Kalyan Singh from the charges.2. Brief facts for the disposal of this revision are that an FIR was lodged on 14.2.1997 before the Police Station on the next day of the incident. It is alleged in the said report that the accused-Kalyan Singh used to harass the deceased in connection with the dowry. Just two days before the occurrence, i.e., on 12.2.1997, the deceased had come to the house of her father and there she had stated that her husband, the accused/Kalyan Singh was harassing and threatening her to kill. The father of the deceased on the next day sent the deceased to the house of her husband. The occurrence of the death of the deceased took place on 14.2.1997 on the next day when she was sent to the matrimonial house. The...
Smt. Rashmi Vs. Vijay Singh Negi and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-07-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Utr13; 2006(4)AWC3537; II(2007)DMC559
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This appeal, preferred under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is directed against the judgment and decree dated 1.10.1991, passed by then learned District Judge, Pauri Garhwal, whereby Original Suit No. 51 of 1990, instituted by plaintiff Vijay Singh Negi for divorce against his wife Rashmi Negi, is decreed for divorce under Section 13 of Hindu Marriage Act, 1955. (In the year 1990 there was no family court in Pauri Garhwal).2. I heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.3. Brief facts of the case are that plaintiff/respondent Vijay Singh Negi got married to defendant No. 1 Rashmi Negi in October, 1972, according to Hindu rites. Out of the wedlock, two sons and one daughter were born to them. Husband and wife, both were in service. Plaintiff Vijay Singh Negi was posted at Paukhal in Guru Ram Rai Inter College, as a teacher, and defendant Rashmi Negi was serving with Kanya Adharik Vidyalaya, Kotdwar. Out of the three children, elder ...
Rapti Contractor Vs. Executive Engineer and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-07-2006
Reported in: AIR2007Utr12; 2007(1)ARBLR390(Uttaranchal)
ORDERPrafulla C. Pant, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This petition is moved under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, for appointment of Arbitrator. Clause 25 of the agreement between the parties, provides the Arbitration Clause, which reads as under:Clause 25 Except where otherwise provided in the contract all questions and disputes relating to the meaning of the specifications, designs, drawings and instructions hereinbefore mentioned and as to the quality of workmanship, of materials used on the work or as to any other questions, claim, right matter or thing whatsoever in any way arising out of or relating to the contract designs, drawings specifications, estimates, instructions orders or these conditions or otherwise concerning the works or the execution or failure to execute the same whether arising during the progress of the work or after the completion or abandonment thereof shall be referred to the sole arbitration of the person appointed b...
Ali Raza and anr. Vs. Bishan Singh Aithani and anr.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Aug-07-2006
Reported in: 2008ACJ124
Rajeev Gupta, C.J.1. Mr. Zaffar Ullah Siddique, Advocate for the appellants is heard on admission.2. This is claimants' appeal seeking enhancement of the compensation awarded by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal/Additional District Judge, Haldwani vide award dated 10.5.2006 passed in Motor Accident Claim Case No. 172 of 2005, whereby a sum of Rs. 2,66,000 (rupees two lakh sixty-six thousand) has been awarded as compensation to the claimants.3. Claimants Ali Raza and Rabia, who are father and sister of the deceased Sabir Saifi respectively, claimed compensation of Rs. 11,52,600 for his death in the motor accident on 16.9.2005, when he was dashed by the offending vehicle, jeep bearing registration No. UP 02-C 7016 resulting in serious injuries to Sabir Saifi who later succumbed to those injuries. The claimants pleaded that deceased Sabir Saifi was aged about 25 years and was earning Rs. 5,400 per month working as a mechanic in Amit Automobiles, Haldwani.4. The owner and insurer of the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »