+ Submit Your Complaint
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: State Transport Authority, Himachal Pradesh

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    446

    Default State Transport Authority, Himachal Pradesh

    H.P.STATE CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION,
    SHIMLA-9.

    F.A. No. 335 of 2006

    Decided on 10.4.2009.



    1. Secretary, State Transport Authority,

    Himachal Pradesh, Shimla-4.



    2. Divisional Forest Officer,

    Mandi Division, District Mandi, H.P.

    .....Appellants.

    Versus



    1. Sh. Divesh Bhardwaj }

    2. Sh. Kailash Bhardwaj } L.R’s of

    3. Sh. Ritesh Bhardwaj } Sh. Bhal Chander Bhardwaj.

    (All R/o Village & P.O.

    Joginder Nagar, District Mandi, H.P.)

    ….Respondents.

    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Kumar Goel (Retd.), President.

    Hon’ble Mrs. Saroj Sharma, Member.

    Hon’ble Mr. Chander Shekher Sharma, Member.



    Whether approved for reporting ?



    For the Appellant. Mr. Anoop Sharma, ADA

    With Mr. Abhay Shukla,

    Additional Chief Secretary

    (Forest) to the Govt. of H.P.

    Mr. Amit Kahyap, Secretary

    State Transport Authority,

    Shimla.



    For the Respondent. Mr. Divesh Bhardwaj

    Respondent No.2 is present

    in Person.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ORDER



    Justice Arun Kumar Goel (Retd.) President.





    1. When this case was taken up today Mr. Anoop Sharma, Ld. ADA on behalf of the appellant stated on instructions received from the Additional Chief Secretary (Forest) to the Government of H.P. that the compensation assessed may be waived while partly allowing this appeal and he has instructions not to press for the same in the event his prayer being allowed.


    2. Looking to the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and time gap we feel that compensation cannot be waived by its entity however looking for stand of the appellants, we deemed it just and proper that compensation needs to be reduced, ordered accordingly.

    3. As a result of it while partly allowing this appeal and upholding the order of District Forum below in Consumer Complaint No. 172/2005, decided on 21.8.2006, it is ordered that compensation payable would be Rs. 5000/- instead of Rs. 10,000/-. Appeal is disposed of subject to this modification.

    4. All interim orders passed from time to time shall stand vacated forthwith.

    5. Ld. ADA has undertaken to collect the copy of this order free of cost from the Court Secretary as per Rules and office is directed to send the copy of this order to Sh. Amar Chand Verma, Advocate, District Court, Mandi, on behalf of the respondent.




    (Justice Arun Kumar Goel) Retd.

    President





    (Saroj Sharma)

    Member





    (Chander Shekher Sharma)

    Member

  2. #2
    kaushaltc@gmail.com Guest

    Default H.p.15a 9099

    vehical owner

+ Submit Your Complaint

Similar Threads

  1. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board
    By Tanu in forum Judgments
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 03-14-2015, 09:38 AM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 06-28-2012, 01:19 PM
  3. Himachal Pradesh Urban Development Authority
    By Sidhant in forum Bad Response or Bribe
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 01-21-2010, 02:25 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-01-2009, 08:14 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 08-31-2009, 01:47 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •