Himachal Pradesh High Court Weekly Roundup: October 9 - October 15, 2023

Nominal Index:

Dilbag Singh vs. Vipan Kumar & other 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 66

State Of Himachal Pradesh vs. Ved Prakash & Ors 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 67

Rudra- XI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd v. Municipal Corporation of Shimla 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 68

Puran Singh v. Land Acquisition Officer 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 69

H.P. Public Service Commission VS Roop Lal and others 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 70

Judgments/Orders:

Women's Gratitious Services In Household To Be Considered In Motor Accident Compensation Claims: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Dilbag Singh vs. Vipan Kumar & other

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 66

The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that though gratuitous services rendered by women in managing households and families cannot be equated with money, such services should be properly considered while deciding a claim for compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act.

Justice Virender Singh added that women perform various activities in the household and that their untimely death due to a motor vehicle accident entitles their families to compensation

'False Rape Allegations Cause Humiliation, Damage To Accused': Himachal Pradesh High Court Upholds Acquittal Of 4

Case title - State Of Himachal Pradesh vs. Ved Prakash & Ors

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 67

The Himachal Pradesh High Court upheld the acquittal of a rape accused as it noted that rape causes great distress and humiliation to the victim of rape but at the same time a false allegation of committing a rape also causes humiliation and damage to the accused.

“An accused has also rights which are to be protected and the possibility of false implication has to be ruled out,” the bench of Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Ranjan Sharma observed while stressing that it cannot be presumed that the statement of the victim is always true or without any embellishment.

Bank Guarantee Expired During The Stay Period, Must Be Renewed Once The Order Granting Stay Is Vacated Due To Withdrawal Of Petition: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Rudra- XI Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd v. Municipal Corporation of Shimla.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 68

The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that Bank Guarantee expired during the stay period, must be renewed once the order granting stay is vacated due to withdrawal of petition.

The bench of Justice Rakesh Kainthla held that principle of restitution demands that the party, who had received the benefit of an order should make restitution to the other party for what he had lost, if the order that granted the benefit to the party is vacated, varied or set aside.

Arbitrator Appointed Under The Provisions Of National Highways Act Is Bound By Section 29A Of The A&C Act, Award Must Be Delivered Without Undue Delay: Himachal Pradesh High Court

Case Title: Puran Singh v. Land Acquisition Officer.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 69

The Himachal Pradesh High Court held that an arbitrator appointed under the provisions of National Highways Act, 1956 is bound to deliver an arbitral award within the time limit prescribed under Section 29A of the A&C Act.

The Court reiterated that if the award is not made within the period specified or the extended period specified the mandate of the arbitrator shall terminate unless the court has, either prior to or after the expiry of the period so specified, extended the period. The extension may be on the application of any of the parties. The same may be granted only for sufficient cause and on such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Court.

Merit-cum-Seniority Distinct From Seniority-cum-Merit, Can't Promote Less Meritorious Sr Candidate Over More Meritorious Jr Candidate In Former: HP High Court

Case Title: H.P. Public Service Commission VS Roop Lal and others

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (HP) 70

The Himachal Pradesh High Court clarified that the tendency to mix 'seniority-cum-merit' and 'merit-cum-seniority' principles should be avoided while deciding promotion cases since the two concepts have distinct meanings and applications.

A bench comprising Chief Justice M S Ramachandra Rao and Justice Jyostna Rewal Dua referenced Ravikumar Dhansukhlal Maheta and another Vs. High Court of Gujarat 2023 to reiterate that promoting a less meritorious senior candidate over a more meritorious junior candidate was unacceptable in cases following the 'merit-cum-seniority' principle.