Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: himachal pradesh Year: 1992 Page 1 of about 11 results (0.011 seconds)

Mar 04 1992 (HC)

Ranbir Singh and ors. Vs. Gita Ram and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Mar-04-1992

Reported in : AIR1993HP43

kamlesh sharma, j.1. this appeal under paragraph 32 of the himachal pradesh (courts) order, 1948, is against the decree and judgment dated 28-9-1976 passed by the district judge, solan and sirmaur districts at solan whereby the appeal of respondents-plaintiffs nos. 1 to 3, s/sh. gita ram, mansha ram and jawala dutt, was accepted, the decree and judgment dated 23-4-1975 of senior sub-judge, solan, district solan, was set aside and a decree for possession of the suit land by way of redemption of mortgage was passed in their favour and against the appellants-defendants. out of appellants-defendants, appellants-defendants nos. 1 to 7, s/sh. ranbir singh, raghubir singh, balbir singh, kumari asha devi, kumari manju, smt. amar devi, smt. munna and appellant-defendant no. 9, smt. kamla devi, are the legal representatives of original defendant sh. devi ram son of sh. mast ram alias mastia son of surat ram, original mortgagee. similarly, appellant-defendant no. 10, smt. dropti devi, is the daughter of smt. sobhni devi, original defendant, widow of sh. janki ram son of sh. surat ram, original mortgagee. appellant-defendant no. 8 bharat ram is son of mast ram son of surat ram, original mortgagee.2. the present appeal has a chequered history. on 1-9-1969, respondents-plaintiffs nos. 1 to 3, s/sh. gita ram, mansha ram and jawala dutt filed civil suit against smt. sobhni widow of janki ram, devi ram son of mast ram, predecessor-in-interest of appellants-defendants nos. 1 to 7, 9 and 10 and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 13 1992 (HC)

Sant Ram and anr. Vs. Mohinder Singh and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Nov-13-1992

kamlesh sharma, j. 1. this appeal is directed against the decree and judgment dated 4th june, 1984 passed by the district judge, solan and sirmaur districts at nahan whereby the appeal of the appellants-defendants was dismissed and the decree and judgment dated 31st may, 1978 of sub judge 1st class, nalagarh, district solan, was affirmed.2. the sub judge 1st class, nalagarh, had passed a decree in favour of respondent-plaintiff mohinder singh alias shiv kumar and against the appellants-defendants sant ram and janki ram, respondents-defendants no. 2 to 5, inder prabhu, sohnu and ram kishan and one munshi ram, who were defendants no. 1 to 7 in the suit. it was declared that the respondent-plaintiff is the son of respondent-defendant prabhu and the land in dispute was coparcenery and joint hindu family property of respondent-plaintiff and respondents-defendants no. 3 to 5 and munshi. the sales made by respondents-defendants no. 3 to 5 and munshi in favour of appellant-defendant sant ram were declared without consideration as well as without legal necessity or without benefit of the estate. as such, the respondent-plaintiff was held entitled to get back the possession of the suit land from the appellants-defendants and respondent-defendant inder.3. respondents-defendants no.3 to 5 and munshi were owners of the suit land. at the first instance, they sold the suit land except 6 biswas to the appellant-defendant sant ram vide registered sale deed dated 12th october, 1962. out of the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 09 1992 (HC)

State of H.P. Vs. Laxmi Nand and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Jan-09-1992

Reported in : 1992CriLJ3226

devinder gupta, j. 1. criminal appeal no. 43 of 1985, is by the state of himachal pradesh against the judgment passed on november 9, 1984 by special judge, shimla, in criminal case no. 34-s/7 of 1983 acquitting the accused-respondents of the charges under sections 379, 411, 420, 120b, 407, 468, 218, 119 and 117 of the indian penal code and section 5(2) of the prevention of corruption act.2. criminal appeal no. 14 of 1985 is by accused-respondents gulabu ram and sadh ram, seeking to set aside the order passed by special judge, shimla, on november 9, 1984 while acquitting them and ordering the confiscation of the seized timber in favour of the state with a prayer to direct its return or sale proceeds thereof to them.3. the facts as revealed, on the basis of which accused-respondents were tried for the aforementioned charges are as under. accused-respondents nos. 7 and 8 had their partnership firm by the name of m/s. gulabu ram sadh ram which had been dealing with the timber business. sohan lal, accused-respondent no. 5, who is son of gulabu ram, at the relevant time was posted as reader in the court of sub-judge-cum-judicial magistrate, theog. ram lal, respondent no. 6 son of sadh ram, respondent no. 8 had died during the pendency of the case before the special judge. respondent no. 8 was posted as the forest range officer at kotkhai and respondents no. 2 and 4 as forest block officer within kotkhai range.. respondent no. 1 was kanungo in sub tehsil kotkhai.4. on january 15, .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 07 1992 (HC)

Ms. Lalima Gupta and anr. Vs. State of H.P. and anr.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-07-1992

Reported in : AIR1993HP11

order1. in these two writ petitions, ms. lalima gupta, ms. kanchan bala and mr. surinder kumar (minor) through his next friend mr. ashwani kumar say that the selection of candidates on the basis of a 'district wise reservation' to the junior basic training course (hereinafter referred to in short as the j.b.t. course') is clearly violative of articles 14 and 15 of the constitution and consequently pray that it be struck down.2. the facts are briefly set out. the state of himachal pradesh issued an advertisement in the daily edition of the punjab kesri on 15th october 1991, inviting applications from interested persons for admission to the two years j. b. t. course for the session 1991-93. the advertisement indicated that application forms could be obtained from the office of the distrcrict education officer of every district, the principals of the junior basic training institutions as also from the primary block education officers' offices. the eligibility requirement of the candidate was that he should be between the age of the 16 to 27 years, a bona fide resident of himachal pradesh and a matriculate or its equivalent.3. admittedly, there are only a few junior basic training institutions in the state of himachal pradesh. they are located at solan, nahan, mandi, chowari in chamba, sarka-ghat and dharmshala. the candidates belonging to the districts of solan, shimla and kinnaur had to submit their applications to the principal, junior basic training institute, solan; whereas .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 14 1992 (HC)

Reference by the District and Sessions Judge Vs. Nawal Thakur

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-14-1992

Reported in : 1993CriLJ1061

v.k. mehrotra, j.1. on a reference made by the district and sessions judge, mandi, kullu and lauhal and spiti districts at mandi, through letter of 19 december, 1991 addressed to the registrar of this court, the present proceedings were initiated against respondent nawal thakur of village bhutti in tehsil and district kullu (h.p.). the reference of the district and sessions judge is one under section 15(2) of the contempt of courts act, 1971. the district and sessions judge had been requested by the additional chief judicial magistrate, kullu, through his letter of 8 november, 1991 to make a reference to this court.2. nawal kishore instituted a criminal complaint no. 375/1 of 1991 against s/shri shanta kumar (at present the chief minister of himachal pradesh), maheshwar singh son of mohinder singh, rupi palace, kullu and roop singh (the then forest minister, himachal pradesh) under sections 120-b/379/447/420/427/395/109, i.p.c. on 28 august, 1991. he filed another complaint the next day, namely, on 29 august, 1991 against s/shri shanta kumar (chief minister of h.p.) and maheshwar singh son of shri mohinder singh, rupi palace, kullu, under sections 397/447/109/34, i.p.c. the complaints were presented before the additional chief judicial magistrate who, after recording the fact of their presentation before him directed that they be put up before the chief judicial magistrate, kullu, on 5 september, 1991 as both the complaints pertained to police station kullu. the chief .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 07 1992 (HC)

Himachal Road Transport Corporation Vs. Puni Devi and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Jul-07-1992

Reported in : I(1993)ACC418,1993ACJ998

kamlesh sharma, j.1. these eleven appeals [f.a.o. (mva) nos. 160 to 169 of 1983 and no. 1 of 1986] and nine cross-objections (nos. 27 to 33 of 1984, 286 of 1983 and 139 of 1986) are being disposed of by a common judgment as these arise out of a common award (except no. 1 of 1986) as well as common accident. the appellant in all the appeals is the himachal road transport corporation who owned bus no. hps 7697 which unfortunately met with an accident. the respondents, except the respondents in f.a.o. nos. 167 of 1983,168 of 1983 and 1 of 1986, are the legal heirs of those who died in the accident. the respondents in f.a.o. nos. 167 of 1983,168 of 1983 and 1 of 1986 have themselves suffered injuries in the accident. cross-objections have also been filed in all the appeals except in f.a.o. nos. 161 of 1983 and 169 of 1983.2. on 28th february, 1981, at 8.15 a.m., the ill-fated bus no. hps 7697 stalled its journey from kotgarh to rampur. its driver was prem singha and conductor was sanjiv kumar. another person, namely, chet ram, was also deputed on this bus as conductor under training. when it reached a place nirath, it developed some snag and could not proceed further. the conductor, sanjiv kumar, brought a mechanic from rampur, who could by about 4.00 p.m. remove the snag by conducting the necessary repairs. thereafter, as no time was left to continue further journey to rampur, it was decided to bring back the bus to kotgarh from nirath. the bus had hardly covered a distance of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 26 1992 (HC)

Chander Singh Mandyal and anr. Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and anr.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Jun-26-1992

Reported in : 1993CriLJ3697

leila seth, c.j.1. the main prayer of the two petitioners, who are the secretary and member respectively of the joint action committee of the non gazetted officers of himachal pradesh is for quashing annexure p-1, which is an order dated 19th june 1992 passed under section 144 of the code of criminal procedure, 1973 by respondent no. 2, the district magistrate, shimla.2. an averment has been made in paragraph 10 of this petition regarding the mala fides of 'the hon'ble chief minister of himachal pradesh'. however, the chief minister has not been made a party and mr. m. s. chandel, learned counsel for the petitioners, has clearly stated at the bar that the petitioners are not pressing paragraph 10 of the petition and the allegations of mala fides.3. learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the impugned order is arbitrary and void and must be quashed since 'the material facts' have not been set out in the said order dated 19th june 1992. he further submits that the fundamental rights of the petitioners under article 19(1) of the constitution have been infringed and they are prejudiced as they are not aware as to why the order has been passed. he also contends that there was no material justifying the passing of the order, as such, there has been total non application of mind by respondent no. 2, the district magistrate, shimla.4. in order to appreciate these arguments, it is necessary to set out the impugned order which reads:'whereas, it has been made to appear to me .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 13 1992 (HC)

