Uttaranchal Court June 2010 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.
Om Singh Son of Sri Hemraj Singh Vs. Delimitation Committee Through It ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-14-2010
B.S. Verma, J.(Stay Application No. 4518 of 2010)1. Heard Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 15-5-2010 passed by respondent No. 1 in the delimitation proceedings of Gram Panchayats in Narsan Block, district Haridwar and the final list published in furtherance thereof (Annexure Nos. 8 and 9 to the writ petition).3. Brief facts, giving rise to the present writ petition, according to the petitioner are that the petitioner is a permanent resident of village Sakauti, Block Narsan, District Haridwar and has an interest in proper delimitation of constituencies. The Block Development Officer of Narsan block made recommendation for delimitation of Gram Panchayat Sakauti and Kuanhedi separately, against which the respondent No. 5- Vinod Kumar son of Preetam Singh, resident of village Sakauti filed objection. The petitioner filed his reply to the ob...
Sanjay Tiwari S/O Sri Nand Ram Tiwari Vs. State of Uttarakhand
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-14-2010
Dharam Veer, J.1. This appeal, preferred by the appellant Under Section 374(2) of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter to be referred as Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.7.1997 passed by Additional Sessions Judge (E.C. Act), Dehradun in S.T. No. 59 of 1994 State v. Sanjay Tiwari whereby the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (E.C. Act) convicted the appellant/accused under Section 307 of The Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter to be referred as the IPC) and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six years.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the entire material on record.3. In brief, the prosecution case is that Harka Bahadur (PW1) lodged a Report at Police Station Clement Town, Dehradun on 7.2.1994 with the averments that on some matter, quarrel had taken place between his son Bhagatman Gurung and Ajay Tiwari in the school. At about 7:30 PM, his son Bhagatman Gurung and Vikram Singh had gone to buy certain ar...
State of Uttarakhand and ors. Vs. Smt. Meera Negi
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-14-2010
J.S. Khehar, C.J.1. Mohan Singh Negi was appointed as a Shramik (Worker), on daily wage basis, by the Forest Department on 01.01.1980. He admittedly continued to render service uninterruptedly in the aforesaid capacity till 10.07.2003. On 10.07.2003, the Conservator of Forests issued an order, for regularising the employment of daily wage workers. A list of 20 names was appended to the aforesaid order. The name of the aforesaid Mohan Singh Negi appeared at Serial No. 13 thereof. Column 11 of the list (referred to above) depicted the date, with effect from which, the concerned employees were in continuous service. For the aforesaid Mohan Singh Negi, Column No. 11 depicted the aforesaid date as 01.01.1980. Column 12 mentioned the dates, when the concerned employees became eligible for regularisation. For the aforesaid Mohan Singh Negi, the date mentioned in Column 12 was 05.01.1981.2. It is not a matter of dispute, that all persons named in the list, appended to the letter of the Conserv...
Prem Ballabh Sati S/O Shri Narottam Sati and ors. Vs. State of Uttaran ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-14-2010
Prafulla C. Pant, J.1. This is application MCRC No. 363 of 2010, moved on behalf of the petitioners/applicants for recalling of order dated 15.09.2008, passed by this Court in Criminal Miscellaneous Application (C482) No. 386 of 2004.2. Heard, and perused the affidavit and counter affidavit filed in support of the recall application.3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners/applicants submitted that the order dated 15.09.2008, was passed by this Court due to inadvertence, as no such statement, for not pressing the application was made by the counsel for the petitioners.4. Having considered submission of learned Counsel for the petitioners and after going through the papers on record, the recall is made on the condition that the counsel of the parties shall argue on the merits in the petition moved under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., today itself. Accordingly, the application MCRC No. 363 of 2010, stands allowed with above condition. Criminal Miscellaneous Application (C482) No. 386 of 2004 is r...
Sukhwant Singh S/O Sri Dilip Singh Vs. Canara Bank, Branch Rudrapur Th ...
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-14-2010
B.S. Verma, J.1. Heard Learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned sale notice of petitioner's property dated 21-05-2010 published by the respondent in Daily Newspaper Amar Ujala (Annexure--2 to the writ petition). The petitioner has also sought a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent Bank to permit the petitioner to deposit 20% of loan amount and further to fix easy instalment for repayment of loan.3. According to the petitioner, one Balwinder Singh took a loan from the respondent-bank and the petitioner stood a guarantor of the said loan taken by Balwinder Singh and the petitioner had mortgaged his residential land situated at 25/1 Wakya Mauja, village Rampura (Mallik Colony) Rudrapur, district Udham Singh Nagar. The principal borrower did not repay the loan. Ultimately, the respondent Bank took possession of the property mortgaged by the ...
Madan Singh Vs. State of Uttarakhand and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-14-2010
V.K. Bist, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. Present petition has been filed by the petitioner for quashing the order dated 29.05.2010 passed by Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Roorkee in Misc. Case No. 25/2010 Madan Singh v. State of Uttarakhand and Ors. whereby the learned Civil Judge (Sr. Div.), Roorkee, Haridwar has refused to grant exemption to the petitioner as provided under Section 80(2) Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (for short C.P.C.) and did not permit the petitioner to file suit without prior service of notice on the Government.3. Brief facts of the case, as emerge out of the writ petition, are that there is a plot Khasra No. 231 measuring 0.128 hectare situated at village Fatehullahpur/Telpura, Pargana Bhagwanpur, Tehsil Roorkee, District Haridwar out of which petitioner is the owner of a portion measuring 0.093 hectare, while non-party Ritu Jain and Surendra Jain are owners of remaining portion measuring 0.035 hectare of land.4. The case of the petitioner is that the r...
Balwant Singh Rautela Vs. State of Uttaranchal and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-14-2010
J.S. Khehar, C.J.1. The following interim directions were issued by a Division Bench of this Court in the instant Writ Petition on 22.6.2006:4. The petitioner is seeking a direction to respondents 1, 2 and 4 to remove the encroachment made by respondent No. 6 over the Government land.5. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent No. 6, para 17 reads as follows:17. That the contents of para No. 14 of writ petition are not admitted as stated. It is true that the land belonged to Forest Department. The land in possession of respondent No. 6 is a public place in as much as it is a School meant for the benefit of children of public of the locality. However, it is wrong that any portion of 9000 square feet lad of respondent No. 6 is in use for Ram Leela, marriage of religious or political meetings.6. Respondent No. 6 is a private educational institution. Admittedly, the land in the occupation of respondent No. 6 belongs to Forest Department. As the said land was never transferred...
Pawan Kumar and ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-11-2010
Nirmal Yadav, J.1. Accused/appellants Pawan Kumar, husband of Arjun Kaur (deceased), Soni and Pinky, mother and sister of Pawan Kumar respectively stood trial for the offence punishable under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC) and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act in sessions trial No. 152 of 1995. Learned trial court after taking into consideration entire evidence on record convicted the accused appellants for the above Fs and sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years under Section 304B IPC and one year rigorous imprisonment under Section 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act and a fine of Rs. 5000/- each. In default of payment of fine, they have been further ordered to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment.2. Facts, in brief, are that Arjun Kaur was married to Pawan Kumar in the year 1993. She died having suffered burn injuries on 19.06.1994 i.e. after about one year of her marriage. The criminal law was set in motion on the complaint made by PW4 Chhinder Sin...
Babu Lal Vs. State of U.P. (Now Uttarakhand) and ors.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-11-2010
Nirmal Yadav, J.1. This appeal has been preferred by appellant/complainant Babu Lal against the judgment and order dated 10.02.1993 passed by Munsif Magistrate, Rishikesh District Dehradun whereby respondents Sharvan Kumar and Shivdhar have been acquitted for the charges punishable under Section 326 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short 'I.P.C.').2. The facts in brief are that appellant/complainant Babu Lal filed a criminal complaint in the court of Munsif Magistrate, Rishikesh District Dehradun on 07.07.1989 against respondents Sharvan Kumar and Shivdhar by which it is submitted that Rambhilor father of the appellant was working in the Irrigation Department and was residing in quarter No. D-57 Bairaj Colony, Rishikesh and both the respondents were also residing in the adjoining quarters. Respondents were having grudge with the father of the complainant as he advised the respondents with regard to the visit of antisocial elements in the house of Sharvan Kuma...
NaraIn Singh Alias Nary Vs. the State of U.P.
Court: Uttaranchal
Decided on: Jun-11-2010
Nirmal Yadav, J.1. Accused- Narain Singh alongwith Smt. Subda, Smt. Chandra Devi, Smt. Puna Devi and Smt. Kausa Devi stood trial for the offence punishable under Section 396 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short I.P.C.) in Sessions Trial No. 30 of 1990 vide Judgment and order dated 25.10.1997 passed by the Sessions Judge, Tehri Garhwal. The trial court after taking into consideration the facts and evidence available on record acquitted accused Smt. Subda, Smt. Chandra Devi, Smt. Puna Devi and Smt. Kausa Devi and convicted accused Narain Singh for the offence punishable under Section 396 of the I.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years.2. The facts in brief are that complainant Sundru (PW-1) submitted written report Ex. Ka-1 stating therein that on 28th June 1987 at about 10-11 a.m. his son Ram Dayal was going to fetch water from the public water tap in two brass pots (Banta). Meanwhile accused Mor Singh alias Bangolia came there in an annoyed mood and ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
- Last »