Himachal Pradesh High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 15 To September 21, 2025

Citations 2025 LiveLaw (HP) 156 to 2025 LiveLaw (HP) 166 Nominal Index:Datta Ram and others v/s United India Insurance Company Limited.,2025 LiveLaw (HP) 156Nitin Gupta v Arrpit Aggarwal.,2025 LiveLaw (HP) 157Bir Singh v/s State of H.P. & Ors.,2025 LiveLaw (HP) 158State of H.P. v/s Hari Saran.,2025 LiveLaw (HP) 159Sachin Kumar v/s State of H.P. & Ors..,2025 LiveLaw (HP) 160Vishwa Nath Sharma & others v/s State of H.P. & Others.,2025 LiveLaw (HP) 161State of H.P. v/s Ram Pal.,2025 LiveLaw (HP) 162Mangat Ram (deceased) through his Lrs. Namely Tarsem Lal and others V/s State of H.P. & Ors.,2025 LiveLaw (HP) 163State of H.P. v/s Rajika Gupta.,2025 LiveLaw (HP) 164Tidj Mamane @ Tidy Mamane V/s State of H.P. & Anr.,2025 LiveLaw (HP) 165Anand Swarup v/s State of H.P. & Ors.,2025 LiveLaw (HP) 16612-Year Limitation Rule Applies To Execution Petitions U/S 174 Of Motor Vehicles Act: Himachal Pradesh High CourtCase Name: Datta Ram and others v/s United India Insurance Company LimitedCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (HP) 156The Himachal Pradesh High Court has clarified that execution petitions filed by insurance companies under Section 174 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 for recovery of compensation, are subject to the twelve years limitation period under the Limitation Act, 1963.Justice Ajay Mohan Goel remarked that: “The findings returned by the learned Court below that an application under Section 174 of the Motor Vehicle Act can be filed at any time and there is no limitation for moving such application because there is no limitation for filing a claim petition for the grant of compensation under the Motor Vehicle Act in the facts of this case are not sustainable”.Closure Of Partnership Activities Till Dissolution Of Firm Cannot Be Granted As Interim Relief U/S 9 Of A&C Act: HP High CourtCase Title – Nitin Gupta v Arrpit AggarwalCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (HP) 157The Himachal Pradesh High Court bench of Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua has observed that an interim relief petition under Section 9, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“ACA”) claiming closure of business and manufacturing activities of the partnership business cannot be granted when the principal dispute pertains to the business activities of that partnership. Granting such a relief would amount to the destruction of the subject matter of arbitration and would defeat the very intent and purpose behind the aforesaid section.Promotion Can't Be Denied When Criminal Case Is Pending Without Chargesheet Being Framed: HP High CourtCase Name: Bir Singh v/s State of H.P. & Ors.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (HP) 158The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that pendency of a criminal case, where no charge sheet has been filed, cannot be a ground to deny promotion to an employee exonerated of all charges in the departmental inquiry.Justice Sandeep Sharma noted that: “Admittedly no charge sheet has been served upon the petitioner. Though the Magistrate concerned is well within his/her right to order further investigation, such fact, if any, cannot be a ground for the respondents to deny promotion to the higher post, especially when charge has not been framed till date,”Mere Recovery Of Money From Accused Does Not Amount To Bribery In Absence Of Demand: HP High CourtCase Name: State of H.P. v/s Hari SaranCitation: 2025 LiveLaw (HP) 159The Himachal Pradesh High Court has upheld the acquittal of a Forest Officer who was accused of demanding and accepting a Rs 3000 bribe.The Court held that mere possession of tainted currency notes cannot constitute bribery unless there is proof of demand and voluntary acceptance of illegal gratification.After going through the evidence, Justice Sushil Kukreja noted that: “In the absence of demand of any illegal gratification and acceptance thereof, it is clear that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt and the learned trial court has rightly acquitted the accused.”Prisoners Should Be Allowed To Solve Family's Problems, Maintain Link With Society: HP High Court Grants ParoleCase Name: Sachin Kumar v/s State of H.P. & Ors.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (HP) 160The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that maintaining family and social ties is important for prisoners, and that parole should be allowed to them to attend to their personal and family responsibilities.Justice Virender Singh held that “Mere registration of the FIR cannot be made basis to decline parole to the petitioner, as, the prisoners should be allowed to maintain their family and social ties. They should also be given an opportunity to solve their personal and family problems and to enable them to maintain their links with society.”Fairly Determined Compensation For Land Acquisition Must Also Be Given To Land Owners Who Didn't Approach Court: HP High CourtCase Name: Vishwa Nath Sharma & others v/s State of H.P. & Others.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (HP) 161The Himachal Pradesh High Court has held that once a fair rate of compensation for land acquisition has been decided, its...

Himachal Pradesh High Court Weekly Round-Up: September 15 To September 21, 2025

Mehak Aggarwal

Tags