Bidhi Singh Vs. M.S. Mandyal and anr.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Oct-13-1992

Reported in : 1993CriLJ499

v.k. mehrotra, j.1. respondent shri m. s. mandyal (at present posted as additional district and sessions judge, shimla) was posted as sub-divisional judi-cial magistrate, palampur in the month of july, 1981. on july 7, 1981 head constable bidhi singh (petitioner before us) escorted some under-trial prisoners for their production in the court of shri mandyal along with some constables. the under-trial prisoners were produced in hand-cuffs before the learned magistrate. it is said that on seeing that the under-trial prisoners were brought before him hand-cuffed, the learned magistrate lost his temper and abused bidi singh by uttering the words 'non-sense' and 'bloody fool'.2. on july 22,1981 applicant bidhi singh filed a complaint in the court of the chief judicial magistrate. he alleged that by his conduct in the open court shri mandyal had intentionally insulted the complainant bidhi singh and had given provocation to him, knowing that it was likely to cause the complainant to break public peace. preliminary evidence was recorded by the chief judicial magistrate. he directed issue of summons to shri mandyal to answer an offence under section 504 ipc. this was on october 30, 1981.3. shri mandyal felt aggrieved by this order and assailed it in criminal revision no. 1 of 1982 which came to be heard by the additional sessions judge, kangra sessions division at dharamshala. the learned additional sessions judge held in his order of february 10, 1983 that cognizance could not have .....

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 11 1992 (HC)

NaraIn Chand Prashar Vs. Prem Kumar Dhumal and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Dec-11-1992

Reported in : AIR1993HP84

orderdevinder gupta, j.1. the election of respondent no. 1, the returned candidate from hamirpur parliamentary constituency is under challenge in this election petition. nominations for filing papers to the lok sabha from 4-hamirpur parliamentary constituency commenced on 20th april, 1991. last date for the same was 26th april, 1991 and the dates for scrutiny and withdrawal were 27th and 29th april, 1991, respectively. the polling was held on 20th may, 1991. counting of votes could not commence on 26th may, 1991, due to the assassination of mr. rajiv gandhi and was deferred to i6th june, 1991. the counting commenced on 16th june, 1991 at hamirpur, una, bilaspur and dehra simultaneously. the result was declared on 17th june, 1991. respondent no. 1 secured 2,05,970 votes as against the petitioner, who secured 2,02,232 votes. respondent no. 1 was declared duly elected having won the election with a margin of 3738 votes. respondents no. 2 to 16 were the other candidates who contested the election.2. the election is sought to be set aside on various grounds, namely:(a) improper acceptance of nomination of respondent no. 7; (b) corrupt practices having been committed by the returned candidate, his election agent and by other persons, with the consent of returned candidate and his election agent; (c) the improper reception and rejection of votes; and (d) violation of rules made under the representation of people act, 1951 (hereinafter called as 'the act').3. the corrupt practices .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 15 1992 (HC)

Vinod Kumar Vs. Income-tax Officer and ors.

Court : Himachal Pradesh

Decided on : Sep-15-1992

Reported in : (1993)114CTR(HP)16,[1993]200ITR79(HP)

kamlesh sharma, j.1. both these petitions (cr. m. ps. (m) nos. 1023 and 1024 of 1988) are being disposed of by a common judgment as these involve identical facts and questions of law and the parties are also the same.2. the facts giving rise to criminal miscellaneous petition (main) no. 1023 of 1988 are that pro forma respondent no. 3, naubat rai, who was karyana dealer at ]oginder nagar, filed his income-tax return for the year 1971-72 with the income-tax officer, mandi. he had shown in his income-tax return rental income of rs. 3,500 net from his building alleged to be let out to his son, vinod kumar, the petitioner. it was also the case of naubat rai that in the said building his son, vinod kumar, was running a hotel in the name and style of messrs. tourist hotel. but from the evidence, the income-tax officer found that naubat rai, the assessee, washimself running the hotel and in order to conceal his income from the hotel business and evade tax, he had put up the false plea of giving the building on rent to his son, vinod kumar. accordingly, the income-tax officer assessed the income from the hotel business at rs. 35,000 and added the same to the income of naubat rai by his assessment order dated september 23, 1974. he also gave a penalty notice under section 274/271(1)(c) of the income-tax act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), for concealment of particulars of income, to naubat rai.3. in the appeal filed by naubat rai, the appellate assistant commissioner of .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //