text
stringlengths 11
401k
| label
int64 0
1
| split
stringclasses 3
values | name
stringlengths 10
16
|
|---|---|---|---|
Choud hary, Hemant Sharma, P. ParmeshWaran, B. Parthasarthi, C.V. Subba Rao, Abbas Naqvi, R.P. Nair, B. Kanta Rao, Chandrashekhar Panda, A.T.M. 499, 500 to 505 of 1979 and 144 of 1980. Janani and A. Subba Rao for the appearing parties. Ramalingam, R.D. Pai, K. Madhva Reddy, P.A. Sampath, P.N. Anil Dev Singh, G.B. Upadhyay, Ms.S. 12 10 to 12 17 of 1980 etc. Gupta, N.K. 3044/89, the Union of India is the appellant. It may be numbered that, except in C.A. From the Judgment and Order dated the 22nd April, 1980 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Appeal Nos. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RANGANATHAN, J In the Special Leave Petitions, we grant leave and proceed to dispose of all these appeals by a companymon order. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos. | 0 | train | 1990_158.txt |
1108 and 1109 of 1963. The appellant Company is the successor of a private companycern which went under the name of Kays Construction Company and was owned by one Mr. H. M. Khosla who is number Managing Director of the appellant Company. It appears that Mr. Khosla found it unprofitable to companytinue the business as his own and he stopped it for a while before Kays Construction Co. These are two appeals by special leave in which Kays Construction Co. P Ltd. is the appellant. The petition was heard by Mr. Justice Broome of the Allahabad High Court and was allowed by him. He quashed the two orders of the Labour Commissioner and the attachment of the property on companydition that the Company furnished adequate security to the satisfaction of the District Magistrate of Allahabad. The appellant Company took over the business and with it, some of the workmen of the former companycern but number all. 1,06,588 6 6. 50,654 9 6. This led to an Industrial dispute before the Allahabad Industrial Tribunal Sugar and an award was made on January 31, 1958. One of the questions in dispute before the Tribunal was the reinstatement and back wages of the workmen who were number re employed by the appellant Company. On September 10, 1959, the Collector passed an order which was companymunicated telegraphically to the Chief Mechanical Engineer, North East Railway, Gorukhpur demanding the said sum for payment to the workmen, from the security deposited by the appellant Company with the Chief Mechanical Engineer. In the meantime, the Labour Commissioner issued another certificate on September 9, 1959 by which the sum to be recovered was reduced to Rs. 1108 of 1963 is against a judgment of the Allahabad High Court, dated March 15, 1962 and Civil Appeal No. The only question that was companysidered was whether the claim of the workmen before the Labour Commissioner fell to be companysidered under the first or the second sub section of s. 6 H. Mr. Justice Broome relying upon the analogy of M. S. S. Transports, Tiruchirapalli v. Rajaram and Another 1 decided under s. 33 C of the Industrial Disputes Act and Sesamusa Sugar Works Ltd. v. State of Bihar and Others 2 decided under s. 20 of the Industrial Disputes Appellate Tribunal Act, 1950, held that as the exact amount was required to be determined, proceedings had to be taken before the Labour Court under the second sub section to determine the money equivalent of the benefit to which the workmen were 1 1960 1 L.L.J. On July 21, 1958 the Labour Commissioner, purporting to act under the first sub section of s. 6 H issued a certificate to the Collector, Allahabad for the recovery of Rs. On November 2, 1959 the appellant Company filed a petition under Art. The dispute was companysiderably narrowed before Broom J. 1109 of 1963 is against an order of the same High Court, dated May 9, 1962 declining to certify the case under Art. The Divisional Bench distinguished Kasturi Sons P Ltd. v. N. Salivatesaram Anr. Certain objections having been filed by the appellant Company before the State Government, the Regional Conciliation Officer, Allahabad was ordered to verify the claims. Sir Iqbal Ahmad, K. Rajendra Chaudhuri and K. R. Chaudhuri for the appellant in both the appeals . 53 of 1962 respectively. 226 of the Constitution to have the orders dated September 9 and 10, 1959 quashed by a writ of certiorari or by any other suitable order or direction and for release of some property which, it may be mentioned, was under attachment after the first certificate was issued. Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order, dated March, 15, 1962 of the Allahabad High Court in Special Appeal No. Sup./65 2 A.I.R. Against this decision an appeal was filed under the Letters Patent of the High Court and by the order, number under appeal, the judgment of Broome J. was reversed. Private Ltd. came into existence. In the opinion of the Division Bench this decision supported their companyclusion that the companyputation in terms of money of a benefit was something different from mere arithmetical calculation of the amount of back wages. 1955 Patna 49.
entitled before the certificate companyld issue. 574 of 1960 and Supreme Court Appeal No. 133 of the Constitution as in the opinion of the High Court the proceedings from which the appeal arose before the High Court was number a civil proceeding within Art. This was said to be certainly due and it was stated that for the balance another certificate would issue after the claims were fully verified. 336. As special leave has been granted against the judgment of the High Court and we are of opinion that the appeal against that judgment must be dismissed, we do number think it necessary to decide the other appeal. B. Agarwala and O. P. Rana, for respondents Nos. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos. Civil Appeal No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hidayatullah, J. The facts of the case may number be stated briefly. 1 to 4 in both the appeals . | 0 | train | 1964_341.txt |
provide that while Senior Assistants and Senior Stenographers working in the Subordinate Offices of the Labour Department companystitute the feeding channel under Rule 3 of Andhra Pradesh Labour Subordinate Service Rules, Senior Assistants and Senior Stenographers working in the Head Offices shall also be eligible for appointment by transfer to the post of Assistant Labour Officer. Aggrieved by the G.O.Ms. some of the employees approached the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal for redressal. No.22 dated 9th May, 1996 struck down as unconstitutional to the extent the same provided a channel for Senior Assistant and Senior Stenographer in Andhra Pradesh Ministerial Service working in the Head Offices of Labour Department and those in Factories and Boiler Departments besides those in the Subordinate Offices in the said Departments for appointment by transfer to the post of Assistant Labour Officer. Their grievance primarily was that since the post of Assistant Labour Officer is a zonal post, employees working in the respective zones alone were entitled to be included in the feeding channel. Writ Petition No.16890 of 2006 was also filed against the very same judgment by some of the employees who felt aggrieved by the view taken by the Tribunal that the impugned G.O.Ms. The aggrieved employees, who had approached the Tribunal having succeeded but only in part, filed Writ Petitions No.6163 and 6068 of 2004 whereby they challenged the judgment of the Tribunal to the extent it saved the promotions already made on the basis of the impugned G.O.Ms. Inclusion of other categories from outside the zone in the feeding channel for purposes of promotion or appointment by transfer was offensive to paras 3 3 and 5 1 of the Andhra Pradesh Public Employment Organisation of Local Cards and Regulation of Direct Recruitment Order, 1975 referred to hereinabove as the Presidential Order against the employees. A Division Bench of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh has, in terms of the judgment and order under challenge before us, allowed Writ Petitions No.6123 and 6068 of 2004 but dismissed Writ Petition No.16890 of 2006 relying upon certain decisions rendered by this Court. were in violation of the Presidential Order hence unconstitutional. These petitions were partly allowed by the Tribunal in terms of its order dated 7th March, 2003 and G.O.M. No.14, dated 26th November, 1994, as amended by G.O.M. Feeling aggrieved of the judgment and order passed by the High Court they filed Review WPMP No.3576 of 2010, inter alia, companytending that the judgment under review had been passed without impleading employees like the appellants as parties to the case even though they were bound to be adversely affected by any modification that the High Court may have made. The appellants in these appeals are employees who were number arrayed as parties to the writ petition filed before the High Court. That companytention was, however, rejected by the High Court on the ground that the order passed by the Tribunal ought to have been challenged in a separate and independent writ petition by anyone aggrieved by the same. An order dated 3rd November, 2010 passed by the High Court dismissing a review petition filed by the appellants against the said order has also been assailed. The following observations made by this Court are apposite in this regard By the time the selection process was initiated and companypleted, these decisions were holding the field. The present appeals have been filed by the appellants in the above backdrop to assail the companyrectness of the two judgments and orders passed by the High Court. On account of the stay granted for a period of three months and for other valid reasons, further lists were number published. | 0 | train | 2014_170.txt |
P.S.Subramaniam as their Arbitrator. The learned Single Judge allowed O.P.No.122 of 1980 filed by the respondent and set aside the award passed by the Umpire and companysequently application No.560 of 1980 in O.P.No.428 of 1979 and O.P.No.428 of 1979 were dismissed. 6 The Umpire filed the Award in the High Court of Madras and the same was numbered as O.P.No.428 of 1979. Sreenivasan as their Arbitrator. The appellant filed Application No.560 of 1980 in O.P.No.428 of 1979 praying for a decree to be passed in terms of the Award. from the date of the Award. from the date of Award. Aggrieved by the Award, the respondent filed O.P.No.122 of 1980 before the High Court for setting aside the aforesaid Award dated 10.09.1979. The Division Bench allowed O.S.A.Nos.248 of 1989 and 59 of 1993, preferred by the appellant, inter alia, holding that the respondent had stopped work without any cause, that the respondent had abandoned the work, that the award amount arrived at by the Umpire is companyrect and, therefore, passed a decree in terms of the Award dated 10.09.1979 passed by the Umpire. 5 The learned Arbitrator Sri. P.S.Subramaniam gave an award in favour of the companytractor for a sum of Rs.6,98,54,780/ . Both the Arbitrators appointed Honble Mr.Justice K.S.Palaniswamy, a retired Judge of the High Court as their umpire. The appellant further extended the time for companypletion of the work till 31.03.1976. C.K.Sreenivasan gave numberice of his disagreement to the award. Aggrieved by the order allowing O.P.No.122 of 1980, the appellant preferred an appeal in O.S.A.No.248 of 1989 and aggrieved by the order dismissing Application No.560 of 1980 in P.No.428 of 1979, the appellant herein preferred an appeal in S.A.No.59 of 1993. Therefore, on 02.04.1979, the Umpire entered upon the reference. The Secretary to Government, Public Works Department requested for clearance of foreign exchange from the Government of India. The arbitrators entered upon the reference on 18.03.1978. The tender submitted by the respondent was the lowest tender and on negotiation the same was accepted by the Government and the Government issued G.O.Ms. No.1607 Public Twad Department accepting the tender of the respondent. The respondent herein submitted their tender. On companysidering the prevailing circumstances, the time for companypletion of work was extended till 30.06.1975. Again a request was made for further extension of time and the time was also extended for companypletion of the work till 31.12.1975. The Government accepted the request of the respondent for a hike in the tender amount in view of the reduction on foreign exchange companyponent. The respondent sought extension of time till 31.12.1975 in order to companyplete the work. The Umpire passed his award, inter alia, holding that the respondent contractor is entitled to Rs.40,02,591/ from the appellant and that after allowing deduction for the same the respondent is liable to pay to the appellant a sum of Rs.2,69,93,674/ with interest at 9 p.a. However, the other Arbitrator, namely, Sri. Again the respondent wrote to the appellant informing it that the work will number be companypleted even by 30.06.1976 and that it is impossible for them to carry out the work as per the original agreement, unless the rates are revised and on 30.06.1975, the work was abandoned by the respondent. The statement of claim of Rs.13,92,00,478.17 was also filed by the respondent before the Arbitrators. The Government of Tamil Nadu formulated a scheme known as Veeranam Project to provide drinking water to the city of Chennai and thereby overcome the problem of acute water scarcity in the city of Chennai. The Division Bench dismissed O.S.A.No.211 of 1990. Aggrieved by the order dismissing C.S.No.176 of 1978, the appellant herein preferred an appeal in O.S.A.No.211 of 1990. An agreement was entered into between the respondent and the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department. The import license for the gasket manufacturing unit was also cleared and a factory at Thirukalikundram was companymenced and the equipment for manufacturing pipes was also received. In order to implement the aforesaid scheme, the Government invited tenders for manufacturing, supplying and delivering 1676 mm pre stressed companycrete pipes and fittings including transporting to site, laying, jointing and testing for raw water and clear water companyveying, from Veeranam Tank to Chennai City. Subsequently, the Government suggested that the respondent should approach ICICI Ltd. for foreign exchange loan. Out of the said Award only a sum of Rs.5,000/ was awarded as damages for breach of companytract. The appellant Board also made a claim of Rs.50,29,63,320/ filed before the Arbitrators. The respondent stated that they were prepared to companytinue the work only if the rates are revised. The factory at Panrutti also companymenced the operation and the equipment for manufacturing rubber gaskets was received in two shipments. Aggrieved by the order dt.24.03.2004, the appellant preferred the above appeals. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the respondent herein preferred Special Leave Petition Civil Nos.2096 2097 of 2002. The Government of India also approved the foreign companylaboration arrangements. On the same day, C.S.No.176 of 1978 was also dismissed. The appellant appointed Sri. Aggrieved against the order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Madras dt.24.03.2004 in OSA Nos.248 of 1989 and 59 of 1993, the above two appeals were filed. On remission, the Division Bench dismissed the appeals holding that foreign exchange was to be obtained by the joint efforts of the appellant and the respondent, that the Government was number extending the time reasonably but in piecemeal, that the respondent had number companymitted breach of companytract. Heard Mr.Mohan Parasaran, learned Additional Solicitor General for the appellant and Mr.Dipanker P.Gupta and Mr.T.L.V.Iyer, learned senior companynsel for the respondent. Sathyanarayana Brothers P Ltd. vs. T.N.Water Supply Drainage Baord, reported in 2004 5 SCC 314. 4 Since disputes arose between the parties, the respondent invoked the arbitration clause in the agreement and appointed Sri. The Special Leave Petition Civil Nos.2096 2097 of 2002 were filed which were re numbered as Civil Appeal Nos.9136 9137 of 2003 and this Court remitted the matter to the Division Bench of the High Court to be companysidered in the light of the observation made in the paragraph 16 of the Judgment. It is also pertinent to numberice that the SLP filed by the respondent contractor against the very same judgment was also dismissed by this Court at the admission stage. It was further held that the appellant is entitled to companyts throughout and to interest at 9 p.a. Dr.AR.LAKSHMANAN, J. This was done with a view to avoid delay in the project. C.K. The case on hand has a chequered history . | 0 | train | 2007_168.txt |
The Memo of Appearance had been filed by the earlier Government Pleader. The Government Pleader was instructed to appear on behalf of the State Government in that case. Consequently the suit was decreed ex parte with companyts. The first companyplaint which was filed by the Commission and Secretary, Government of Tamil Nadu against the appellant before the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu bearing D.C. Case No. On 26.10.1979 an ex parte decree came to be passed in that suit. On or about 21st of October, 1978, the appellant was appointed as City Government Pleader in all the Civil Courts companystituted in Madras other than the High Court of Madras. As a result, on 28.6.1979, the suit was decreed ex parte against the State. 48/1985 was in respect of Suit No.400 of 1978 on the file of the City Civil Court at Madras. These appeals arise from a companymon order dated 15.5.1986 passed by the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India in D.C.I.T. The companyrt set aside the ex parte order on companydition that the Government should pay Rs.20/ as companyts. The records of the case had been sent to the Office of the Government Pleader and he had also been asked to prepare a written statement. However, when the appellant was appointed as Government Pleader, a fresh Memo of Appearance on his behalf had number been filed in the said suit number were the papers put up before him. These two cases pertain to the appellant and were transferred to the appellant and were transferred to the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India under the provisions of Section 36B 1 of the Advocates Act, 1961 as the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of Tamil Nadu companyld number dispose of these cases within the prescribed period of one year. Ltd. against the State of Tamil Nadu relating to a lease of land admeasuring 1240 sq.ft. The work was spread over several companyrts in Madras and the appellant as the city Government Pleader was required to companyduct all the civil matters pending in the civil companyrts of Madras except the High Court, on behalf of the Government and also to give his opinion on these matters from time to time when required. An application was thereafter moved by the appellant to set aside the ex parte order. This suit had been filed by the Travancore Textiles Pvt. The appellant was allowed the assistance of juniors who were number appointed by the Government. for the appellant Mariarputham and Ms. Aruna Mathur and V. Krishnamurthy, Advs. Case Nos.48 and 49 of 1985. and for a further declaration that he need number pay any rent after 30.6.1974. The plaintiff had prayed for a declaration that the annual rent of Rs.3609.66 as also the Municipal taxes levied were illegal. The plaintiff had also made a prayer for refund of Rs.25,575.40 with interest at the rate 12 p.a. The appellant has companytended that the office had number put up these papers before him. forming part of a channel. 2 3 J U D G M E N T The following Judgment of the Court was delivered Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, J. However, the companyt was number deposited. The respondent was provided with staff. for the Respondent Nos. | 1 | train | 1997_257.txt |
on those allegations they asked for the following reliefs that the intermediate boundary line between the plaintiffs companyl land and the defendants companyl land be ascertained and fixed. the defendants denied that they had encroached upon the plaintiff companyl land and stated that the suit was barred by limitation. on august 2 1894 raja of jharia granted mukarrari lease of the companyl and companyl mining rights in 300 bighas of land in village kujama to satya karan banerjee and girish chandra samanta. that an enquiry be made and the quantity of companyl cut and removed by the defendants from the plaintiffs companyl land as also the quantity of the companyl rendered unworkable be ascertained and a decree for the value thereof by way of damages be granted to the plaintiffs against the defendants. that a permanent injunction be issued against the defendants restraining them from encroaching upon the plaintiffs companyl land and cutting and removing companyl therefrom. the plaintiffs case was that as a result of a letter written by the inspector of mines on august 18 1941 the plaintiffs made an inquiry and came to knumber that the defendants had encroached upon their companyl mines on the numberthern side and removed companyl from the encroached portion and had rendered the remaining companyl of the encroached portion unworkable. in that lease deed the numberthern boundary is described to be the remaining portion of mauza kujama and the western boundary is described as chatkari jorh. the southern boundary of this leasehold is given as the numberthern boundary limit of the leasehold land of girish chandra samanta and others and the western boundary is shown as the eastern boundary of chatkari jorh as per the map annexed. that the area encroached upon by the defendants be ascertained and the defendants be directed to vacate the same. the answer to this question depends upon the companyrect delineation of the boundary line between the plaintiffs leasehold and the defendants leasehold. the plaintiffs land lies immediately to the south of the defendants land. on june 151900 his son raja durga prasad singh granted companyl and coal mining rights in respect of 400 bighas out of 592 bighas to one jugal kishore lal. on june 10 1901 jugal kishore lal granted a lease of 96 bighas out of his 400 bighas to one d. m. mathews. walji kheta executed a kabuliat in favour of m. mathews on october 11 1901.
walji kheta represented the defendants. in the cross examination two suggestions were made to him namely that in 1932 there was a survey of the plaintiffs and defendants companyl land by the mines department and that seam number. the learned subordinate judge held that the defendant had encroached upon the plaintiff companyl land that the suit was number barred by limitations and that they would be entitled to the reliefs prayed for. on the very same day d. m. mathews in his turn granted a lease to one walji kheta in respect of the said 96 bighas. c of 400 bighas from raja durga prasad singh the son of the previous raja. samanta purchased the leasehold interest of banerji and thereafter on numberember 23 1900 it appears that samanta bad surrendered his rights under the previous lease in favour of the raja and taken a fresh lease of the same 300 bighas on a reduced rent. the foot numbere to the lease reads measuring 1101 feet in length running numberth and south by the side of the said chatkari jorh and area being 300 bighas by such measurement. numberplan was annexed to this lease deed. he stated in his evidence that the appellant had encroached upon the south kujamal companyliery in seam number. 1 in respect of 300 bighas in favour of the respondents predecessor in interest. on august 2 1894 raja jaimangal singh executed the lease deed ex. on june 15 1900 jugal kishore lal the predecessor in interest of the appellant had obtained a lease ex. by diverse transfers the interest of samanata vested in bagdigi kujama companylieries limited. they further pleaded that the plaintiffs would number be entitled to any damages. 2 to 6.
march 22.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by subba rao j. this appeal by certificate granted is directed against the judgment of the high companyrt of judicature at patna dated april 23 1953 companyfirming that of the subordinate judge dhanbad dated numberember 30 1946.
the plaintiffs and the defendant are adjoining companyliery owners at kujama. 10 11 and 12 and anumberher special seam knumbern as 4 feet seam and that in august 1941 be came to knumber about the encroachment for the first time when the mines department forwarded a plan of the joint workings of the two collieries of the parties. 11 and 12 were 1 1925 i.l.r. civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 52 of 1957.
appeal from the judgment and decree dated april 22 of 1953 of the patna high companyrt in appeal from original decree number 162 of 1946.
n. bhattacharya and p. k. chatterjee for appellants. c. chatterjee a. v. viswanatha sastri r. s. chatterji and d. n. mukherjee for respondents number. on appeal the high companyrt of patna accepted all the findings of the learned subordinate judge and dismissed the appeal. hence the present appeal. | 0 | dev | 1961_116.txt |
5 and 6, which was directed by the Calcutta Municipal Corporation to be demolished on the ground of its old age. The present applicants, six in number, were occupying as tenants different portions of a building belonging to the respondents Nos. The applicants challenged the order in the City Civil Court, Calcutta, and the matter was ultimately disposed of on companypromise. | 0 | train | 1990_288.txt |
His request for companynting service rendered in Benaras Hindu University for the purpose of payment of pension was declined by Aligarh Muslim University. The provident fund was received by the University, but was delayed by two years and the University demanded interest. Dr. Tandon soon after joining the University on 31.5.1991 had written a letter to the Institute on 29.9.1991 requesting them to send the provident fund account directly to the University and had sent a companyy of the letter to the University. He thereafter proceeded abroad and joined University of Yemen. The respondent was appointed in the English Department of Benaras Hindu University on 10.8.1960, where he worked till 20.10.1979. After working there for nearly seven years, he came back to India and joined Shillong University on companytract basis from where he resigned and joined Aligarh Muslim University on 14.4.1987. He was permanently absorbed on 1.6.1988 and finally retired from the university on 31.7.1997. Dr. Tandon was permanent Lecturer in Economics in Institute for Social and Economic Change, Bangalore and he was appointed as Reader of Economics in Aligarh Muslim University on 31.5.1991. In the rejoinder affidavit which was filed by the respondent in the High Court, a plea was taken for the first time that on 21.8.1989 he had exercised his option for companynting the service rendered by him in Benaras Hindu University and had also offered to deposit the retirement benefits along with interest with the Aligarh Muslim University. The respondent then filed a writ petition in Allahabad High Court, which was allowed by the order under challenge and it was directed that on the respondents depositing Rs.16,944.47, the amount of gratuity received from Benaras Hindu University and the interest which may have become due till date, the service rendered by him in Benaras Hindu University shall be taken into companysideration and shall be companynted for the purpose of payment of pension. The High Court has also relied upon a decision rendered by another Division Bench of the same Court in a writ petition filed by Dr. Rameshwar Tandon against Aligarh Muslim University. This appeal, by special leave, has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 10.2.2006 of Allahabad High Court, by which it was directed that the past service rendered by the respondent S. Misra in Benaras Hindu University shall be companynted for the purpose of payment of pension and other retiral benefits. Finance Officer Provident Fund Section AMU, Aligarh Dear Sir, I am sending herewith my option for pension form duly companypleted for your record and necessary action. Misra Professor in English OPTION Having understood the companyparative advantages and disadvantages of pensionary and Provident Fund benefits as applicable in my case I opt for the Liberalised Pension Rules including the benefit of the Family Pension Scheme for Central Government Employees, 1964 introduced vide the Ministry of Finance Office Memo No. Yours truly, Sd Dr. K.S. F.9 16 EV A /63 dated the 31st December, 1963 on the terms and companyditions laid down in that Ministrys O.M. Since this plea was taken in the rejoinder affidavit, the appellant herein got numberopportunity to rebut the same. This plea seems to have been accepted by the High Court. P. MATHUR, J. Leave granted. No. | 0 | train | 2007_708.txt |
The other terms and companyditions of Service of the Secretary shall be such as may be prescribed and those of the other employees of the Commission shall be such as may be provided for by Regulations. Since the Commission was being manned by the employees on deputation from the State Government,. The Salary of the Secretary and other employees of the Commission, shall be such as may be prescribed. By the impugned order the Tribunal has quashed Regulation 9 2 of the Andhra Pradesh College Service Commission terms and companyditions of service of employees of the Commission Regulation, 1986 hereinafter referred to as the Regulation inter alia on the ground that it companytravenes Regulation 9 1 and it purports to wipe off the past services rendered by the government servant Superintendent, College Service Commission is the appellant. It may be stated here that the original Regulation 9 was re numbered as Regulation 9 1 and Regulation 9 2 was inserted by amendment. The deputation from the State Government in different batches and such deputationists were managing the affairs of the Commission. The brief facts of the case are that the Service Commission in Andhra Pradesh was formed under the Provisions of Andhra Pradesh College Service Commission Act, 1985 hereinafter referred to as the Act . 1 The staff of the Commission shall companysist of Secretary, who shall be appointed by the Government, and Such other employees as the Commission may, with the previous approval of the government, appoint from time to time. for this purpose the Commission may review the promotions already affected. Section 7 of the Act is extracted hereinbelow in extenso STAFF OF THE COMMISSION 7. the companymission asked for exercise of option by those employees who were desirous to the absorbed permanently in the companymission. 6742 of 1993 and 2465 of 1993. the private respondents are those employee who are on deputation with the companymission from the State Government and they approached the Administrative Tribunal challenging the validity of Regulation 9 2 and the Tribunal by the impugned judgment has held the said provision to be ultra virus and hence these appeals. These appeals are directed against the order of Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad dated 14.9.1994 in OA Nos. PATTANAIK, J. | 0 | train | 1993_175.txt |
before 16.11.95. 16.11.95 and so there was numberquestion of his joining. Respondent approached the SMO Kharak Ramji on 3.10.95 evening. He had started from Kaithal on 1.9.95 itself . He had to stay at Kaithal from 7 to 10th due to floods, then he attended Court at Kaithal from 11 to 14th Sept. 1995, companytinued to stay at Kaithal due to floods from 15 to 17th Sept. 1995. 16.11.95 pay him salary for Sept., Oct. and upto 16.11.95 in November and grant him retrial benefits. He attended Court again from 27th to 29th Sept. and had to stay at Kaithal on 30.9.95 due to floods. 16.11.95 pursuant to his numberice dated 16.8.1995. These facts were put on record in a separate letter dated 6.10.95 from Kaithal to the Director seeking permission to join duty at PHC, Kharak Ramji. In the meantime, the 3 months period was over on 16.11.95. For the first time he received a letter dated 16.11.95 from the Civil Surgeon, Jind that the respondent should join after Rule 5.32 B At any time a Govt. The latter asked the respondent to see the Civil Surgeon, Jind. He sent a letter dated 7.9.95 to the Civil Surgeon, Jind from Kaithal informing him that due to floods he was unable to report at his head quarters and that he would be able to do so only after the floods receded and transport services were restored. The respondent joined at Jind on 16.8.95 and on the same date i.e. The respondent gave a letter on 4.10.95 duly forwarded by the SMO narrating the above facts and soliciting permission to join duty w.e.f. On 29.11.95 a telegram was sent by the appellant received by respondent on 30.11.95 requesting him to join at kharak Ramji at once. 4.10.95 seeking salary from Sept. 95. Which he was working as Medical Officer, Civil Hospital Kaithal, the respondent was transferred on 8.8.1995 as Medical Officer, Primary Health Centre Kharak Ramji, District Jind. The respondent sent a reply dated 2.12.95 to the Civil Surgeon, Jind stating that he stood retired w.e.f. Unfortunately, on 5.10.95, there were floods and the roads reaching to Jind were blocked. The Civil Surgeon addressed a letter to the Director on 4.10.95 seeking the letters approval for the respondent joining. The floods companytinued and there was to transport. The Smo said that the respondent companyld number join without permission of the Director and without explaining his absence to the Civil Surgeon. On 4.9.95, the respondent had to give evidence in the Kaithal Court. Thereafter, he had to give evidence in another Court on 6.9.95 and he companyld number go to Kharak Ramji to meet the SMO. He sent an advance companyy to the Commissioner Secretary and presented the application to his departmental head, Civil Surgeon, Jind. Long after the expiry of 3 months on 16.11.1995, a telegram was sent on 5.12.95 asking the respondent to join duty. The respondent sent a further letter to the Director on 6.10.95 giving the above facts and sought permission to join. He met the SMO and requested that his salary bill companyld be forwarded. The respondent sent a letter on 23.11.95 to the Commissioner Secretary, Health narrating the above facts and requested to treat him as retired w.e.f. He pointed out that he wrote in the movement register on 1.9.95 at 11 a.m. that he was going to meet the Senior Medical Officer SMO incharge of Primary Health Centre, Kharak Ramji, Dr.Khazan Singh and had placed a companyy of the station leave in the Movement Register, that he took the second companyy with himself to seek permission but at Jind, Dr. Dhazan Singh was number available because on that day, the Govt. 16.8.95 , he issued a numberice seeding voluntary retirement, and the letter was addressed to the Commissioner and Secretary, Health Department, Haryana, Chandigarh. On 30.9.1992 he approached the Tribunal companytending that he stood retired on expiry of 3 months from numberice, w.e.f. 16.11.1995.
as he was absent from duty and he did number perform his duties during the period of 3 months numberice. Ist Oct. was a Sunday, 2nd and 3rd Oct. were gazetted holidays. No letter was received from the Commissioner and Secretary to Govt. On receipt of a request, the appointing authority may companysider such request for the curtailment of the period of numberice of three months on merits and if it is satisfied that the curtailment of the period of numberice of three months. It was the case of the respondent that his retirement was automatic on expiry of 3 months and that in any event, there was numbertruth in the allegation that he did number perform his duties in those 3 months. After expiry of 3 months, on 25.2.1994, the companypetent authority declined to accept the numberice. The Civil Surgeon in his order stated that the respondent writ petitioner companyld number be deemed to have retired voluntarily w.e.f. II , he must be deemed to have retired on the expiry of three months of numberice issued after companypletion of 20 years qualifying service. employee has companypleted twenty years qualifying service, he may, by gining numberice of number less than three months in writing to the appointing authority retire from service. had declared 1st and 2nd Sept. 1995 as holidays on account of the assassination of the Chief Minister, Sri Beant Singh. According to the respondent, in view of the above facts, the allegation that he was number on duty after 16.8.95 was number companyrect. The respondent joined service on 4.6.75. In that case, when the employee gave numberice for voluntary retirement on 20.9./1993, criminal cases were pending against him. Then 23rd to 25th were Gazetted holidays 24th was Sunday . However, a Government employee may make a request in writing to the appointing authority to accept numberice of less than three months given reason therefor. Respondent attended the Criminal Court on 6, 12, 14, 18, 20, 27, 30.10.95, 9,14, 21, 23.11.95 for giving evidence as certified by the Court. By that Judgment, the High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent and quashed the order dated 13.12.95 of the Civil Surgeon. There was numberresponse from the companycerned authorities till 16.11.1995. On 26.12.1990 he filed a reply to the chargesheet. No reply was received. The respondent had claimed that by virtue of the proviso to sub clause 2 of Rule 5.32.B of the Punjab Civil Service Rules Vol. On 22.8.1992 another chargesheet was served for unauthorised absence and one more on 18.9.1992. 675 of 1996 dated 12.9.1997. JUDGEMENT Jagannadha Rao. The appellant, State of Haryana has filed this appeal against the Judgment of the High Court of Punjab Haryana in C.W.P. Earlier on 12.12.1989, a charge sheet was issued against him for certain acts of misconduct. The respondent obtained certificates from the Courts regarding his attendance at those Courts. of pb. The facts of the case are as follows. Leave granted. J. No. | 0 | train | 1999_263.txt |
Leave granted/ These appeals by special leave are against the order dated 29th August, 1997 passed by the Patna High Court in CWJC Nos. | 1 | train | 1997_1060.txt |
2 710 absentee voters were impersonated by persons who polled their votes in favour of the returned candidate. 3 158 government servants who were registered as voters in the Constituency but were number present in their respective villages and did number cast their votes, were impersonated and their votes were polled in favour of the returned candidate. It was stated that he would produce genuine voters who should be shown the companynterfoils of the ballot papers to test whether the companynterfoils carried their genuine signatures and for this purpose the petitioner asked for production of the companynterfoils. 4 149 persons, registered as voters at two or more different places in the companystituency, polled their votes twice or more than twice in favour of the returned candidate. 158 E of 1973 in Election Petn. Shri Surinder Singh, referred to hereinafter as the petitioner, filed an election petition challenging the election of the returned candidate on various allegations of which the following are material for the present purpose 1 28 votes were cast in favour of the returned candidate by some persons impersonating voters who were dead. In the election held on March 11, 1972 the appellant Shri Manphul Singh was elected to the Haryana Vidhan Sabha from the Jhajjar Constituency defeating his only rival, Shri Surinder Singh, the respondent before us, by a margin of 265 votes. Bakhtawar Singh Ch. In this appeal by special leave the appellant questions the propriety of an order made by the High Court of Punjab and, Haryana at Chandigarh in the companyrse of trial of an election petition allowing the petitioners experts to inspect the companynterfoils of the ballot papers of voters who had been found by the Court prima facie to have been impersonated. 739 NCE of 1974. 158 E/73, on which the order under appeal was passed on February 4, 1974. This application was pending when the petitioner started examining his witnesses and the prayer was renewed when one Ranbir Singh, P.W. 45 of 1972. In an application filed on December 1, 1972 the petitioner suggested a procedure to enable him to prove his case of impersonation and double voting. Manmohan Singh, D. N. Mishra and J. The application also included several other grievances which the Court found were of substance and the order disposing of the application was to that extent in favour of the petitioner. K. Garg, S. C. Agarwala and S. S. Bhatnagar, for the appellant. Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated the 4th February 1974 of the Punjab and Harvana High Court in Civil Misc. 17, was in the witness box. B. Dadachanji, for the respondents. The facts leading to the order under appeal are briefly as follows. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GUPTA, J. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. | 0 | train | 1974_349.txt |
Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that numberwithstanding that the return of Income had been filed on February 6, 1961, i.e., within the period permissible under Section 139 4 of the Income tax Act, 1961, the imposition of a penalty was justified as there was a delay for the purpose of Section 271 l a of the Income tax Act, 1961 ? 911 of 1977, two questions were referred under Section 256 1 of the Income tax Act, 1961, for the opinion of the High Court. Even though a period of two years elapsed, numberexplanation or representation was made by the assessee, whereupon the order of penalty was passed on December 23, 1968. Both the questions were answered by the High Court against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue. There are two appeals before us. In Civil Appeal No. | 0 | train | 1995_1128.txt |
It was held that the value of the goods when companypared with manufacturers price list was much below the numbermal price in the International market. Consequently, the Department obtained export price list from M s. Coates Electrographics Limited. Therefore, he proceeded to determine the value under rule 3 b and on the price list supplied by the manufacturer the valuation of the toner imported by the appellant was determined. After examining the price list of M s Coates Electrographics Ltd., the Collector was of the opinion that it was a case in which rule 3 a companyld number be applied. Since the seller was number a manufacturer the Department required the appellant to furnish the price list of the goods under import but the appellant instead of filing the price list stated that they had purchased the goods from a trading companypany which was number willing to reveal the source of supply. The appellant filed a Bill of Entry for clearance of 125 cartons of toners declaring the value of the goods at a particular amount on the basis of invoice cum value and companyntry of origin certificate issued by M s. Sangill Ltd. The goods were directed to be companyfiscated with an option to clear on Rs. 8 lakhs to Rs. 8 lakhs. 5 lakhs. 1995 3 SCR 69 The following Order of the Court was delivered The only question that arises for companysideration in this appeal is whether the Tribunal was justified in applying Rule 3 b of the Customs Valuation Rules framed under Section 14 of the Customs Act. Penalty of Rs. 1000 was also imposed. Against this order the appellant approached the Tribunal. | 0 | train | 1995_269.txt |
The grand father of the appellant Dhondapati Narayana Reddy who had undivided one third share in the said property executed a registered Will dated 20.8.1994 bequeathing his entire estate to the plaintiff appellant. After the death of his grand father, the plaintiff and his brothers became absolute owners of one third undivided share in the property and along with their fathers one third share they became owners of two third undivided share in the scheduled property. It is alleged that in his written statement defendant NO.1 did number dispute the existence of will dated 20.8.1994. It was submitted that the said plaintiff and defendant No.1 jointly purchased the undivided one half of the plaint schedule property under registered sale deed dated 12.12.1978 for a companysideration of Rs.40,000/ . During the pendency of the suit, the plaintiff filed IA No.1283 of 2000 seeking permission for adducing additional evidence to prove testamentary succession by producing the registered Will dated 20.8.1994 executed by Donapati Tirumala Ramareddy. The said will is number true and genuine and valid under law and the said Tirumala Rami Reddy has numberright to bequeath the alleged 1/3rd share in the plaint schedule property. Dondapati Narayana Reddy, one of the appellants in the above appeals filed Suit No.214 of 1997 against his brothers and father claiming partition of the plaint schedule property by metes and bounds and separate possession of 2/3rd share of the property. As a retaliatory measure the defendant No.1 filed an application being IA No.1288 of 2000 seeking amendment of the written statement for inclusion of the following para PROPOSED AMENDMENT Add para 5 a of the written statement It is submitted that the alleged will dated 20.8.1984 alleged to have been executed by the father of the 1st plaintiff Trimuala Rami Reddy in favour of his grand sons i.e., plaintiffs 2 to 4 is companycocted, fabricated and impersonated document. It was further alleged that they also purchased the remaining one half vide another sale deed dated 10.4.1979 for a further sum of Rs.40,000/ . Aggrieved by the said order, defendant No.1 filed CRP No.4721 of 2000 in the High Court which was allowed vide the order impugned in the appeal. Aggrieved by the order of the trial companyrt, the defendant appellant filed CRP No.4692 of 2000 in the High Court which was dismissed vide the order impugned in the appeal. Delay companydoned in SLP C No of 2001 arising out of CC No.5441/2001 . The application was allowed by the learned Additional District Judge by imposing the companyt of Rs.200/ vide his order dated 16.10.2000. On the basis of pleadings of the parties, the companyrt framed an issue to the effect, as to whether the plaintiff was entitled for partition and separate possession. Both the revisions have been disposed of by the High Court vide a companymon order dated 13.3.2001. SETHI,J. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2001_458.txt |
The Doctor who was attending Renukaben requested ASI Hargovanbhai to record her statement. Sessions Judge, Mehsana framed charges against all the accused on 29.12.2004 for the offences punishable under Sections 498A, 306, 201 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code. In the meantime, Mehsana Taluka Police Station was informed and ASI PW4 reached at the Emergency of the Hospital where Renukaben was admitted and her treatment was going on. The facts leading to the prosecution story pertains to the village Panchot of Mehsana District, Gujarat, where on 16.12.1997 suicide was companymitted by one lady Renukaben Maheshbhai Patel, who was married to appellant number1 for two years before the incident. The fourth accused was sister in law. Thereafter, charge sheet came to be submitted against all the four accused in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mehsana, who companymitted the case to the Court of Sessions at Mehsana. Thereafter, in the evening, on the advice of the Doctor, Renukaben was shifted to Civil Hospital of Ahmedabad for further treatment, where she died during treatment at about 19.10 hours. The trial companyrt had acquitted all the accused except accused number1 husband , who was companyvicted for offence under Section 498A, IPC and sentenced him for three days simple imprisonment, which was already undergone by him. All accused were acquitted, except the main accused husband , who was companyvicted under section 498A, IPC to the period already undergone since he remained in jail for three days. On account of this and companypelling circumstances, on 16.12.1997, at about 13.30 hours, Renukaben, at her in laws house, poured kerosene of the quantity of five litres upon her and ignited herself and companysequently she started burning in flames. 1.1.2005 Prosecution produced list of 12 witnesses 7.1.2005 The prosecution produced 5 witnesses, who were examined, and remaining dropped. On the same day, accused were examined under Section 313, Cr. The High Court also enhanced the sentence awarded to Appellant accused No.1 Husband of the deceased for the offence punishable under Section 498A of Indian Penal Code. The said police official, therefore, through his writer recorded the statement of victim Renukaben in a manner that he asked questions, which she answered and he got it numbered through his writer. On 1.1.2005, the prosecution submitted a list of about 12 witnesses to be examined on behalf of the prosecution and Sessions Judge issued witness summons. On 7.1.2005, in all, five witnesses came to be examined by the Sessions Court and the rest of the witnesses came to be dropped by the prosecution. Thereafter, she was taken to General Hospital of Mehsana in ambulance and was treated by Dr. A.K. She stated that her husband had returned to village Panchot from Africa about three days before the incident. In the appeal arising out of said judgment at the instance of the State, the High Court in the impugned judgment dated 16.6.2008 has also taken numbere of this fact and finally reversed trial companyrts findings of acquittal against all the accused and companyvicted the present appellants accused of the charges under Section 306 read with Section 114 of Indian Penal Code, as also companyvicted appellant accused number2 father in law of the deceased and appellant accused No.3 mother in law of the deceased for the offence punishable under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code. According to aforesaid police official PW4 , Renukaben was in a fit mental companydition to give answers and in token of it, Doctor in charge put his signature on the statement and thereafter thumb impression of her leg was obtained since fingers of both of her hands were distorted by burning. Hence present appeals by special leave by the accused persons, viz.,
husband, father in law and mother in law of the deceased. Dissatisfied and aggrieved by the decision of the trial companyrt, the State preferred Criminal Appeal No.1346 of 2005 against all the four accused, which was admitted and the High Court issued suo motu numberice for revising the sentence awarded to accused number1 husband and the same was registered as Criminal Revision Application No.642 of 2007. This is an exceptional case where this Court has taken serious numbere, the way the Sessions Judge disposed of the Sessions case within a period of nine days, which can be briefly narrated herein below 29.12.2004 Charges were framed and the case was adjourned to 1.1.2005. P.C., arguments heard and judgment was delivered acquitting all the accused. In the statement, she narrated the story that she was harassed by the appellants on account of suspicion on her character and due to mental as well as physical cruelty, she companymitted suicide. After thoroughly appreciating entire evidence on record with reference to appeal against acquittal, enhancement for revision application and also with reference to the application filed by the accused for adducing additional evidence, the High Court took into companysideration the broad and reasonable probabilities of the case arising out of the re appreciation of the evidence on record and other vital circumstances surrounding the essence of the trial. Her husband 1st appellant immediately tried to save the deceased and it has companye to the evidence that while making such an attempt, the 1st appellant also suffered injuries. The deceased had stated in her dying declaration that her marriage was solemnized two years before the incident i.e. Y. EQBAL, J. Kapadia and he found burns on all over her body, deep in nature. Upon this, a crime came to be registered against four persons including appellants herein. in the year 1995 and out of that wedlock she had a female child. 15,000/ . The appellants have been directed by the High Court to undergo rigorous imprisonment of seven years with total fine of Rs. | 0 | train | 2014_791.txt |
81 to 103 of 1970. Vineet Kumar, for respondents in 81, 83 and 89 and respondent 1 in 85/70. 1124, 1480, 154 of 1966, 81, 82, 472, 473, 896, 1113, 1567 to 1574, 1578, of 1967, and 489 to 493 of 1968. C.Bhandare, M. N. Shroff and S. P. Nayar, for respondent 2 in 85/70. K. Ramamurthy, C. R. Somasekharan and Vineet Kumar, for respondents in 90, 93 101 103 of 1970. N. Shroff, for the appellants. From the Judgment and Order dated the 16/19/20th November, 1968 of the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Application Nos. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos. The orders which were passed gave reasons. The orders were number served. | 1 | train | 1975_101.txt |
PW 5 Preeti Srivastava, sister of the deceased, has stated that the deceased was married to appellant Devendra Nath Srivastava. PW 6 Shailender Kumar Srivastava has stated that he is the nephew of the deceased and the accused, but he does number know how his aunt Madhu Srivastava died. The appellants wife Madhu Srivastava was taken by PW 6 Shailender Kumar Srivastava to District Hospital after arranging an ambulance. The medical evidence, discussed above, clearly establishes that Madhu Srivastava wife of the appellant Devendra Nath Srivastava has died homicidal death. On this, prosecution got examined PW 1 Vijay Kumar Chaurasia, PW 2 Rampher Jaiswal, PW 3 Sadhna Srivastava, PW 4 Virender Singh, PW 5 Preeti Srivastava, PW 6 Shailender Kumar Srivastava informant , PW 7 Dr. Rajkumar and PW 8 Incharge Inspector Rajender Prasad Singh Investigating Officer . 10,000/ , in default to under further six months rigorous imprisonment Prosecution story, in brief, is that appellant Devendra Nath Srivastava got married to Madhu Srivastava deceased on 04.03.1994. PW 5 Preeti Srivastava has further stated that there had been litigation between the deceased and the appellant, but it terminated with companypromise entered between the parties in 2003 Ex. Convict Devendra Nath Srivastava and victims sister Preeti Srivastava moved this Court through separate Special Leave Petitions challenging the order passed by the High Court. It has been opined by the said Medical Officer that Madhu Srivastava deceased died of strangulation with the above mentioned ante mortem injuries. 88 90 of 2008 have arisen out of the Special Leave Petitions filed by Preeti Srivastava, sister of the deceased. The trial companyrt in its wisdom got summoned companyrt witness Adesh Kumar Srivastava CW 1 , the eldest son of the deceased who was minor. PW 2 Rampher Jaiswal in his examination in chief, denies his presence at the time of the incident, but in cross examination this witness has proved that the brick, allegedly used in the crime, was recovered on pointing out of the accused Devendra Nath Srivastava. He further stated that he took Madhu Srivastava in injured companydition to the hospital at about 8.50 p.m. where she was declared brought dead. On 12.05.2005 at about 7.30 p.m., companyplainant Shailender Kumar Srivastava, who is nephew of the appellant, heard cries of the appellants children and rushed to the house of his uncle appellant , where he saw the appellant assaulting his wife with brick. Though the defence witnesses DW 1 Shyam Rang and DW 2 Chandermukhi have attempted to say that Devendra Nath Srivastava appellant had gone to village on the day of the incident to give medicines to his mother, but there is numberhing to companyroborate on the record if any medicine is purchased from any chemist by the appellant. Red companytusion 5 cm x 3 cm across the trachea on the front of neck. Red companytusion with abrasion 3 cm x 2 cm on top of left shoulder joint. Red companytusion with abrasion in the area of 13 cm x 5 cm along right companylar bone. 2 of 2007 along with criminal appeals filed by appellant Devendra Nath Srivastava arising out of judgment and order dated 18.01.2007 passed by Additional Sessions Judge Special Judge E.C. He has further stated that the accused and the deceased had strained relations. PW 8 Inspector Rajendra Prasad Singh, the Investigating Officer, has stated that during interrogation he recovered brick Ex. He has further stated that the blood stained pantaloons and the shirt of the accused were taken into possession, and memo Ex. Incised wound 6 cm x 1 cm x muscle deep on left side of neck 7 cm below the left ear. On 13.05.2005 PW 7 Dr. Rajkumar companyducted autopsy, and opined that the deceased had died of asphyxia on account of ante mortem injuries. Statement of CW 1 Adesh Kumar Srivastava, eight years old eldest son of the appellant and the deceased, does number support prosecution but it can be easily gathered that after he lost his mother, he does number want to lose his father. It further discloses that human blood was also found in the piece of cement floor and the clothes of the deceased. A 27 shows that in the blood stained clothes of the accused companytained human blood. She further stated that the appellant used to torture the deceased after taking alcohol. A 13 was prepared, and sent for chemical analysis along with other blood stained articles including the blood stained piece of floor companylected from the spot as also the clothes of the deceased Ex. I on pointing out of the accused. The Investigating Officer, after interrogating the companyplainant, went to the spot and got sealed the dead body of the deceased and prepared the inquest Report Ex. The blood stained shirt and pants of the appellant were also taken into possession by the police in respect of which memo Ex. Thereafter, on behalf of the defence DW 1 Shyam Rang and DW 2 Chandermukhi were got examined. She has proved the letters Exs. After companypletion of investigation, a charge sheet was submitted by Investigating Officer Rajender Prasad Singh PW 8 against the appellant for his trial. In all, nine ante mortem injuries were recorded in the post mortem examination report Ex. PW 7 Dr. Raj Kumar has stated that on internal examination both upper and lower jaws bones found broken and some portions of upper and lower teeth were also found broken. A 9 was got lodged by PW 6 at Police Station Kotwali City Gonda on the very day at about 21.45 hours. On seeing PW 6 and others companying from the neighbourhood, the appellant ran away. In all these letters, it is specifically mentioned by the deceased that the appellant was a drunkard and used to beat her after getting drunk. She further told that there were four children born out of the wedlock between the deceased and the appellant. Meanwhile, the appellant was arrested, and on his pointing out recovery of the brick used in the crime was made. A First Information Report Ex. There is numberversion put forward by the appellant as to how his wife died homicidal death in his house. A 26 to the police, soon after the incident on 12.05.2005. A 2, A 3, A 4 and A 5 written by the deceased to her father companyplaining about the ill treatment meted out to her by the appellant. At one stage he says his mother fell on a brick, and then discloses that she had fallen from the staircase. It is established on the record that the appellant was a drunkard. Forensic Science Laboratory report dated 14.10.2005 Ex. The First Information Report was lodged by numbere other than the appellants own nephew, immediately after the incident. , in response to which he pleaded that at the time of incident he had gone to his native village to give medicines to his mother. The prosecution evidence was put to the accused under Section 313 of Criminal Procedure Code Cr. She further stated that the appellant was Field Inspector with Khadi Gramodyog Board. The parties were heard also on sentence and the trial companyrt awarded death sentence to the companyvict, and submitted the record to the High Court vide judgment and order dated 18.01.2007, for affirmation of the sentence. Thereafter, this additional evidence was also put to the accused under Section 313 Cr. 2, 3, and 4 . He further found hyoid bone fractured and both lungs blocked. He proved his signatures in the recovery memo. After hearing the parties, the trial companyrt found that the charge in respect of offence punishable under Section 302 is proved against the accused, and companyvicted him accordingly. He further got submitted another appeal Criminal Appeal No. 87 of 2008 has arisen out of the Special Leave Petition filed by the companyvict, and Criminal Appeal Nos. At the end, he states that at the time of the incident he was playing at the boundary of the house. In the cross examination he admits that he gave written report Ext. 237 of 2007 from jail. Aggrieved by the judgment and order of the trial companyrt the companyvict preferred appeal Criminal Appeal No. Criminal Appeal No. It is also number clear as to what was the ailment of his mother, and since when she was unwell. On re appreciation of entire evidence and having companysidered the submissions of learned companynsel for the parties, we agree with the view taken by the High Court that it is clearly established from the evidence on record that the appellant caused homicidal death of his wife, after quarrel between the two. 201 of 2007 to the High Court. She further disclosed that she used to live at a distance of some 1 1.5 kilometers away from the house of the appellant and his family. Prafulla C. Pant, J. Act Gonda, relating to companyviction of the appellant under Section 302 of Indian Penal Code for short IPC in Sessions Trial No. In our opinion, the trial companyrt and the High Court have rightly disbelieved these two witnesses. These observations are also made in the autopsy report. These appeals are directed against judgment and order dated 24.08.2007, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench, in Criminal Appeal No. It appears that the case was companymitted to the companyrt of Sessions for trial. 201 of 2007 whereby said Court has disposed of Capital Reference No. Crime No. The companyple had four children. Both these appeals were clubbed together with the Reference made by the Court of Sessions, and disposed of together by the High Court vide companymon judgment and order dated 24.08.2007, impugned before us. A 13 was prepared. However, the doctors declared her brought dead. 258 of 2005. His statement was recorded on 16.11.2006. 169 of 2005 was registered based on the said F.I.R. P.C. A 10 . | 0 | train | 2017_160.txt |
it was he who had intentionally rented out such lockers to the plaintiffs which had been tampered with by him. it has one such safe deposit vault at its branch in jullundur. the respondents herein hired lockers on rental basis from the bank at jullundur through its manager under different agreements on different dates during the year 1950.
in april 1951 the said lockers were tampered with and the valuables of the respondents kept therein were removed by the manager of the jullundur branch of the bank. the lockers had been rented out to the plaintiffs by the manager baldev chand who was entrusted with the duty of doing so. though its main business is banking it carries on the incidental business of hiring out lockers out of cabinets in safe deposit vaults to companystituents for safe custody of their jewels and other valuables. the respondents filed 3 suits in the companyrt of the subordinate judge jullundur against the bank for the recovery of different sums on account of the loss of the valuable companytents of the lockers hired by them. in due course the said manager was prosecuted before the additional district magistrate jullundur and was companyvicted under ss. in c.a. mehta for the respondents in c.a. number 930 of 1963 .
kanwar rajendra singh and vidya sagar nayyar for the respondent in c.a. the national bank of lahore limited hereinafter called the bank is a banking companycern registered under the indian companies act and having its registered office in delhi and branches at different places in india. 136 137 and 138 of 1959.
hans raj sawhney and b.c. mehta and k.l. the bank denied its liability on various grounds and also companytended that the suits were barred by iimitation. number 229 of 1963 .
d. mahajan for the respondent. 380 and 409 of the indian penal companye. number 931 of 1963 .
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by subba rao j. these appeals by special leave raise a question of limitation. 930 and 931 of 1963.
appeals by special leave from the judgment and decree dated october 11 1961 of the punjab high companyrt in regular first appeals number. misra for the appellant in all the appeals . civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeals number. | 0 | test | 1965_189.txt |
In the meanwhile, an Ordinance was issued by the Bihar Government so as to acquire the sugar mills of the petitioners. Pet C No.298/97 and T.C. C No.26/85, W.P. C No.1487/86, W.P. Writ petitions were filed in the Calcutta High Court challenging the numberification dated 29.9.1984 proposing to withdraw the acquisition. Thereafter a numberification was issued by the State Government on 29.9.1984 purporting to withdraw the numberification dated 29.10.1978 to the extent it related to the three sugar mills of the petitioners stating that this numberification was issued pursuant to the order of the Division Bench of the High Court dated 18.9.1984. C No.1600/86, T.C. Several writ petitions were filed in the Calcutta High Court challenging the numberification issued under Section 17 of the Act which included the petitioners sugar mills thereunder. The Act was to provide for acquisition and transfer of certain sugar undertakings in the State of Bihar and for matters companynected therewith or incidental thereto. The petitioners, on 21.9.1984, requested the respondents to take over possession of the three sugar mills. Workers of the petitioners also filed writ petition in the Patna High Court challenging the numberification dated 29.9.1984. C No.83/86, Cont. C No.1260/86, SLPC No. 7887/94, W.P. 12598/85, 1600/86, 1487/86 1260/86 The Bihar Sugar undertakings Acquisition Act, 1976 Bihar Act XIII of 1977 hereinafter referred to as the Act was passed by the State Legislature and received the assent of the President on June 4, 1977 and was published in the Gazette on June 30, 1977. On 5.7.1983, the distillery at Hathua was sold by the petitioners to United Distilleries P Ltd. Under Section 2 h of the Act schedule undertaking is defined to mean an undertaking engaged in the manufacture or production of sugar by means of vacuum pans and with the aid of mechanical power in a factory specified in the schedule and companyprises of several items as set out therein. Writ petition was filed before this Court challenging the Ordinance. Under Section 3 of the Act, the undertakings listed in the Schedule stood transferred to and vested in the Government of Bihar or a Corporation with all the assets, liabilities, rights, titles, interest and obligation including any mortgage, charge of other encumbrance or lien trust of similar obligations attaching to the undertaking. On 12.7.1979, the writ petitions were heard together and were allowed and the Act as well as the numberification under Section 17 of the Act were declared ultra vires and the take overs were quashed. C No.66/99 RAJENDRA BABU, J. P.C Nos. In the pending appeals, the Petitioners sought leave to withdraw their writ petition R.No.784 of 1978 and the Division Bench dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn and set aside the judgment under appeal so far as the petitioners therein were companycerned. Subsequently this Court transferred the writ petitions from the Calcutta and the Patna High Courts to this Court by an order made on 11.2.1985. Interim stay was granted restraining possession being taken over on 31.10.1978. J U D G M E N T With W.P. On 28.10.1979, the State Government preferred appeals to the Division Bench of the High Court. The High Court granted stay of the operation. | 0 | train | 2003_130.txt |
Thereafter a Notification under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 18.6.2003. The said Notification under Section 6 was challenged and the writ petition filed by the appellants was allowed on 20.1.2004 and the Notification under Section 6 of the Act dated 18.06.2003 was quashed. Subsequently a second Notification under Section 6 dated 30.10.2006 was issued by the State Government. Heard Shri Harish Salve and Shri Shyam Divan, learned senior companynsel for the appellants and learned Attorney General of India and Shri Shekhar Naphade, learned learned senior companynsel for the respondents. The facts in brief are that a Notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 hereinafter for short the Act was issued in respect of the land in question on 29.8.2002. This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 21.01.2008 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Bombay whereby the writ petition filed by the appellants herein has been rejected. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2009_1084.txt |
Sri Pamanji Chenna Reddy, Sri Pralayakaveri Gnanaiah, Sri Voila Babu and Sri Pamanji Babu each described as detenu hereinafter Respondent claiming to be a friend of the detenu challenged the validity of the order stating it to be illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Article 22 of the Constitution of India, 1950 in short the Constitution . Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986 in short the Act in respect of Shri Pralayakaveri Bhaskar. The main ground of challenge was that the grounds of detention referred to certain acts which are punishable under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short IPC , as well as the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 in short Explosive Act and, therefore, shows number application of mind. The crucial issue, therefore, is whether the activities of the detenu were prejudicial to public order. It was the stand of the writ petitioner who had filed the Habeas Corpus Petition that the instances referred to do number affect the public order at all and in any event since some of the grounds related to offences punishable under the Explosive Act, the detention under the Act was impermissible. In all these instances deadly weapons were used causing injuries to various persons. Challenge in these appeals is to the order passed in each case by a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in writ petitions filed for quashing the order of detention passed by the Collector and District Magistrate, Nellore, under Sections 3 1 , 3 2 read with Section 2 a and g of A.P. | 1 | train | 2008_2041.txt |
with by the promotion Committee. 1815 of 1970. 1815 of 1970 . 28B and 32, the Circular dated August 27, 1966 and the Orders dated January 4, 1967 and January 22, 1970. 28B and 32 as well as the Circular of 1966 and the Order dated January 4, 1967 is the same as in the Civil Appeal. 28B and 32 and the Circular of 1966 and the promotions made under the order dated January 4, 1967, the writ petitioner challenges also the order dated January 22, 1970 companyfirming the promotions of respondents 2 to 16 in the Senior Scale. 28B and 32 as violative of Arts. Regarding the promotions made under the Order dated January 14, 1967, the Division Bench upheld the same as it had already held that rules 28B and 32 as well as the Circular of 1966 were all valid. On the other hand, they have impliedly accepted that the circular was before the Committee at the time of companysidering the promotions. On all these grounds the appellant attacked rules 28B and 32, the Circular dated August 27, 1966 and the Order dated January 4, 1967. The circular dated August 27, 1966 was struck down and the promotions of respondents made under the order dated January 4, 1967 were also struck down. 28B and 32 and the Circular dated August 27, 1966 on the same grounds as those mentioned in Civil Appeal No. 1815 of 1970 is against the decision of the Division Bench, reiterating the objections regarding the validity of the rules, the Circular, as well as the promotions made. Promotions were made by the Government on the basis of the recommendation of the said Committee. The State has further companytended that as the rules are valid and the circular is also valid, the officiating promotions given under the Order dated January 4, 1967 are also valid. 3 to 17 by the Order dated January 4, 1967 as well as to the Order dated January 22, 1970, companyfirming their promotions. 2 to 4 were made on January 4, 1967 on the basis of illegal rules and invalid circular. Regarding the promotions made under order dated January 4, 1967, the learned Judge held that the directions companytained in the Circular must have been taken into account by the Selection Committee and hence the promotions were number valid. 1815 of 1970 under the first order dated January 4, 1967 and their companyfirmation, by the second order dated January 22, 1970. According to the petitioner as the officiating promotions given to those respondents under the Order dated January 4, 1967 were invalid. The petitioner then refers to the officiating promotions to the Senior Scale given to the respondents Nos. Rules 28B and 32 were challenged as violative of Arts. Nevertheless, they kept quite and allowed the officiating promotions of all the officers to stand from 1967 and even kept quiet till the government companyfirmed the promotion of those officers on January 22, 1970. 76 and 139 of 1970. Hence the promotions given and companyfirmations made of the other officers under orders dated January 4, 1967 and January 22, 1970 respectively should be allowed to stand. 2 to 16 were all his juniors and on the basis of the illegal rules and the directions given in the Circular, officiating promotions have been given to those respondents to the Senior Scale under the Order dated January 4, 1967. The Order dated January 4, 1967 was attacked on the ground that the promotions had been made on the basis of illegal rules as well as the directions companytained in the invalid Circular dated August 27, 1966. The appellant also challenged the validity and legality of the Circular dated Angus 27, 1966 as well as the order dated January 4, 1967 giving promotions to the respondents Nos. 139 of 1970 a further Order of the State Government No. It is admitted by the State that the Promotion Committee had met in the end of September, 1966 and made recommendations regarding the officers who are to be promoted. Regarding the validity of the Circular the State companytended that the Circular dated August 27, 1966 was issued by the Chief Secretary in his administrative capacity being the Head of the Service in the State. The Circular has done numberhing except to lay down broad guidelines for the excercise of discretion by the Promotion Committee. The State disputes the allegation of mala fides and has also pointed out that the Departmental Promotion Committee companysidered the claims of all the respondents including that of the petitioner for promotion. According to the appellant by the Orders dated December 7, 1966 and January 4, 1967 promotions had been made quite companytrary to rr. According to the appellant adverse remarks were companymunicated to him only on May 11, 1967, long after the decision of the Promotion Committee. On August 27, 1966 the impugned circular was issued by the Chief Secretary to the State Government. A IV /66 dated January 4, 1967. 28B and 32 were number violative of either Arts. Hence the Committee has illegally taken into companysideration the adverse remarks made against him and has denied him promotion on that account. He has further companytended that the Promotion Committee which met in September, 1966 has taken into account the adverse remarks made against him which were number justified and which were number companymunicated to him. A IV /66 dated January 22, 1970 and in Writ Petition No. Regarding the Circular dated August 27, 1966, the State companytended that the marking system laid down in the Circular for assessment of merit of an officer was calculated to ensure objectivity of approach on the part of the Selection Committee. 139 of 1970, the petitioner challenges the validity of the IT. After the new r. 32 was incorporated on September 8, 1966 the Government took steps to fill up the 44 vacancies in the Senior Scale of Service and for this purpose a Departmental Promotion Committee was companystituted and the Committee met in the end of September, 1966 for companysidering the claims of the officers for purposes of promotion. The petitioner further states that after the judgment of the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court, which is under attack in the Civil Appeal, the State Government passed an order on January 22, 1970 companyfirming the promotions of respondents Nos. On this reasoning the learned Judges held that the Circular of 1966 was valid and it was in numberway repugnant to the rules. Depending on the fresh recommendations, any, made by the Departmental Promotion Committee, the first respondent, will also make any modifications that may be found necessary in the orders dated January 4, 1967 and January 21, 1970. It is the view of the Division Bench that the Circular of 1966 was very elastic and gave wide discretion to the Committees to assess the merit of an officer. 1815 of 1970 arises out of the Division Bench Judgment of the Rajasthan High Court dated January 20, 1970 in D. B. Regarding the allegation made by the appellant that the adverse remarks which had number been companymunicated to him had been taken into account by the Promotion Committee in September, 1966, the learned Judges held that as the Departmental Promotion Committee had number been impleaded as a party, the question whether the adverse remarks made against the appellant had been taken into account by the said Committee cannot be gone into in these proceedings. 1815 of 1970 are companycerned, we are giving separate directions, regarding the reconsideration of their promotion and companyfirmation, along with the appellant in the appeal. It is the grievance of the appellant that under the Order dated January 4, 1967 a large number of officers who had qualified for promotion on the basis of merit under the merit formula were superseded by the officers junior to them. Thus both the writ petitioners will be only entitled to have a declaration that the circular dated August 27, 1966 is invalid and that it is struck down. Another set of officers, who had been selected earlier, were appointed by promotion to the senior scale post by the order dated February 21, 1970. It is also admitted by the State Government that the companyfidential rolls of all the officers were before the Selection Committees They have number denied that the circular was number taking into account by the Committee. 2 to 4 in the civil appeal have been companyfirmed on January 22, 1970 after the decision of the High Court in favour of the State and those officers is of numberconsequence, so far as the appellant is companycerned, if their original officiating promotion on January 4, 1967 requires reconsideration by the Government. 76 of 1970 Baldev Mehta, for respondent Nos. We are entitled to take this circumstance into account for denying the larger reliefs claimed by the writ petitioners when they attack the orders dated January 4, 1970 and January 22, 1970. 2 to 4 are found eligible for promotion and the appellant is number found eligible, the rank given to those respondents will remain the same as is number due to them as per the orders dated January 4, 1967 and January 21, 1970. In companysequence the State points out that the order of companyfirmation dated January 22, 1970 is also valid. The appellant in the civil appeal is number challenging the officiating promotions or companyfirmation made of the officers other than respondents Nos. The State Government, as pointed out earlier, was justified in passing the order dated January 22, 1970 except regarding respondents Nos. On this reasoning, the learned Judge, by his judgment and order dated November 7, 1968 held that sub rule 1 of r. 28B and r. 32 were valid and that sub rule 2 of r. 28B was violative of Art. 76 and 139 of 1970 have been filed in this Court. The petitioner further challenges the order dated February 21, 1970 passed by the State Government promoting and companyfirming in the Senior Scale the respondents Nos. This new rule was also incorporated to give effect to the Governments decision taken in 1965 to introduce the system of recruitment to the service by promotion on the basis of merit, as a result of which r. 28B was earlier incorporated. The Division Bench agreed with the views of the learned Single Judge regarding the validity of sub rule 1 of r. 28B and r. 32. 2 to 4 as the appellant is number challenging the promotions given to other officers under the said two orders. The petitioner further says that several officers were selected on probationary basis and given promotions, but only respondents 91 2 Nos. After referring to the rules as well as the amendments made from time to time and the Circular of 1966, the petitioner levels the same attack as against them similar to those in the civil appeal. nevertheless certain adverse remarks companytained in the companyfidential rolls which were number companymunicated to him, had been taken into account by the Departmental Promotion Committee, which met in the last week of September, 1966 and hence there has been numberproper companysideration of his claims for being promoted to the Senior post. If the appellant is found eligible for being companysidered for promotion under the Rules, his claim also will have to be companysidered along with that of the respondents Nos. only after the judgment dated January 20, 1970 of the High Court in D. B. On the basis of the recommendations made by the said Committee, the Government by the Order dated December 7, 1966 promoted 29 officers to the Senior Scale on the basis of seniority cum merit. In the civil appeal Guman Singh, the appellant has raised a companytention that promotions of respondents Nos. D/50 dated August 27, 1966 issued by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Rajasthan as well as the Order of the Government of Rajasthan No. The Division Bench by its order and judgment dated January 20, 1970 allowed the two appeals Nos. By the Order dated January, 1966, the State Government created 26 new posts in the Senior Scale of Service and 14 posts in the Selection Grade with effect from the date of the order. Again by the order dated January 4, 1967, which is another order under attack in these proceedings, 15 officers including the respondents Nos. 2 to 4 in the appeal, on the basis of the Division Bench judgment of the High Court which had upheld the validity of the rules and the circular. Differing from the learned Single Judge, the Division Bench held that numberpart of r. 28B 2 was invalid. Regarding the Circular dated August 27, 1966, the learned Judges held that the marking system indicated therein was really based upon the previous Circular dated August 31, 1960 under which merit was to be evaluated by allotting marks on the previous record of an officer. Therefore, according to the appellant, his claims for promotion have number been properly dealt. 76 of 1970 is filed by Motilal Kakkar, Apart from challenging rr. According to the appellant, the Circular dated August 27, 1966 was issued without any authority and in any event the Government by execution instructions had numberpower to fetter the powers of the Selection Committees which were functioning under the statutory rules. F. 27 24 A A 4 /66 dated February 21, 1970 are also challenged. The Division Bench held that the view of learned Single Judge that r. 28B 2 was bad was erroneous. The petitioners must have been aware that the appellant was challenging only the promotions of four officers in his writ petition 59 1 S.C.R. Their companyfirmation will stand or fall depending on the final decision of this Court regarding the order dated January 4, 1967. 2 to 16 in the Senior Scale. The same reasoning will apply to the order of February 21, 1970 also. 2 to 5 were promoted to the Senior Scale of Service on the basis of merit alone. As there were as many as 35 sets of service rules governing various services, the Circular was issued to bring about uniformity in the procedure for assessment of merit and for making selections on the basis of seniority cum merit. The learned Judges of the Division Bench have brushed aside the grievance of the appellant regarding This matter by observing that as the Departmental Promotion Committee is number a, party to the proceedings, the question whether the Committee took into account the adverse remarks said to have been made against the appellant, cannot be gone into in these proceedings. The system of marking indicated in the Circular was quite good as it brought about uniformity in the procedure for assessment of merit. The appellant had made a specific grievance in his writ petition about the uncommunicated adverse remarks having been taken into account by the Committee. 139 of 1970, who alone is challenging this order, will number be entitled to have that order reopened. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated January 20, 1970 of the Rajasthan High Court in D. B. Even the principles laid down in the Circular regarding the award of marks for assessing the merit were arbitrary and vague. Regarding the authority for the Circular, the learned Judges numbered that there has been some companyfusion in the stand taken by the State from time to time even when they made applications for amending their companynter affidavit for making it clear that the Circular has been issued number by the Chief Secretary in his individual capacity but by the State Government. Ultimately the petitioner was appointed to the Rajasthan Administrative Service with effect from January 6, 1950. For this purpose the original r. 32 was substituted by a new rule providing for appointments to senior scale and selection grade posts on the basis of merit and seniority cum merit in the ratio of 1 2 on the recommendation of the Committee companystituted under the said rule. On September 8, 1966 the State decided to extend the principles of making selections on the basis of merit alone to appointments to senior posts also. According to the petitioner respondent Nos. The appellant herein filed cross objections, in the appeal filed by the State challenging the decision of the learned Single Judge upholding the validity of sub rule 1 or r. 28B and r. 32. Ultimately, the Division Bench held that they had examined the cabinet file produced before them along with the numbere sheets and that the Court was satisfied that the Circular of 1966, has been issued with the approval of the State Government. His companytention is that after the adverse remarks were companymunicated to him, long, afterwards he made representations and the adverse remarks were directed to be expunged. The said Circular of 1960 had been in operation in respect of the said services except the Rajasthan Judicial Service or the Rajasthan Higher Judicial Service, which were under the companytrol of the High Court. The nature of the various Orders as well as the Rules and the Circular that are challenged will be referred to later at the appropriate stage. 76 of 1970 to the effect that the adverse entries in the companyfidential rolls of Shri Guman Singh, the appellant, were expunged on his representations. The nature of the adverse remarks has been referred to by the Division Bench. It is also seen that the order dated February 21, 1970 was passed by the State Government, after the order of stay was vacated by the High Court. Writ Petitions Nos. Though it was admitted that the third respondent was the son in law of the Chief Minister of the State, it was denied that any favoritism was shown by the State either to that respondent or to the other respondents in the matter giving promotions to them. It is the case of the appellant that prior to the numberification dated September 8, 1966 though many posts in the senior scale of service had fallen vacant even during the years 1963 64 and 1964 65, those posts were number filled up by making promotion on the basis of the principle of seniority cum merit which was in force at the relevant time. 57 of 1968 and the respondents Nos. 2 to 4. 79 of 1967 in the High Court challenging the vires of rr. After referring to the rules as originally framed and the amendments made from time to time, the petitioner attacks the validity of rr. 55 and 57 of 1968 and Writ Petitions Nos. Therefore, the petitioner in writ petition No. 2 to 5 to the senior Posts, In the writ petition the appellant had alleged that the various amend ments made to the rules from time to time and the delay in making promotions to Senior Posts were all with a view to show favourtism to the third respondent who was the son in law of the Chief Minister of Rajasthan and to the other respondents who are all near relations of persons who were the favourites of the Chief Minister of the State. The respondents Nos. On the other hand, the Division Bench held that restricting the eligibility of officers who have put in at least six years of service was quite reasonable and the further provision in r. 28B 2 regarding the field of selection being companyfined to senior most officers in the Junior Scale number exceeding 10 times the total number of Vacancies was also reasonable. So far as the writ petitioners are companycerned, the State must be companysidered to be justified in passing the order dated January 22,,1970, on which date the High Courts judgment was in its favour. The officers companyered by those orders are respondents Nos. The stand taken by the State in respect of rr. The petitioner joined the Rajasthan Administrative Service on October 1, 1960 after having passed the companypetitive examination held by the State Public Service Commission. His rank has been given as Nos. 2 to 16, the petitioner claims that he was the senior most amongst them and that his seniority has been so stated in the relevant seniority list. 57 of 1968. The modi fications, if any, will be companyfirmed only to the appellant and the respondents Nos. 1815/1970 and the petitioners in both the petitions. At the time of the formation of the Rajasthan Union, the petitioner was working as Assistant Director, Civil ? 332 in the Seniority List of the Rajasthan Administrative Officers issued in 1964. The State Government has filed a very elaborate companynter affidavit. On January 12, 1959 he was promoted as Block Development Officer in the Delhi Administration, in which capacity he companytinued till September 30, 1960. If ultimately respondents Nos. 2 to 4 in the appeal. Apart from the fact that the State Government had the power either to fill up the posts or keep them vacant, in this particular case the vacancies were number filled up as an amendment of the rules was in companytemplation of the State Government. Apart from the attack levelled against rr. So far as respondents Nos. 1, 32 and 33 in W. P. No. 2 to 4 in the Civil Appeal No. Later on he was on deputation as Principal, Tribal Orientation and Study Centre during the period May 22, 1964 to March 31, 1967. The fact that the respondents Nos. The Government companyld have obtained a report or an affidavit regarding the true facts from a responsible officer of the Committee and placed it before the High Court. Those allegations have been denied by the State. The petitioner gives the rank of some of the respondents. He entered the Jodhpur State Civil Service on March 13, 1946 as a result of the companypetitive examination held by the Public Service Commission of that State. Degree in History and the Law Degree from the Lucknow University joined service in the erstwhile State of Jodhpur on August 1, 1943 as a Special Officer Settlement . Aggrieved by the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge, the first respondent, the State, filed D. D. Special Appeal No. 16 and hence that sub rule was bad. Special Appeals Nos. The State companytroverted the allegations of mala hides made by the appellant. 32 and the civil appeal, by special leave, companymon questions that arise for companysideration relate to the validity of rr. Nevertheless the vacancies were number filed up by the State. J, In both the writ petitions under Art. Degree from the Agra University joined service in the Delhi Administration on February 6, 1954 as Extension Officer, Agriculture. Writ Petition No. Jagadish Swarup, Solicitor General and K. Baldev, Mehta, for respondent No. Special Appeal No. After giving the history sheet of respondents Nos. The State finally prays for the dismissal of the writ petition. He also alleged mala fide against the State. 18 to 33 were companyfirmed by the order dated February 21, 1 970. He has been serving in various capacities and he was also sent for higher training to the United States of America by the Government of India during the period March 23, 1958 to September 27, 1958. Supplies, Jodhpur. According to the petitioner these orders are illegal and invalid for the same reasons urged in the civil appeal. Sen and K. Baldev Mehta, for respondent No. In the two writ petitions the Order No. K. Garg, S. C. Agarwala, D. P. Singh and R. K. Jain, for the appellant in C. A. Coming to Writ Petition No. Civil Appeal No. The facts leading up to the writ petition are as follows The petitioner after obtaining his M. A. After the probationary period of one year, he was companyfirmed in the service with effect from October 1, 1961. In this companynection, learned companynsel relied upon the companynter affidavit filed in this Court on behalf of the State in writ petition No. 55 of 1968. M. Jain, for respondent No. the order of companyfirmation is also equally bad. Special Secretary to Government in the Appointments Department. The petitioner thereafter was sent on deputation to the Municipal Corporation of Delhi as an Assistant Commissioner during the period June 17, 1963 to April 21, 1964. Petitions under Art. F. 2 24 Apptts. The facts leading up to this writ petition may be stated The petitioner after obtaining the B. Sc. Agricultural Degree in the First Division from the Delhi University and the LL. They are number entitled to any further reliefs in the writ petitions. The appellant filed S. Writ Petition No. 55 and 57 of 1968 and dismissed the cross objections filed by the appellant. 32 of the Constitution of India for en forcement of fundamental rights. It was the duty of the State Government to place before the High Court all the materials available before it to enable the Court to companysider whether the grievance of the appellant was justified or number. In particular the appellant companytended that though his service record for the year 1965 66 was quite good. Therefore, he seeks to get that order also quashed. This approach made by the learned Judges does number appeal to us. 2 to 5 do number appear to have filed any companynter affidavit. He became the District Manager of Food Corporation of India and was holding that post since July 1, 1968. The learned Judges rejected the plea of mala fides raised by the appellant herein. CIVIL APPELTATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. 2 and 3 filed B. 6 Apptts. 14 and 16. 1 in C. A. 1 in W. P. No. No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Vaidiyalingam. 139/1970. 18 to 33. B. 3 in C. A. India/71 in the High Court. 3 to 17. | 1 | train | 1971_260.txt |
You have thus acted in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. The ground on which the order was founded is as follows That on 16 2 73 in between 10.08 hours and 10.14 hours you along with your other associates being armed with gun and other weapons companymitted a decoity in a 3rd class companypartment of running train S. 110 Dn. 30,0,00/ from Shri Ashutosh Pal of Calcutta causing bullet injuries to him and putting all passengers to fear of death. The petitioner has been detained u s 3 of the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 briefly the Act in order to prevent him from acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of public order. Your action caused companyfusion, panic and disturbed public order there. Sumitra Chakravarty, G. S. Chatterjee and S. K. Basu, for the respondent. 305 of 1974. The order was passed by the District Magistrate Nadia, on 11 4 73. Narayana Rao, for the petitioner. The order was served upon the detenu who made a representation which was companysidered by the Government and rejected. Petition under ArtiCle 32 of the Constitution of India. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GOSWAMI J. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. | 0 | train | 1974_258.txt |
1485 of 1973. K Ramamurthy and Fineet Kumar, for the respondents. C. Chitale, Naunit Lal and Lalita Kohli, for the petitioners. Under Art. 32 of the Constitution of India. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. | 0 | train | 1974_148.txt |
1 Whether Education Cess on excisable goods is leviable on goods manufactured prior to imposition of Cess but cleared after imposition of such cess? 2781 2790 of 2010 Ors. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, Jammu2 In both these decisions, the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal had opined that the Education cess and Higher Education Cess were also refundable along with the excise duty. Other Circular is dated April 08, 2011 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi on the subject education cess and secondary and higher education cess reg We would like to reproduce this Circular in its entirety Education Cess and Secondary and Higher Education Cess also exempted when numberifications exempt whole of Service tax Circular No. 354/42/2011 Tru Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue Central Board of Excise Customs, New Delhi Subject Education Cess and Secondary and Higher Education Cess Reg. Thus, numbereducation cess would be leviable on such clearances. dated 25 Apr 2007 North East Exemption to all goods, except as specified, cleared from Assam, Tripura, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Manipur, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh or Sikkim from duty paid other than by utilisation of Cenvat Credit. Assam, Jammu Kashmir, Meghalaya, Tripura, Mizoram, Manipur, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh as well as Sikkim, numberifications were issued by the Excise Department, Government of India, exempting goods specified in the First Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 other than those mentioned in the annexure to these numberifications from payment of excise duty in respect of the goods manufactured and cleared from units located in the aforesaid States. dated April 25, 2007 granting exemption from duties of excise levied under the Central Excise Act, 1944 hereinafter referred to as the Act read with Section 3 3 of the Additional Duties of Excise Goods of Special Importance Act, 1957 and Section 3 3 of the Additional Duties of Excise Textiles Textile Articles Act, 1978 to goods cleared Civil Appeal Nos. The said Notification provided that the assessee would be entitled to refund of duty paid other than the duty paid by way utilization of CENVAT credit under the CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Industrial Policy dated April 01, 2007 for the North Eastern States, including the State of Assam, was announced by the Ministry of Commerce and Industry Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion , Government of India to set up a special package for the North Eastern States to accelerate industrial development of the State. Page 7 of 27 from the numberified areas within the North Eastern States. 20/2007 Ex. As per this package, new industrial units were entitled to 100 excise duty exemption for a period of 10 years from the date of companymencement of companymercial production. Pursuant to the said Industrial Policy, the Central Government issued Notification No. Page 12 of 27 The Revenue, on the other hand, had relied upon another judgment of Tribunal in the case of Commissioner of Central Excise, Jammu v. Jindal Drugs Ltd.3. Page 4 of 27 In order to encourage the business companymunity to set up manufacturing units in industrially backward areas like the North Eastern States, viz. Reproduction of the first three paragraphs of this Notification would be sufficient, which are as follows NOTIFICATION 20/2007 C.E. 605/54/2004 DBK, dated 21 st July, 2004 issued by Member Customs may also be referred to. Del. 134/3/2011 S.T., dated 8 4 2011 No. Civil Appeal Nos. In this judgment which was also rendered by the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal, a companytrary view has been taken, viz.,
The points raised and the clarifications thereon are as follows. In this regard, letter D.O. K. SIKRI, J. Issue No. Leave granted in the special leave petitions. No. | 1 | train | 2017_700.txt |
1376 of 1967. They started operating the vend from April 1, 1967. On March 16, 1967 the Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Haryana, appellant No. 2,46,000.00 The difference between the amount which the respondents were liable to pay under their bid and the amount realised in the reauction companyes to Rs. In the auction held on March 27, 1967 for the retail vend known as Biswan Meel, Sonepat, respondents offered the highest bid for a quota of 62,100 proof litres for which they became liable, under companydition 14 iii of the auction, to pay an amount calculated at the rate of Rs. In pursuance of the order dated May 17, the Biswan Meel vend, Sonepat, was reauctioned on May 23, 1967, the highest bid received being of 15,000 litres, which in terms of money companyes to Rs. On May 17, 1967, the Collector and Deputy Excise Taxation Commissioner, Haryana, passed an order, after hearing the respondents, cancelling their licence under section 36 b and c of the Punjab Excise Act with immediate effect and stating that the vend will be resold on May 23, 1967 at 10.00 A.M. in the office of the Excise and Taxation Officer, Rohtak, at the risk of the respondents. 5,898.80 respectively, before April 20 and April 30, 1967. The amended rules issued by the Excise and Taxation Commissioner Financial Commissioner were published in the Government Gazette dated March 31, 1967 and came into effect on April 1, 1967. 15 1 of the auction and Rule 36 22 A of the Punjab Liquor Licence Rules, 1956 as amended. On May 22, 1967 respondents filed a Writ Petition No. 15 ii of the auction read with Rule 36 23 2 , to pay the licence fee in 22 equal instalments, each instalment being payable before the 10th and 25th of every month, companymencing on April On the failure of the respondents to pay the instalments due for the periods ending with April 10 and 25, 1967, the Excise and Taxation Officer, Rohtak, gave them numberices dated 15th and 25th April, 1967 calling upon them to make good the short fall of Rs. 21 8 72, the High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the order cancelling the respondents licence and calling upon them to pay the difference between the amount payable by them under their bid and the amount realised in the reauction of the vend. 900 of 1967 which was dismissed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on May 26, on the ground that it was premature. Since the respondents did number pay the amount, the Deputy Excise and Taxation Commissioner, Headquarters, Haryana, gave them a numberice calling upon them to show cause, within two days of the receipt of the numberice, why their licence should number be cancelled under section 36 c of the Punjab Excise Act, for their failure to companyply with the terms of the auction in the matter of payment of the two instalments. 45,527.50, being 1/24th of the total amount payable by them, by way of security for the due performance of the terms of the auction, as required by companydition No. By their reply dated May 12, 1967, the respondents stated that they were illiterate villagers, that the terms of auction were number explained to them, that the district of Rohtak was in the grip of a severe drought leading to a fall in the sale of liquor, that April being a summer month, the companysumption of liquor was less as companypared with the companysumption during winter months and that, there was in fact numberdefault on their part as alleged in the numberice sent to them. 17,60 per litre, that is to say, Rs. The successful bidder who is granted licence for retail sale of companyntry liquor is required by companydition No. On July 11, 1967 respondents were served with a numberice dated July 7 by which they were called upon to pay the aforesaid amount, failing which, they were warned, the amount was liable to be recovered as arrears of land revenue. The terms and companyditions in regard to the auction of retail vends of companyntry spirits were set out in a pamphlet issued along with the numberice. The Court remanded the case for a finding on the following two questions 1 Whether it was necessary according to the rules in force at the relevant time to give adequate publicity to the reauction and 2 if so, when such publicity was in fact given to the reauction on May 23, 1967 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. 33,827.20 and Rs. On the bid being knocked in their favour, respondents deposited a sum of Rs. Journal, p. 460, which was affirmed by this Court in CA 1042 and 1043/68 dt. 20,000 at the time when the Writ Petition was filed, as also on the date of the proposed appeal. Those terms and companyditions did number accord with the rules then prevailing but were evidently announced so as to companyply with the requirement of the new rules which were being brought into force. 1507/1969. 1376/67. 10,92,960.00. 7,41,577.40. This is an appeal by certificate granted by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana under Article 133 1 a of the Constitution in regard to its judgment dated March 12, 1968 in Civil Writ No. Tirath Singh Munjral, H. K. Puri and V. K. Bahl for Respondent No. From the Judgment and Order dated 12 3 1969 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Writ No. On July 18, respondents filed the present Writ Petition in the High Court challenging the legality of the aforesaid numberice. Genl.,
Ravinder Rana and M. N. Shroff for the Appellants. 1 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHANDRACHUD, C.J. N. Kacker Sol. Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD 1. It has given to the appellants a certificate to appeal to this Court under Article 133 1 a of the Constitution since the subject matter in dispute was of the value of more than Rs. | 1 | train | 1980_150.txt |
The respondent was appointed as an Assistant Foreman Safety . He was however, re designated as Assistant Foreman Safety . Safety Officer E 1 Executive Cadre 15.6.95 Rs. The respondent was first promoted to the post of Foreman Safety in the pay scale of Rs. Rule 5 of the said Rules reads as under Rule 5 The Chief Safety Officer or the Safety Officer in the case of factories where only one Safety Officer is required to be appointed shall be given the status of a departmental head or a senior executive in the factory and he shall work directly under companytrol of the Chief Executive of the factory. Factories Safety Officers Rules, 1984 herein after referred to as the Rules . In the meanwhile, the respondent was promoted to the post of Sr.
Safety Officer in E2 grade and further more promoted to the post of Deputy Manager Safety in E 3 grade w.e.f. A numberification dated 02.01.1985 was issued by the State Government numberifying the appellant as a Safety Officer in the factory, for which a Safety Officer was required to be appointed. Foreman Non Executive Cadre w.e.f. On a query made by the Director of Factories, the appellant informed him that the respondent was the in charge of Safety in its factory being in the pay scale of Rs. Foreman OS Sr.
Artisan B2/Sr. Every other Safety Officer shall be given appropriate status companyresponding the status of an officer holding a position next below other departmental heads in the factory Provided, that where any dispute arises as to the status of a Safety Officer or Chief Safety Officer, the case shall be referred to the State Government, whose decision shall be final. 4000 175 4300 Rs. Foreman E 3 25.6.86 Rs.965 52 1225 55 1665 Rs. Executive Officer E 2 executive cadre 25.6.97 Rs. 1100 60 1940 scale and in number executive grade maximum pay scale of Foreman Sr.
Office Supdt. 2500 120 4300 Rev. Gen. Foreman E 4 25.8.92 Rs. Vijay was neither given pay scale of executive grade number was given to him status of departmental head or sr.
executive under Rule 4 and 5. As the number of employees working in the said Unit was 1600, indisputably only one Safety Officer was required to be appointed. Before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, the companytention raised on behalf of the enforcing agency was that the respondent being a Safety Officer, should have been given E1 Executive pay scale being Rs.1100 60 1940/ in terms of Rule 5. Section 40B of the Act provides for employment of such number of Safety Officers as may be specified in a factory wherein 1000 or more workers are ordinarily employed. Designation Status w.e.f. The respondent, who at the relevant time was working as an Assistant Foreman was said to have been numberinated to look after the safety provisions as companytained in the Act and the Rules , in addition, to his existing work. 965 1665 on 25.6.1986. General Manager E6 3 years n Sr.
General Manager E6A 3 years o Additional General Manager E7 1 year p General Manager I c General Manager E8 3 years q Executive Director E9 4 years 3. 6550 allow. Artisan II Accountant 965 52 1225 55 1665 and pay scale 880 42 964 48 1492 of immediate junior Asstt. 3820 allow. 5575 allow. 13000 allow. He had successfully companypleted his diploma companyrse in Industrial Safety from Central Labour Institute, Bombay in 1979 The said Jhansi Unit of the appellant is a factory within the meaning of the provisions of the Factories Act, 1948 hereinafter referred to as the Act . In his representation dated 27.4.2001 he prayed for fixation of wage arrears and allowances stating I was awarded following promotions, after my appointment as Safety Officer Asstt. 5400 allow. Manager E5 3 years m Dy. 3700 allow. 1445 allow. Manager E3 3 years K Manager E4 4 years l Sr. 1965 52 1225 55 1685 and had been enjoying an independent status. date Pay scale Basic pay allowances 1. Rs. He was placed in SA II grade. Assistant Gr. 19.3.1985. 4000 200 5800 250 8300 Rev. 35123 of 2001 did number make any prayer that he should be given E 6 grade. The said scale of pay was accepted by the respondent without any demur whatsoever. A companyplaint petition came to be filed in the companyrt of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jhansi by the Assistant Director, Factories, Agra purported to be in terms of Section 92 of the Act alleging violation of the provisions of Section 40B thereof, read with Rules 4 and 5 of the Rules. II Sr. He was appointed as a Charge Man in the year 1976 by the appellant in its Jhansi Unit. 20571 of 2001 wherein he also did number companytend that he was entitled to E 6 grade. Engineer E2 4 years j Dy. In fact, he had number raised any grievance even before the authorities under the Factories Act. 12500 500 18000 Rs. 2 and 3 to treat the petitioner as placed in E 6 level of its employees as categorized by BHEL itself w.e.f. In P. Ramanatha Aiyars Advance Law Lexicon, 3rd edition, Volume 4, at page 4469, the expression status has been defined as under Status is a much discussed term which, according to the best modern expositions, includes the sum total of a mans personal rights and duties Salmond, Jurisprudence 253, 257 , or, to be verbally accurate, of his capacity for rights and duties. 19.3.1985 and pay difference of pay and other allowances together with increment and other benefits including promotional benefits as had become due to the petitioner from time to time. Accountant II has been provided. Writ Petition No. He, in fact, did number raise any grievance in the said proceeding before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. Rules were framed by the State of Uttar Pradesh in terms of the provisions of the said Act known as U.P. The Respondent also made representations on 6.5.2002, 23.5.2003 and 28.5.2002. A reference was made to the State Government pursuant to the observations made by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate. The said judgment, indisputably, has attained finality. The respondent herein is a Diploma Holder in Mechanical Engineering. State Government Lucknow Annexure 17 II a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Respondents particularly Respondent No. In the said proceeding, the respondent did number intervene. 34259 of 2002 he inter alia made the following prayer I a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 8.7.02 passed by Principal Secretary Labour U.P. 25.6.2004. The said companytention of the respondents has been denied and disputed. Only in Civil Writ Petition No. He again in Civil Misc. 18305 of 2005 B. SINHA, J Leave granted. By reason of the impugned order the said prayers were granted. It was further held Evidence produced by prosecution proves beyond doubt that during inspection Shri B.K. The appellant is, thus, before us. He filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court being Civil Misc. Arising out of SLP C No. He was number examined as a witness. | 1 | train | 2006_121.txt |
Gomti Bai P.W. Gomati Bai P.W. Shobha Ram P.W. Sharma P.W. Tulsa Bai was homicidal, by gun shot injury, ana that the plea of the accused that Jaswant Singh P.W. 6 and Ram Narain P.W. 1 and Prem Lal P.W. Tulsa Bai was unwell and was resting on company inside the room of the respondent. Tulsa Bai died as a result of gun shot injury from the gun of the respondent and in numberother manner. He found the respondent at the house of Bhaiya Lal P.W. Tulsa Bai in village Man kapur, where he looked after the cultivation of his companysin Jaswant Singh P.W. The statements of Ram Narain and his father Bhaiya Lal P.W. Tulsa Bai had succumbed to the gun shot injury and her dead body was lying on the bed in the room. Tulsa Bai and her husband respondent Dig vijay Singh were resting. Tulsa Bai, wife of respondent Digvijay Singh, was unwell and was resting in a verandah. Gomti Bai has clearly stated that the room was closed from inside and only the respondent and the deceased were there. Gomti Bai that when she took tea to the room of the respondent, she found that the door was closed from inside. He returned to his house and saw Jaswant Singh standing in front of his room with a gun in his hand, and it was he who informed the respondent that the gun was fired accidentally. He did so, and reached village Ramkhiriya where he found the respondent at the house of Ram Narain P.W. In doing so the High Court placed reliance on the statements of Jawahar Lal P.W. The statements of these two witnesses as well as the statement of chowkidar Jawahar Lal P.W. The respondent, in the meantime, tried to run away from the house of Bhaiya Lal P.W. It has been proved by the state ment of village Patel Shobha Ram P.W. 1 but also by the statements of several other prosecution witnesses including Prem Lal P.W, 2 and companypounder Hari Om P.W. We have carefully examined the question whether the gun companyld have been fired in the scuffle to which reference was made by the respondent to Jawahar Lal P.W. 1 telling Jaswant Singh that the respondent had run away after shooting his wife. Jaswant Singh asked Shobha Ram to go in the direction in which the respondent had gone. In that companynection the High Court made a reference to the statements of Jawahar Lal P.W. She found that the door of the room had been closed from inside. She was shifted to her room in the house. He admitted that he was looking after Jaswant Singhs cultivation at Mankapur and stated that Jaswant Singh rebuked him on January 8, 1968, and that when he had gone out to answer the call of nature, he heard the gun shot. 2 ran after him and informed Jaswant Singh that the respondent had run away after shooting his wife. He therefore told Ram Narain P.W, 7 , son of Bhaiya Lal, to see that the respondent did number abscond, and came back to Mankapur. The position of the gun shot injuries therefore disproves the theory of accidental firing and shows that the shot was fired while Smt. He told the respondent that he had been called by Jaswant Singh, but he refused to go. When he began to run away, she and Prem Lal went after him and informed Jaswant Singh who was near the house at that time. He was ultimately taken to Mankapur and kept inside a room until the arrival of the police at about 2 a.m. 3 that when he reached the place of occurrence after hearing the gun shot and shouts, he was asked by Jaswant Singh to go in the direction in which the respondent had run away. When she called a third time, she heard the report of gun fire in the room. It has been proved by the statements of Smt. Respondent Digvijay Singh was also in the house. It was a muzzle loading gun of which the respondent held licence Ext. The gun article C which was recovered from the room of the respon dent near the dead body and was taken in police custody, was sent for examination by the ballistic expert S. D. Gandha P.W. 8 , but he was brought back and was ultimately taken to Mankapur and kept companyfined in a room. Tulsa Bai shortly before the incident, but he also gave medicine to the respondent who said that he too was number feeling well. It appears from the statement of Smt. The respondent used to live with his wife Smt. A company was provided for him near the company of his wife in the same room. She knocked at the door and called twice that it may be opened, When she called a third time, she heard a gun shot. 3 , village Patel, who lived nearby, came to the place of occurrence on hearing the gun shot and heard Smt. He found that his niece Smt. The police also recovered a gun article C from the house of the respondent vide memorandum Ext. This has been proved number only by the statement of Smt. 1 , who was serving as maid servant in the house, took tea to the room in which Smt. in the trial Court, and companytended that he had been falsely implicated by Jaswant Singh. Jaswant Singh came to Manka pur on January 8, 1968, in the evening. 9 companyroborate the statement of Shobha Ram. The respondent however admitted that he was kept inside the room throughout the night. 7 who had stated that the respondent told them that when he wanted to go out to the field, his wife Smt. 13 who lived elsewhere and occasionally visited Mankapur to supervise the cultivation. Immediately thereafter she saw the respondent opening the door, and companying out of the room. He therefore informed Ram Narain that the respondent had companye after shooting his wife and should number be allowed to escape. It is alleged that Digvijay Singh opened the door immediately thereafter and ran out. The police arrived at Mankapur at about 2 a.m. , when the respondent was taken out for answering the call of nature. He has stated that he found the gun in working companydition and that its barrel showed signs of discharge. The Sessions Judge placed reliance on the statements of Smt. The companypounder number only gave a companyamine Injection to Smt. 2 that the respon dent also stated that he would take rest in the same room with his wife, and both of them stayed in it. It was mentioned in the report, inter alia, that Smt. 7 about what the respondent had told them about the incident, and took the view that although the respondent must be presumed to know that his gun was loaded, he did number know that his wife would catch hold of him and would grapple with him in her attempt to prevent him from going to the field. She knocked at the door to get it opened, and called twice. 8 in village Ramkhiriya, which was close by. The High Court was in numberdoubt that the death of Smt. The High Court took numberice of the companytention of the respondents learned Counsel that he was number in a position to support the version of the respondent about the incident, but held that it would be reasonable and proper to companyclude, on a companysideration of the circumstances, that the gun went off accidentally and the respondent had numberintention of killing his wife. He sent report Ext. The evidence on the record further shows that the respondent went out on the pretext of easing himself and jumped into a well from which he was rescued and taken in police custody. The above facts and circumstances are themselves quite sufficient to prove, beyond any doubt, that Smt. It was sent for examination to the ballistic expert whose opinion Ext. 2 , and the other circumstantial evidence on the record, as well as the companyduct of the respondent, and reached the companyclusion that, the chain of circumstantial evidence was companyplete and the defence taken by the respondent was false. 6 show that while the respondent was under their watch, he rushed out of the house on the pretext of making water and was caught and brought back. He has also stated that the pellets which were recovered from the dead body companyld have been fired from it. He tried to bring back the respondent, but he refused. The dead body was found lying on the company and was sent for post mortem examination. 14 whose report Ext. He however managed to escape and jumped into a nearby well. He therefore companyvicted the respondent of the offence of murder under Section 302 I.P.C. The respondent was challaned on companypletion of the investigation. He was taken out and the investigation of the case was companymenced on the arrival of the Station House Officer. P l to police station Udaipura, which was at a distance of 10 miles, the same night, at about 10 30 p.m. This appeal by special leave is directed against the appellate judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dated October 26, 1971, by which the companyviction of respondent Dig vijay Singh for an offence under Section 302 I.P.C. P 10 is also on the record. The High Court therefore proceeded to companysider the question whether the respondent was entitled to the benefit of the exception under Section 80 I.P.C. P 11 has been placed on the record. He did number plead guilty to the charge under Section 302 I.P.C. He said that he was also number feeling well. 7 . The post mortem was performed by Dr. S.L. N. Shinghal, J. 13 was responsible for the crime was absolutely without merit. and sentenced him to imprisonment for life. has been set aside and he has been acquitted. 19 . 4 . He did so. | 1 | train | 1978_309.txt |
7340 and 7341 of 2001. The said appeal was filed by the Company against the judgment dated 01.12.1999 of the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No.1705 of 1998 which was filed by the Company against the award of the Industrial Tribunal in Reference being Reference IT No. The appellant Company on its own effected an additional ad hoc payment in varying amounts grade wise to employees in grades 00 09. The Company companycluded a settlement on 09.06.1982 companyering service companyditions of all staff and officers including those in Grades 01 and 00. On 04.11.1991, the respondent Association served a Charter of Demands on the Company. 1705 of 1998 by which the single Judge had reduced the extent of dearness allowance granted under the award of the Industrial Tribunal. These companytentions of the Company are number, however, accepted by the Association. The appellant Company companycluded a Settlement with the respondent Association on 14.08.1974 whereby welfare scheme for the staff and officers, jointly funded and managed by the Company and the Association did number create any companydition of service. The Tribunal, by its Part I Award, directed an ad hoc payment of Rs.500/ per month to all employees in grades 12 00. The Vice President of the Company filed an affidavit before the learned single Judge on 24.06.1999 whereby he placed on record the facts on the financial position of the Company. 7340 7341 OF 2001 Dr. AR. 70 of 1998 relating to the Companys daily rated workmen at its factory at Kurla while admitting the said writ petition, directing the Company to pay to the said daily rated workmen 50 of the increase in the allowances granted by the said Award except certain allowances specified therein. 375/ to Rs.1050/ per month to employees who had number been granted additional ad hoc payment by the appellant Company. Being aggrieved by the Award of the Industrial Tribunal, the appellant filed Writ Petition No. On 01.12.1999, the learned single Judge passed judgment and order modifying the impugned Award and held that there was companymunity of interest between the workmen and number workmen as they worked and functioned in the same grades and that the Company had companycluded Settlements companyering both categories of employees in the past, and further that in the facts of the case, the workmen companyld espouse the cause of the number workmen. According to the appellant Company, they suffered a loss of Rs. This Settlement did number companyer employees in Grade 01 and 00 who are General Foremen or Senior Officers and Asstt. The Tribunal, by its interim Award Part II, directed payment of employees on the basis of basic pay slab ad hoc amount ranging from Rs. The appellant Company filed its written statement setting out in detail how the demands raised by the respondent Association, which according to them, were unreasonable and pointing out that the financial position of the Company was number sound. The Company also submitted statements relating to basic pay etc. Learned single Judge passed another Order on the same date in the Companys Writ Petition No. The Association filed companytempt petition in the High Court on the ground that the Company was deducting from retrial benefits of the employees the amount that were paid to them under the interim order dated 05.10.1998. 1704 of 1998 against another Award passed by another Tribunal in Reference IT No. 40 crores during the financial year 2000 01 as per the audited financial results and a chart showing the financial position of the Company from 1991 92 to 2000 01 was also filed. The Government of Maharashtra, by its Order dated 17.02.1993, referred the dispute for adjudication to the Industrial Tribunal. 7340 and 7341 of 2001 were filed by the Union against the judgment and order in Appeal No. 342 of 1996 filed by the companypany against the said Awards, directed the Company to deposit the amounts payable under the interim Award Part II in the Provident Fund Accounts of the companycerned employees instead of disbursing the same to them, and directed the Tribunal to dispose of the Reference on or before 30.04.1996. In the appeal, the Company filed its Annual Report for the year 1999 2000 which reported a profit of Rs. This Court granted leave to appeal to both parties and directed the appellant Company number to make any recovery from the employees of the amounts paid on the basis of the interim Awards passed by the Tribunal or by the High Court. On 11.12.1995, the appellant Company and the respondent Association companycluded a Settlement on annual bonus for four years, without prejudice to their respective rights and companytentions as stated in Clause 1 of the said settlement which stated as under It is the Companys companytention that a majority of the staff, on the one hand and the officers on the other are number Workmen under Section 2 s of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and are also number companyered by the provisions of The Payment of Bonus Act, 1965. And whereas the Government of Maharashtra after companysidering the aforesaid report is satisfied that there is a case for reference to the dispute to an Industrial Tribunal. 9,52,205/ recovered thus from the employees. The text of the Order issued by the Government of Maharashtra is reproduced below ORDER Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 No. 5601 of 2001 filed by the Company against the judgment and order of the Division Bench for companysideration and the decision taken on this appeal will also govern the other two appeals filed by the Staff and Officers Association in Civil Appeal Nos. He companyfirmed all other increases in emoluments granted by the Tribunal. 5601 of 2001 was filed by the appellant Company against the companymon final judgment and order of the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Appeal No. By its order dated 19.02.2000 in the said petition, the Company was directed to deposit in the High Court a sum of Rs. 441 of 2000 which was filed by the Union impugning the judgment dated 01.12.1999 of the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No. The respondent Association filed its Statement of Claims. The present case raises an important issue of vital public importance, namely, whether the Industrial Tribunal was justified in adjudicating upon the service companyditions of employees, who are number workmen under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and are hence clearly outside its jurisdiction. profits from sale of land and of shares owned by the Company in other companypanies are excluded, there was, in fact, a loss amounting to Rs. The High Court issued rule and granted companyditional stay subject to the companydition, inter alia, that the petitioner Company pays to the employees 50 of the increased salary and allowances awarded by the Tribunal, in addition to the existing salary and allowances with effect from the date of publication of the Award, and that in case it is held ultimately that the said employees were number entitled to the payments so made, the amount shall be adjusted by the appellant in future wages. The Review Petition filed by the Association against the judgment of the learned single Judge was also rejected by Order dated 15.02.2000. The Division Bench passed its judgment partially modifying the learned single Judges Order by reducing i one of the 3 companyponents of Dearness Allowance granted by the Tribunal viz. 9.45 crores. Whereas the Government of Maharashtra has companysidered the report submitted by the companyciliation Officer under sub section 4 of section 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 XIV of 1947 , in respect of the dispute between M s. Mukand Ltd., B.S. Marg, Kurla, Bombay 400 070 and the workmen employed under them, over the demands mentioned in the schedule appended hereto. Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers companyferred by clause d of sub section 1 of section 10 read with sub section 5 of section 12 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Government of Maharashtra hereby refers the said dispute for adjudication to an Industrial Tribunal, Bombay companysisting of Shri G.S. basic linked variable D.A. According to the appellant, the Award was far in excess of the appellants financial capacity and the same ignored the well settled industry cum region principle and the status of the employees before him. The appellant filed an appeal before the Division Bench against the said interim order dated 05.10.1998. 35 crores upto March, 2001 and prospective gross burden of Rs. 1705 of 1998 before the High Court at Bombay. The Division Bench affirmed the decision of the learned single Judge on all other points. fixed in terms of percentages of basic pay, grade wise ii the number of service increments iii the gratuity from 21 days to 15 days and iv by changing the effective date for increase in emoluments from 17.02.1993 to 01.01.1996. 194 of 2000. 5.85 crores but showed that when capital profits i.e. General Foremen or Officers. ADM 3092/21867/CR 2001/Lab 3. the D.A. Baj, Member companystituted under Government Notification, Industries, Energy and Labour Department, No. Failure report was submitted by Conciliation Officer on 31.10.1992. 7 crores per annum. IDA 0392/CR 69/Lab 3, dated the 31st March, 1992. The Order casts as retrospective burden of approximately Rs. Both the appellant and the respondent preferred separate appeals challenging the judgment of the learned single Judge. The High Court, by its judgment and order dated 27.01.1996 in Writ Petition No. The appeal was disposed of stating that the said order was a discretionary order and did number warrant any interference at the interim stage. 3 of 1993 which arose out of the demands of the respondent Union. to the Division Bench during the companyrse of hearing. Lakshmanan, J. As already stated, the special appeals were filed against the companymon judgment by the respective parties. WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS. Civil Appeal Nos. Civil Appeal No. | 1 | train | 2004_178.txt |
The surplus first preference votes according to the second preference votes to the tune of 4.81 votes were added to the first preference votes polled by the appellant and he was declared elected to the third seat. In companyrse of companynting it transpired that four postal ballot papers were tampered with and the tampering indicated that the first preference vote in favour of respondent 1, Gurcharan Singh Tohra, the Akali candidate was altered to show second preference vote as also to indicate a first preference vote in favour of the appellant. Thereafter the ballot box was opened, and folded ballot papers were unfolded and mixed up with the postal ballot papers. He also denied his relationship with Giani Zail Singh and further denied that he was a candidate put up by Giani Zail Singh. Appellant secured 23 first preference votes. The central issue was whether four ballot papers were unauthorisedly tampered with after the voters thereof had cast their first preference on them in favour of Akali candidate, and if so, whether they were hereby companyverted in favour of the returned candidate by changing the figure I placed against the name of the Akali candidate into figure II and further placing the figure I in favour of the returned candidate ? The quota was 25.51 votes. Respondent 1, the Akali numberinee also secured 23 first preference votes. To the election petition the returned candidate, namely, the present appellant whose election was called in question, two other returned candidates and the defeated Akali candidate were impleaded as respondents. Hence this appeal by the returned candidate. On the finding of this issue a further issue had to be answered whether the four votes were improperly received and companynted in favour of the returned candidate and improperly refused to Akali candidate in whose favour they were cast, and if this miscount materially affected the result of the election ? Thereafter, according to him all these ballot papers were placed in different trays earmarked for the candidates and companynted with regard to their preferences. Amarjit Kaur and Sat Pal Mittal secured 29 and 27 first preference votes respectively. Any allegation of tampering was denied and it was companytended that Akali Party presented a picture of a house divided and, therefore, the surmise made that members belonging to the Akali Party would en block vote for the Akali candidate is number justified. Amarjit Kaur and Sat Pal Mittal who had secured first preference votes in excess of the ascertained quota were declared elected. Respondent 1 Gurcharan Singh Tohra was a numberinee of the Akali Party. His evidence was further to the effect that after the small inner envelopes companytaining the ballot papers were opened and the ballot papers were put down on the table with their faces in reverse 1327 so that the agents and candidates companyld number see as to for whom the vote had been cast, he kept a close watch. Thereafter all the four companycerned witnesses were questioned in their respective examination in chief with regard to the 1312 first preference vote cast by each of them and also a negative answer was taken that numbere of them had cast his second preference vote. Two candidates of the Indian National Congress, Smt. One issue was whether a case for inspection of ballot papers is made out ? The allegation was that Giani Zail Singh was the Chief Minister of Punjab at the relevant time and it was he who had put up the appellant as a candidate even though the members of the Assembly belonging to Indian National Congress companyputing their voting strength in the Assembly had only fielded two candidates Smt. Appellant Sardar Raghbir Singh Gill claimed to be an independent candidate. It may be numbericed that neither the election petitioners respondents 2 and 3 in this appeal number the appellant, the returned candidate, number respondent 1 the unsuccessful Akali candidate stepped into the witness box. Seven members of Assembly belonging to Akali Party and a lone Jan Sangh M.L.A. The Chief Minister Giani Zail Singh in order to snatch the third seat number legitimately available, fielded appellant as his candidate and to secure his election, power of office was abused. There was an issue about alleged companyrupt practice which was held number proved and was answered in favour of the returned candidate. As there were three seats and four candidates, poll was companyducted on March 27, 1976. Amarjit Kaur and Sat Pal Mittal. He said that these six envelopes companytaining ballot papers did number have the seal of the Superintendent of Jail from where they were despatched. 13 S. Surjit Singh Barnala, detained in Jail at Jullundur, S. Gurbachan Singh and S. Kundan Singh, Patang, detained in Jail at Sangrur, all belonging to Akali Party and Dr. Baldev Prakash belonging to Jan Sangh. It was alleged that Giani Zail Singh abused his power as Chief Minister by bringing pressure upon Partap Singh, the Returning Officer, Sardar Tirth Singh Sobti, a Sub Post Master and the Superintendents of Jails at Sangrur, Patiala and Nabha, for facilitating the tampering and thereby four additional first preference votes were wrongly received in favour of the appellant to which he was number entitled and the valid votes in favour of first respondent were denied to him by improper refusal and that it has directly and materially affected the result of the election. Amarjit Kaur and respondent 5 Sat Pal Mittal were numberinated as candidates of the political party described as Indian National Congress. Election petitioners examined P.W. The allegation of companyrupt practice was that with the assistance of Chief Minister Giani Zail Singh official machinery was pressurised and utilised to get the appellant elected. 2 Sardar M. S. Khera, companynting agent of respondent 1 four voters whose votes were alleged to have been tampered with and an expert P.W. These detenus applied for postal ballots with a view to exercising their right of franchise and they did in fact exercise their franchise. An objection was taken on behalf of the returned candidate that the question violates the secrecy of the ballot as ensured by s. 94 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 Act for short , and, therefore, the question was impermissible. 15, S. Jaswinder Singh Brar, and W. 15 S. Jagdev Singh Talwandi, detained in Central Jail at Patiala, S. Basant Singh Khalsa, detained in Jail at 1309 Nabha, P.W. The voting was in accordance with the system of proportional representation by means of the single transferable vote. Inevitably the witnesses relevant to these ballot papers are also allowed to be examined with regard thereto in the interest of justice. It was, however, stated in the petition that though the tampering of four ballot papers was self evident, they, the petitioners were number in a position to state the exact method adopted in this behalf. The returned candidate, the present appellant companytested the petition, inter alia, companytending that the whole petition is based on companyjectures and surmises. 16 S. Parkash Singh Badal, detained in Tihar Central Jail at Delhi, P.W. Purity of election and secrecy of ballot, two central pillars supporting the edifice of Parliamentary democracy envisioned in the Constitution stand in companyfrontation with each other or are companyplimentary to each other, present the companye problem in this appeal. Respondents 2 and 3 two sitting members of Punjab Legislative Assembly and, therefore, eligible electors, filed an election petition on May 10, 1976, challenging the election of the present appellant, the independent candidate who was declared elected to the third seat, inter alia, companytending that the result of the election of the present appellant has been materially affected i by numbercompliance with the provisions of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, and the Rules made thereunder ii by improper reception of votes in favour of respondent 1, and iii by companymission of companyrupt practice in the interest of appellant by his agent as also companymission of companyrupt practice by obtaining assistance of persons in the service of the Punjab Government. 2 S. Manjit Singh Khera who was the companynting agent of respondent 1. The allegation of companyrupt practice was firmly denied. Hardev Singh, R.S. This order was questioned by the returned candidate by filing a petition to obtain special leave to appeal to this Court but subsequently it was withdrawn. As a serious exception was taken to a part of this direction, the same may be reproduced in extenso I would accordingly allow the application and direct the inspection and examination of the postal ballot papers in the present case. The election programme was March 10, 1976, was prescribed as the last date for filing numberinations the scrutiny of the numberinations was to be made on March 11, 1976 March 13, 1976, was the last date by which it was permissible to withdraw from the election in the event of companytest, poll was to take place on March 27, 1308 1976 companynting was to be done on the same day. It was companytended that the petitioners as admitted by them in the petition were number in a position to state the exact method and process adopted by the Returning Officer and his accomplices in tampering with the postal ballots, and, therefore, the case put forth in the petition is a figment of imagination, devoid of particulars and the petition is liable to be thrown out on this ground. 1 of 1976. Punjab Legislative Assembly formed a companystituency for electing members to the Council of States. On March 3, 1976, a numberification was issued calling upon the members of Punjab Legislative Assembly to elect three members to the Council of States. were detained under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, the detenus included P.W. Accordingly, Smt. Appeal under Section 116 A of the Representation of People Act 1951 from the Judgment and Order dated the 5th June 1978 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Election Petition No. Sodhi, M.S. Sharma, Vivek Seth and Miss Anil Katyar for the Appellant. Gupta and Miss Manisha Gupta for Respondents. First to the factual matrix. 17 Dewan K. S. Puri. Counting took place on the same day after the poll closed at the prescribed hour. R. Lalit, O.P. Respondent 4 Smt. 1035 of 1978. Ultimately, the learned Judge by his reasoned order dated October 25, 1977, granted the application. 1310 The learned Judge of the High Court before whom the petition came up for hearing framed as many as seven issues. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DESAI, J. The application was companytested. This was numbericed by PW. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. | 0 | train | 1980_198.txt |
No.72 of 1991. O R D E R NON REPORTABLE This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 9th of February, 2001 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad in Writ Petition No.27838 of 1995 by which the High Court had set aside the judgment of the Special Court dated 29th of September, 1995 in L.G.C. | 0 | train | 2008_409.txt |
out of them he knew only tota and with subedar. in this companyrt only subedar has appealed. subedar also raised an alarm at the time of the dacoity. the high companyrt therefore summoned subedar and tota who were on bail. according to the companyrts below subedar and tota were number amongst the dacoits. 5 had also accompanied subedar along with lila pradhan and the chowkidar. and subedar appellant and tota under s. 396 read with s. 109 i.p.c. lila pradhan deposed in his examination in chief in the high companyrt that chhotey lal had asked subedar to go and lodge a report in the police station about the dacoity in question. subedar also expressed a desire to produce witnesses in his defence. though he denied that he had sent subedar to lodge the report he was companystrained to admit that the following day at 9 or 10 oclock the sub inspector had also told him that subedar had gone to the police station to lodge the report. lila pradhan was in the circumstances examined by the high companyrt as d.w.
it may be recalled that according to danunar lila pradhan was also one of the persons who had gone to lodge the report with him and subedar. chhotey lal who appeared as p.w. they are however stated to have assembled at the time of the dacoity which was companymitted on the night between the 21st and 22nd march 1963.
on the night following the dacoity was committed at the house of gajodhar and chhotey lal when gajodhar was killed and chhotey lal seriously injured and in the companymission of that offence gajju son of chheda participated subedar who was inimical towards gajodhar. 2 admitted in his cross examination that subedar accused had gone to the police station to lodge a report regarding the occurrence in question. he also admitted that when the sub inspector informed him about subedar having gone to lodge the report on his behalf he did number tell the sub inspector that subedar was inimical to him and his report should therefore be shown to him for scrutiny the detailed nature of the report the companytents of which have number been show in to be incorrect were presumably given to the appellant by chhotey lal. dammar p.w. on the same night a dacoity was companymitted at the residence of gajodhar and he was killed by the dacoits. 5 that chhotey lal had sent the appellant to lodge airport. the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by dua j. subedar appellant has companye up an appeal by special leave from his companyviction under s. 396 read with s. 109 p.c. khanna p.w. this order was passed on 11th august 1966.
subedar was accordingly examined by the high companyrt on the 24th august and was confronted with the statement of babu ram and khanna pws 7 and 8 .
the appellant denied that he was ever in the grove as stated by these witnesses and stated that he had enmity with them and added that they were police witnesses. there is however positive evidence in the statement of dammar p.w. babu ram p.w. was examined by the high companyrt at some length he was village pradhan for six years. seven persons including the appellant were tried fixe under s. 396 i.p.c. by the trial companyrt and that they were misled in their defence because the trial court had questioned them in a manner which suggested that they been charged with having actually companymitted dacoity along with the other culprits. khanna and bashir were with him. when they reached near the big grove lying to the south of village daulatpur he saw five or six persons in the grove. a day earlier on 27th march 1963 p.w. the trial companyrt companyvicted six and acquitted one. 7 whose statement was recorded in companyrt on the 28th march 1964 has deposed that about a year earlier he was returning to his village from the companysolidation office at thomharwa in the evening when the sun was about to set. 8 the two witnesses on whose evidence the appellant is companyvicted were recorded by him on the 28th march 1963.
it is however number knumbern as to what they had stated during the investigation. the appeal of the companyvicted persons to the high companyrt failed. this witness after his cross examination by the companynsel for the state. we may number appropriately refer to the statements of the two witnesses whose sole testimony appears to be the basis of the appellants companyviction. and sentence of life imprisonment imposed by the temporary civil sessions judge hardoi and affirmed on appeal by the allabad high companyrt according to which the appellants case is companyered by the second and third clauses of s. 107 i.p.c. 8 has deposed in similar terms. they were armed ballam kanta and lathis. others were number knumbern to him. criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 164 of 1967.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated october 14 1966 of the allahabad high companyrt lucknumber bench in criminal appeal number 425 of 1964.
p. varma for the appellant. the third circumstance is found on their evidence. p. rana for the respondent. | 1 | test | 1970_188.txt |
Delay companydoned. The admitted position is that the uncle of the petitioner died pending Regular Civil Suit No.51/65 in the Court of the Civil Judge, Senior Division Chandgad. 632/91 by order dated December 8, 1994, the High Court dismissed as numberproper explanation for companydoning the delay was given. In Civil Revision No. This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment of the High Court of Bombay, made on December 8, 1994 dismissing the Civil Revision No.632/91. Since he died pending appeal, it was dismissed on August 4, 1967 as having abated. We have heard learned companynsel on both sides. Thus, this appeal by special leave. Leave granted. | 0 | train | 1996_1451.txt |
The Act was passed to companysolidate and amend the law relating to the regulation of buying and selling of agricultural produce and the establishment of markets for agricultural produce in the State of Gujarat. That Act remained in operation in Gujarat till September 1, 1964 on which date the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 20 of 1964, came into force. An Inspector of Godhra Agricultural Produce Market Committee filed a companyplaint against the appellant charging him with having purchased a certain quantity of ginger in January and February, 1969 without obtaining a licence as required by the Act. This is an appeal by special leave from the judgment of the Gujarat High Court companyvicting the appellant under section 36 read with section 8 of the Gujarat Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 20 of 1964 referred to herein as the Act , and sentencing him to pay a fine of Rs. 10, dated February 16, 1968 which was issued under section 6 5 of the Act and by which new varieties of agricultural produce like onion, ginger, sunhemp and jowar were added to the old list. S. Patel, S.S. Khanduja and Lalita Kohli, for the appellant. Appeal 695 of 1969. K. Zauri, Amaresh Kumar and M. V. Goswami, for the respondents 1 2. Appeal by special leave from the Judgment and order dated the 12th November, 1971 of the Gujarat High Court at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No. 219 of 1970. The judgment of companyviction was recorded by the High Court in an appeal from an order of acquittal passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Godhra. 158 of 1972. The High Court set aside the acquittal by following the judgment dated February 12, 1971 rendered by A. D. Desai, J. in Cr. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No. The High Court was really companycerned with the numberification, Ex. R. Khanna and M. N. Shroff, for respondent number 3. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by CHANDRACHUD, J. | 1 | train | 1975_208.txt |
By order dated 22.3.2000 the Commissioner A held that the value of the bought out items was includible in the assessable value of the equipments manufactured. By order dated 22.3.2000 the Commissioner A had remanded the matter to the adjudicating authority the question of quantification. By order dated 1.5.1999 the adjudicating authority companyfirmed the demand on the bought out items on the ground that the same was necessary for the manufacture of the fatty acid plant at the site of M s Godrej Soaps Ltd. and M s Galaxy Surfactants Ltd. Aggrieved by the order dated 1.5.1999 the matter was carried in appeal to the Commissioner A . Under the companytract, in addition to the supply of the equipments manufactured by the appellants, various duty paid bought out items were directly supplied by the appellants to the site of M s Godrej Soaps Ltd. and M s Galaxy Surfactants Ltd. Ltd. On 23.5.1997 a show cause numberice was issued by the department to the appellants demanding duty on the various bought out items supplied directly to the site of M s Godrej Soaps Ltd. and M s Galaxy Surfactants Ltd. The appellants had entered into a companyposite companytract with M s Godrej Soaps Ltd. and M s Galaxy Surfactants Ltd. for the supply of various items which formed part of the fatty acid plant. By judgment and order dated 3.10.2003 the Tribunal held that numberduty was payable on the bought out items. In reply the appellants companytended that numberduty was payable on various bought out items which were directly sent to the site. The Tribunal further held that the appellants were entitled to raise the issue of dutiability of bought out items even though in the earlier round of litigation the appellants did number challenge the order of the Commissioner A dated 22.3.2000, on merits. The Tribunal companycluded that the department was number entitled to add the value of the bought out items in the assessable value of the goods manufactured by the appellant. The dispute relates to dutiability of certain bought out items like motor pumps, heat exchangers etc. The short question which arises for determination in this civil appeal is whether the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal for short CESTAT was right in entertaining the assessees appeal on dutiability against the order passed by Commissioner A dated 9.4.2003 in the Quantum Dispute, particularly when in the earlier round of litigation the Commissioner A had companycluded vide order dated 22.3.2000 that the bought out items were dutiable and which order had become final. However, the Commissioner A remanded the matter for quantification of the duty liability on the ground that the demand stood restricted for 6 months. In the circumstances the High Court held that the Tribunal was number companypetent to entertain the appeal preferred by the assessee against the later order of the Commissioner A dated 9.4.2003 in the second round of litigation on the question as to whether the bought out items were dutiable. It is subject to before the Commissioner A . Therefore, it was open to the appellant to appear before the adjudicating authority and submit companytentions on quantification of duty liability. Aggrieved by the said order of the adjudicating authority the appellants once again moved the Commissioner A .
Vide order dated 9.4.2003 the Commissioner A companyfirmed the duty demanded on the ground that the appellant had failed to produce evidence to disprove the quantification made by the department. The manufactured equipments were cleared by the appellants on payment of duty. The fatty acids plant and the film sulphonation plant were to be erected and companymissioned number by the appellant but by M s K.S. In the quantum dispute the adjudicating authority companyfirmed once again the duty demand amounting to Rs.94,03,500 although the period stood reduced to 6 months. Aggrieved, by the order passed by the Commissioner A dated 9.4.2003 the matter was carried in appeal by the appellants to the Tribunal. By the impugned judgment dated 5.11.2004 the High Court held that the order of the Commissioner A dated 22.3.2000 had become final on merits since that order was never challenged by the assessee, and therefore, in the quantification dispute quantum dispute the only question to be decided was regarding the quantum of duty liability. In our view the High Court had erred in holding that the Tribunal companyld number have examined the question of dutiability, once on merits, the order of the Commissioner A dated 22.3.2000 became final. These items were never received in the factory premises of the appellants. The appellants are engaged in the manufacture of plant and equipments for soaps, detergents and allied industries falling under Chapter Sub Heading 8479.90 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. An order of assessment under the taxing law does number become final before the adjudicating authority in every matter. Aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal the department preferred Central Excise Appeal No. However, the duty amount was number companyrespondingly reduced. The Commissioner A did number companysider the claim of MODVAT credit made by the appellants on the ground that the appellants had number followed the prescribed procedure for claiming MODVAT credit. Accordingly, he dismissed the appeal and also the companytention of the appellants that the net duty liability would be only for Rs.20,42,993. By a companyrigendum dated 6.6.1997 the period was reduced to November 1996 to March 1997 6 months . 23,21,500 since the period was restricted to six months. In the alternative they submitted that maximum duty payable, if any, would be Rs. Accordingly, the Tribunal allowed the appeal. The demand was for the period April 1996 to March 1997. Hence this appeal by the assessee. 28 of 2004 in the High Court under Section 35G of the Central Excise Act, 1944. By the impugned judgment the High Court set aside the order of the Tribunal. Krishnan Associates Pvt. KAPADIA, J. | 1 | train | 2007_249.txt |
Alagiriswami, J. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment and decree of a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in a Letters Patent Appeal. | 0 | train | 1973_393.txt |
AM Netherlands has sold its shareholding in Uttam Galva to the other promoters of Uttam Galva on 7 February 2018 and 2.5. On 20.9.2011, a Non Disposal Undertaking was provided by AMNLBV, as promoter of Uttam Galva, to the lender banks of Uttam Galva, which included the State Bank of India. AM Netherlands has applied to the National Stock Exchange Limited and the BSE Limited, each on 8 February 2018 for declassification as a promoter of Uttam Galva under Regulation 31A 2 of the Securities and Exchange Board of India Further, as on the Plan Submission Date, AM Netherlands had number obtained the Stock Exchange Approvals relating to declassification as a promoter of Uttam Galva and companytinued to be classified as a promoter of Uttam Galva. As in the case of Uttam Galva, Fraseli divested its shareholding in KSS Petron on 9.2.2018, i.e., only three days before AMIPL submitted its first resolution plan. Given this, both AMIPL and Numetal submitted their resolution plans on this date. AMNLBV addressed letters to the NSE and the BSE to record the aforesaid inter se transfer, who accordingly declassified AMNLBV as a promoter of Uttam Galva on 21.3.2018 and 23.3.2018 respectively. Inasmuch as AMNLBV therefore ceased to be a promoter in Uttam Galva prior to 12.2.2018, the resolution plan is number hit by Section 29A c .
In any case, the entire shareholding of Fraseli in KSS Global was transferred back to the promoters of KSS Global on 9.2.2018, i.e., 3 days before submission of the resolution plan. On 4.9.2009, a Co Promotion Agreement was executed between AMNLBV and the Indian promoters of Uttam Galva, who are stated to be the Miglani family, who are residents of Mumbai. On 31.3.2016, Canara Bank and Punjab National Bank declared Uttam Galvas accounts as NPA. As per the Co Promotion Agreement, the foreign promoter, viz.,
AMNLBV was entitled to numberinate one half of the number independent directors on the board of Uttam Galva, the other half being numberinated by the Miglanis. the date Section 29A was inserted by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code Amendment Ordinance, 2017 but the Resolution Plans were submitted by both AM India Ltd. and Numetal Ltd. on 12th February, 2018. AM Netherlands had entered into a companypromoter agreement dated 4 September 2009 with the other promoters of Uttam Galva Co Promoter Agreement under which AM Netherlands had various rights including certain rights which can be companysidered as participative in nature and number merely protective 2.3. As has been stated hereinabove, KSS Petron was declared as an NPA on 30.9.2015. Consequently, AM India shall number be eligible to submit a resolution plan. This particular Act was meant to repeal the Sick Industrial Companies Special Provisions Act, 1985 companysequent to some of its provisions being telescoped into the Companies Act. The Resolution Professional therefore issued the first addendum to the request for proposal, extending the date for submission of resolution plans to 12.2.2018. Consequently, AM India shall number be eligible to submit a resolution plan as on 12.02.2018. On 24.12.2017, the Resolution Professional published a request for proposal, in which it was stated that the last date for submission of resolution plans would be 29.1.2018. An entity called Numetal Limited hereinafter referred to as Numetal , also submitted an expression of interest on 20.10.2017. Close on the heels of the amendment made to the Companies Act came the Sick Industrial Companies Special Provisions Repeal Act, 2003. Interestingly, the Companies Amendment Act, 2002 omitted a provision similar to Section 22 1 of the Sick Industrial Companies Special Provisions Act, 1985. On the same day, the directors numberinated by Shri N. Mittal, through Fraseli, resigned from the board of KSS Global. The facts of the present case revolve around the ineligibility of resolution applicants to submit resolution plans after the introduction of Section 29A into the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 hereinafter referred to as the Code , with effect from 23.11.2017. The Eradi Committee Report was further given effect to by inserting Sections 424 A to 424 H into the Companies Act, 1956 which, with a few changes, mirrored the provisions of Sections 15 to 21 of the Sick Industrial Companies Special Provisions Act, 1985. Pursuant to the Eradi Committee Report, the Companies Act was amended in 2002 by providing for the companystitution of a National Company Law Tribunal as a substitute for the Company Law Board, the High Court, BIFR and AAIFR. In light of the above, AM India is ineligible under the provisions of Section 29A c of the IBC and pursuant to paragraph 4.11.2 a of the RPP, the Resolution Plan is hereby rejected and will number be placed before the Committee of Creditors. brother, sister, brothers son and daughter, sisters son and daughter, fathers father and mother, mothers father and mother, fathers brother and sister, mothers brother and sister, and b wherever the relation is that of a son, daughter, sister or brother, their spouses shall also be included Consequently, the Committee recommended that the Sick Industrial Companies Special Provisions Act, 1985 be repealed and the provisions thereunder for revival and rehabilitation should be telescoped into the structure of the Companies Act, 1956 itself. In the same order, insofar as AMIPLs resolution plan was companycerned, the Appellate Authority held as follows In the present case, the Expression of Interest was submitted by AM India Ltd. on 11th October, 2017 and by Numetal Ltd. on 20 th October, 2017, both prior to 23rd November, 2017 i.e. Ltd., a companypany incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956, having registered office at Swastik Chamber, 6th Floor, Sion Trombay Road, Chembur, Mumbai has been NPA for more than a year and CIRP has been initiated against the KSS Petron vide order dated 01.08.2017 by Mumbai Bench of the National Company Law Tribunal. The Committee further pointed out that effectiveness of the Sick Industrial Companies Special Provisions Act, 1985 as has been pointed out earlier, has been severely undermined by reason of the enormous delays involved in the disposal of cases by BIFR. Uttam Galvas account was classified as a number performing asset NPA on 31 March 2016 by Canara Bank and Punjab National Bank which classification has companytinued for more 1 year till 02 August 2017 2.4. These facts and figures speak for themselves and place a big question mark on the utility of the Sick Industrial Companies Special Provisions Act, 1985. This was accordingly done on 21.3.2018 and 23.3.2018 before the NSE and BSE respectively. Adjudicating Authoritys order dated 19th April, 2018, the companycession granted by the Ld. Adjudicating Authoritys Order dated 19th April, 2018, the companycession granted by the Ld. On a request made by the Committee of Creditors, the NCLT extended the duration of the companyporate insolvency resolution process by 90 days beyond the initial period of 180 days, i.e., upto 29.4.2018. Pursuant to this advertisement, one ArcelorMittal India Private Limited hereinafter referred to as AMIPL submitted an expression of interest on 11.10.2017. Consequently, creditors were given liberty to file suits or initiate other proceedings for recovery of dues despite pendency of proceedings for the revival or rehabilitation of sick companypanies before the National Company Law Tribunal. Further to the responses received from AM India on 28 February 2018 and 17 March 2018 companylectively the AM India Responses on the aforementioned requests for clarifications, I understand that 2.1. Such declassification, being a ministerial act, is relatable to the date of sale of shares, i.e., 7.2.2009, and companysidered effective from the said date. Thus, the Companies Amendment Act, 2002 and the SICA Repeal Act formed part of one legislative scheme, and neither has yet been brought into force. Shri Satish Kumar Gupta was appointed as the Interim Resolution Professional and companyfirmed as such on 4.9.2017. In terms of the advertisement, the last date for submission of an expression of interest was 23.10.2017. The shareholders of Numetal bring to the table, companysiderable experience from difference industries companyering finance, steel, oil and gas, metals and mining chemicals and other sectors across geographies. Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by SHASHI SAREEN On 2.8.2017, the Adjudicating Authority, being the NCLT, Date 2018.10.04 143429 IST Reason Ahmedabad Bench, passed an order under Section 7 of the Code at the behest of financial creditors, being the State Bank of India and the Standard Chartered Bank, admitting a petition filed under the Code for financial debts owed to them by the companyporate debtor Essar Steel India Limited hereinafter referred to as ESIL , in the sum of roughly Rs.45,000,00,00,000 Rupees Forty Five Thousand Crores . The Eradi Committee Report relating to insolvency and winding up of companypanies dated 31 7 2000, observed that out of 3068 cases referred to BIFR from 1987 to 2000 all but 1062 cases have been disposed of. Out of the cases disposed of, 264 cases were revived, 375 cases were under negotiation for revival process, 741 cases were recommended for winding up, and 626 cases were dismissed as number maintainable. This Amendment Act came under challenge, which challenge culminated in the Constitution Bench decision in Union of India v. R, Gandhi, President, Madras Bar Association, 2010 11 SCC 10 by which the amendments were upheld, with certain changes recommended by the Constitution Bench of this Court. Since the CoC have number by themselves filed an appeal over the Ld. See Paras 5.8, 5.9 and 5.15 of the Report. 1 Any person aggrieved by an order of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal may file an appeal to the Supreme Court on a question of law arising out of such order under this Code within forty five days from the date of receipt of such order. Both of them were to jointly numberinate all of the independent directors. F. Nariman, J. An appeal against a liquidation order passed under Section 33 may be filed on grounds of material irregularity or fraud companymitted in relation to such a liquidation order. Appeal to Supreme Court. | 0 | train | 2018_1034.txt |
Hard disk drive n. See hard disk Platter. In the meantime, at Delhi, they had imported Laptop companyputers with Hard Discs preloaded with Software and claimed classification of the Software loaded Hard Disc Drives under Heading 85.24. See also hard disk. Most hard disks have from two to eight platters. Also called hard disk drive. Hence the demand of duty which is on the assessable value companyprising the value of the Notebook companyputers with Hard Discs excluding the value of Software. They imported Notebooks Laptops with Hard Disc Drivers Hard Discs, for short preloaded with Operating Software like Windows XP, XP Home etc. Most hard disks companytain from two to eight platters. The Bills of Entry filed by the importer declared the value of Laptop and the value of Software separately, the software value including the Hard Disc value also. The Bills of Entry classified the Software loaded Hard Discs under Heading 85.24 of the CTA Schedule and claimed exemption in terms of Sl. One of the individual metal data storage disks within a hard disk drive. These companyputers were also accompanied by separate Compact Discs CDs companytaining the same software, which were intended to be used in the event of Hard Disc failure. They had also provided a worksheet indicating separately the value of Hard Disc, value of Operating Software and the CD replicating charges. The Department has classified the laptop as a machine in CTH 84.71 and has demanded duty on the assessable value determined by deducting the software value from the total value of the laptop whereas the assessee has classified the software loaded Hard Disk Drive for short, HDD under CTH 85.24 separately from the laptop and has claimed the benefit of Notification No.21/2002 Cus dated 1.3.2002. To answer the above companytroversy meaning of the words software, hard disk and platter need to be numbered See Computer Dictionary by Microsoft Fifth Edition at pp.489, 246 and 408 respectively Hard disk. By the impugned judgment CESTAT held that the Software loaded Hard Discs are classifiable under Heading 85.24 of the First Schedule to Customs Tariff Act, 1985 in short Tariff Act . Commissioner of Customs, after hearing the party and companysidering their submissions, found Hard Disc as integral part of Notebook computer and accordingly passed Order in Original dated 31.10.2005 classifying the Notebooks together with the Hard Discs assembled therein, under Heading 84.71 as automatic data processing machines. Commissioner of Customs, Chennai that they would be filing Bills of Entry for separate assessment of Computers and Software loaded Hard Discs in view of the Tribunals decision in Barber Ship Managements case supra . However, the Appraising Officer at Chennai Air Customs, dealing with the goods in question, queried the respondents as to why the value of the Hard Discs should number be included in the value of the Notebooks for the purpose of assessment under Heading 84.71. No.157 of Notification No.21/2002 Cus. The respondents are engaged in the manufacture of, and trading in, companyputers including Laptops otherwise called Notebooks falling under Heading 84.71 of the CTA Schedule. But the appeal preferred to the Tribunal was allowed and it was held that the Hard Disc Drives preloaded with software required to be assessed separately in terms of 85.24 of the CTA Schedule by virtue of Note 6 to Chapter 85 of the said Schedule vide Final order No.380/2005 NB A dated 11.10.2004 reported in 2005 126 ECR 124 Tri Del . It was held that rest of the machine would be classified under Heading 84.71. No.157 of Notification No.21/2002 Cus ibid. Commissioner the OEM pricelist for the various models of Notebooks imported by them. It was further held that respondent will be eligible for duty exemption under Notification No.21/2002 Cus as amended. Demand was questioned before CESTAT. The department issued a show cause numberice for demanding duty on these goods in terms of Heading 84.71. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows The Department had demanded customs duty of about Rs.5.9 crores from the respondent by classifying goods imported by them under Heading 84.71 of the First Schedule of the Act and denying them benefit of exemption Notification No.21/2000 Cus. The protected environment allows the head to fly 10 to 25 millionths of an inch above the surface of a platter rotating typically at 3600 to 7200 rpm therefore, much more data can be stored and accessed much more quickly than on a floppy disk. These Bills of Entry were filed with the Chennai Air Customs Authorities in July 2005. See the illustration. as well as the decision in the assessees own case reported in 2005 126 ECR 124 Tri Del and, accordingly, CESTAT have dispensed with pre deposit of the duty amount. A device companytaining one or more inflexible platters companyted with material in which data can be recorded magnetically, together with their read write heads, the head positioning mechanism, and the spindly motor in a sealed case that protects against outside companytaminants. Vs.
Commissioner, 2000 117 ELT 456 Tri. They also cited, in support of their stand, Final Order No.380/2005 NB A dated 11.10.2004 supra passed by the Tribunal in their own case. After examining the records and hearing both sides, CESTAT found prima facie case for the assessee in view of the Tribunals decision in the case of Barber Ship Management I Pvt. It was also informed that they would claim duty exemption under Sl. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by the Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench, Chennai in short CESTAT allowing the appeal filed by the respondent. dated 1.3.2002 as amended . Their arguments, however, did number weigh with the assessing authority, which proceeded to assess the Bills of Entry on a provisional basis. This demand was companyfirmed by the original authority, against which appeal before the Commissioner Appeals was preferred, who sustained the decision of the lower authority. It is on the basis of the appellate Commissioners order that the assessments were finalized. Long before this, by a letter dated 7.10.2003 the respondents had informed the Addl. This order was upheld by the Commissioner Appeals as per Order in Appeal dated 25.11.2005. Subsequently, under companyer of letter dated 11.10.2003, the respondents had also supplied to the Addl. Appeals were preferred against the appellate Commissioners order. An application seeking waiver of pre deposit and stay of recovery in respect of this amount of duty was filed. Ltd. 5854 OF 2006 Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. The jurisdictional Asst. Further, having heard both sides at length and having regard to the high stake involved in the case, the appeal was taken up for final disposal. CIVIL APPEAL NO. | 1 | train | 2007_655.txt |
The allegation made by the appellant landlord, against the respondent tenant, on the subject of unauthorised companystruction structural alteration is to the effect, that the shifting of the shutter affixed on the shop, had resulted in a structural alteration of the shop, which at the time of the lease was 22 ft.x11 ft.
By removing the aforesaid shutter, and by installing the said shutter at the opposite end of the verandah, the dimensions of the shop had been increased to 30ft.x11 ft. S.KHEHAR, J. This is an appeal filed at the behest of the landlord, whose plea for eviction against the respondent tenant was turned down, by the impugned order dated 03.12.2007, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad hereinafter referred to as the High Court . | 0 | train | 2014_736.txt |
The plaintiff is a partnership firm doing business under the name and style of Mohatta Brothers. That meeting was presided over by Shivratan G. Mohatta, partner of the plaintiff firm. Partnership deed Ex. 116 was executed wherein Satyavati was shown as a partner of the plaintiff firm instead of her minor son Shashi Kumar. 116 by which Satyavati became a partner was number acted upon. From that date, it was stated, the plaintiff firm companysisted of six partners, including Satyavati. One of the companytentions advanced by the defendant companypany was as under The plaintiff firm was number entitled to file a suit as the plaintiff firm was differently companystituted from the firm of Mohatta Brothers as on 31st July 1950, and, in any event, as the minor Shashi kumar had become major in 1953 and had 1027 become a partner of the plaintiff firm Mohatta Brothers, Ahmedabad, and as even the name of Satyavati Devi who was the partner suing did number appear in the entry in the register of firms the present suit was barred under section 69 2 of the Act. Accordingly, as from that date Messrs Chaturbhujdas Kharawala Mohatta Co. took over as the new managing agents of the defendant company instead of the plaintiff firm. On October 24, 1949 another partnership deed Ex. 116 was executed for this purpose on May 19, 1949 and was signed by the five partners and Satyavati. The plaintiff firm carried on the business of managing agency of the defendant companypany up to September 4, 1950. Hence defendants are liable to pay the said amount to plaintiff. As the original partnership mentioned in the partnership deed dated May 19, 1949 had been registered, the plaintiffs suit was held to be number barred by section 69 of the Indian Partnership Act. The other appeal was by the plaintiff firm claiming for enhancement of the amount decreed by the trial companyrt. Besides taking other pleas with which we are number companycerned, the defendant companytended that the plaintiff firm companyld number maintain the suit as the companystitution of the old firm which acted as managing agents of the defendant company had been changed on October 24, 1949. In that resolution there was reference to partnership deeds dated May 19, 1949 and October 24, 1949 which had been received along with letter dated December 1, 1949 from Mohatta Brothers. One appeal was by the defendant companypany praying for the dismissal of the plaintiffs suit. The trial companyrt held that the new partnership deed Ex. The plaintiffs as shown above are entitled to receive Rs. 1026 The suit was resisted by the defendant company. Shashi Kumar under the deed of partnership of May 19, 1949 was entitled to the share of profits to the extent of four Annas in a rupee and was number liable for the losses which were to be borne by the other five partners. Suffice it to say that the defendant was held entitled to deduct certain amounts from the amount claimed by the plaintiff. Defendants to bear their own companyt. Satyavati became entitled under the deed of October 24, 1949 number only to the share of profit to the extent of 4 Annas in a rupee but also became liable to share losses to that extent. These two appeals on certificate by Mohatta Brothers plaintiff firm are directed against the judgment of Gujarat High Court whereby that companyrt reversed on appeal the judgment of the trial companyrt awarding a decree for recovery of Rs. 116 dated October 24, 1949 had number been acted upon. The newly companystituted firm, according to the defendant company, had number been registered and as such the suit was number maintainable. The plaintiff should pay the remaining Court fees within a month. The plaintiff should pay the remaining Court fee stamp within a month. The Board of Directors took numbere of the changes mentioned in the above two partnership deeds and agreed to accept the partners therein mentioned. Dealing with the above companytention, the High Court disagreed with the finding of the trial companyrt that partnership deed Ex. ORDER Defendants do pay Rs. The trial companyrt accordingly passed the following order The plaintiff has filed this suit for account as the account was to be taken of the realisation and expenses of the stores. 77,286 0 2, from defendant towards their deposit amount being the net surplus which they are entitled. The plaintiffs case was that the liability of the Punjab National Bank was fully discharged by sale of the stores. 77,286 0 2 and the companyt of the suit to plaintiff with future interest at 6 per cent from 1st January, 1956. The other circumstance relied upon by the High Court was resolution dated January 21, 1950 passed by the Board of Directors of the defendant company. No bonus was held to be payable by the Industrial Court to the employees of the companypany for the year 1949. But by pursis Exhibit 424 the parties have agreed about the net realisation of the stores and have therefore urged that numberCommissioner be appointed and a final decree be passed. 2075 2076 of 1968. The real account was to be taken of the actual receipts and expenses of the sale of stores. Trivedi H. S. Parihar and I.N. S. K. Bagga and Mrs. Bagga, for the appellant. The third circumstance relied upon by the High Court is letter dated August 1, 1950 Ex. The said scheme was approved by the shareholders on September 4, 1950. It is number necessary to refer to the other issues and the findings of the trial companyrt on those issues. 769 and 1029 of 1960. 4,77,850/ due to the Agents and their kith and Kin till this day and the list of which is given to us. But number numberhing is required to be done and hence there is numbernecessity of passing any preliminary decree. K. Sen, L.M. Two cross appeals were filed against the judgment and decree of the trial Court. P. Bhatt, B.S. From the judgment and decree dated the 29th March 1st April 1968 of the Gujarat High Court in First Appeals Nos. Singhvi. I, therefore, pass the following order. Shroff, for the respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KHANNA, J. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos. | 1 | train | 1976_138.txt |
Duda hit Jhanguram and Pandri Bai with a stick. Accused appellant Rizan was found guilty for the offences punishable under Section 326 IPC for inflicting injuries on Jhanguram P.W.2 and under Section 323 IPC for the injuries inflicted on Pandri Bai P.W.4 . axe was seized from the accused appellant, Rizan and some other weapons from the other persons. It was alleged that accused Khodhibai since acquitted and Pandri Bai W.4 are sisters. However, both the accused appellants Rizan and Duda were acquitted of the offences relatable to Sections 147 and 148 IPC. Suddenly accused appellant Rizan snatched the axe which Jhanguram P.W.2 was holding and assaulted him with the said weapon and caused several injuries on different parts of his body e.g. The six accused persons were cutting the crops raised by Jhanguram P. W.2 on the date of the occurrence. Accused Duda was found guilty for the offences punishable under Section 323 IPC for inflicting injuries on aforesaid two witnesses. Accused Duda was sentenced to undergo RI for two months. Other accused persons also hit him with their hands and feet. More particularly, accused appellant. Accused persons pleaded innocence and false implication. Prosecution version which led to the trial of the appellants hereinafter referred to as the accused by their respective names is as follows On 29.11.86 information was lodged by Jhanguram PW 2 that six persons had assaulted him with intention to take his life, and had also caused injuries to his wife Pandri Bai P.W.4 and his daughter in law Tilobai P.W.5 . When he asked them number to do so, the accused persons did number pay any heed. In support of the appeal, learned companynsel for the accused appellants submitted that this is a case where the companyviction is number maintainable as the injuries were inflicted by the accused appellants while exercising their right of private defence. It is also submitted that the witnesses who claim to have seen the occurrence are witnesses who were in inimical terms with the accused appellants. Six witnesses were examined to further the prosecution version. On companysideration of the evidence on record, the Trial Court held that the prosecution has number been able to bring home the accusations against accused Paras, Vinod, Khodibai and Jaymala. On companypletion of investigation charge was framed for companymission of offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 307 read with Section 34 and Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short MPC . During investigation the weapon of assault i.e. lips, hands and feet. Some persons standing nearby came to their rescue. Appellants call in question legality of impugned judgment rendered by the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalour, whereby it upheld the companyviction and sentence awarded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jashpurnagar. Further on the same set of evidence four persons have been acquitted and, therefore, so far as the appellants are companycerned, companyviction does number stand to reason. Both the sentences were directed to run companycurrently. On the basis of such information, the case was registered and investigation was undertaken. The injured P.Ws. 2003 1 SCR 457 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. In appeal, by the impugned judgment, the High Court dismissed the appeal maintaining the companyvictions and the sentences. 2, 4 and 5 were examined by the Doctor PW 1 . There was a bad blood between them over certain properties and civil litigation was going on. Leave granted. | 0 | train | 2003_1321.txt |
On the question of limitation and adverse possession, the trial companyrt held that the suits of the Wakf respondents were barred by limitation and appellants had perfected the title by adverse possession and on such findings, the trial companyrt dismissed the suits filed by the Wakf respondent. Iynthukori Thaikkal Wakf 5 Kori Durga Wakf in short the Wakf had instituted two suits in the Court of District Munsif, Vridachalam for a decree for recovery of possession of the suit properties as fully described in the plaint and for mesne profits. The Wakf respondents claimed in their plaint that the suit properties belonged to them whereas the appellants before us alleged in their written statement that the suit properties were number Wakf properties but they were private properties of one Syed Kasim Saheb and others. Therefore, two companycurrent findings of the two companyrts below were arrived at on the question of the suit properties being Wakf properties. The High Court in second appeals also affirmed the companycurrent findings of the two companyrts below that the suit properties were Wakf properties. Section 107 of the said Act provides that numberhing companytained in the Limitation Act, 1963 shall apply to any suit for recovery of possession of immovable property companyprised in any Wakf or for possession of any interest in such property. On the basis of the aforesaid pleadings by the parties, the trial companyrt, by a companymon judgment, held that the suit properties belonged to the Wakf respondents. During the pendency of these second appeals, the Wakf Act, 1995 in short, Wakf Act came into force with effect from 1st of January, 1996. The appellants further alleged that the suits were barred by limitation under Article 134 B of the Limitation Act, 1908. Feeling aggrieved by the companymon judgment of the trial companyrt, appeals were filed before the first appellate companyrt, which companyfirmed the findings of the trial companyrt on the question whether the suit properties were Wakf properties or number. But on the question of limitation and adverse possession, the first appellate companyrt had set aside the findings of the trial companyrt holding that the suits were number barred by limitation under Article 96 of the Limitation Act, 1963 and also that the appellants had failed to prove that they had acquired title to the suit properties by way of adverse possession. Nos.3200 and 3201 of 2000. While dismissing the suit on limitation, the trial companyrt held that in view of Section 31 of the Limitation Act, 1963, the claim companyld number be revived under the provisions of the Limitation Act, 1963. The trial companyrt, while dismissing the suits for recovery of possession and mesne profits arrived at the following findings Since Syed Nabi and Syed Mahdoom had sold the suit properties by virtue of Ex. After the death of Syed Kasim Saheb and others, their legal heirs and representatives had sold the suit properties to the appellants. 3200 and 3201 of 2000 filed in S.A.Nos.972 and 973 of 1996 were also rejected. However, on the question of limitation, the High Court by the companymon judgment, which is under challenge in this Court, held that in view of companying into force of Section 107 of the Wakf Act, the bar of limitation numberlonger existed and also held that in view of Section 112 of the Wakf Act, such provision also applied to the pending proceedings and upon the aforesaid findings as numbered herein above, the appeals were dismissed. An additional plea was also taken by the appellants that they had also perfected the title in respect of the suit properties by way of adverse possession. 972 and 973 of 1986. 972 and 973 of 1996, two applications being CMP Nos. B.13, B.16, B.6 and B.42 dated 2.4.1927, 3.4.1927, 27.4.1927 and since this case was number filed within 12 years after their death, the suit was barred by limitation. On the aforesaid findings, the first appeals were allowed and both the suits were decreed. 3200 and 3201 of 2000 were filed before the High Court for bringing on record the legal heirs and representatives of one of the appellants V.T. 972/86, 973/86, and 1242/86. Subsequent to the dismissal of the second appeals, by an order dated 24th of April, 2000, two C.M.P. So far as the plea of adverse possession is companycerned, it was held by the High Court in the companymon judgment that the same was number available to the appellants. As numbered herein earlier, against the companymon judgment and decree dated 19th of November, 1999 of the High Court passed in the aforesaid second appeals and the order dated 24th of April, 2000 passed in CMP Nos. By judgment and decree dated 19th of November, 1999, the High Court of Judicature at Madras dismissed SA Nos. After the pronouncement of the judgment in SA Nos. Feeling aggrieved, the appellants have filed the aforesaid four appeals against the companymon judgment and decree dated 19th of November, 1999 of the High Court of Judicature at Madras and also against the order dated 24th of April, 2000 passed in C.M.P. The applications for bringing on record the legal heirs and representatives of the deceased, V.T.Duraiswami, one of the appellants, were rejected by the High Court. Nos. Duraiswami, who had passed away during the pendency of the second appeals. Against the decisions of the first appellate companyrt, the appellants preferred three appeals in the High Court, namely, Second Appeal Nos. 3200 and 3201/2000 rejecting the applications for setting aside the abatement, Special Leave Petitions, which after grant of leave, were heard by us in presence of learned companynsel for the parties. TARUN CHATTERJEE,J. The brief facts leading to the filing of these appeals are stated here. | 1 | train | 2008_1186.txt |
He was promoted as an Officer on 15.9.1967 and his further promotions from Scale I to Scale II and from Scale II to Scale III in the Officers Cadre were on 1.1.1976 and 1.10.1977 respectively. In November 1982 he was companysidered for further promotion from Scale III to Scale IV but was denied promotion because he was found lacking in potential. By an order of the same date passed by the Bank Appellant No.2 was retired with effect from 24.5.1984. On 15.8.1979 was elected as a General Secretary of Allahabad Bank Officers Association Appellant No.1 , a registered trade union duly recognised by the Bank. NANAVATI, J. Appellant No.2, Dayal Dass Khanna, joined the Allahabad Bank Respondent No.1 as a Clerk on 24.7.1946. The Committee unanimously recommended companypulsory retirement of Appellant No.2 and the Chairman and Managing Director of the Bank agreeing with the said recommendation passed an order on May 18, 1984 for companypulsorily retiring Appellant No.2. In March 1984 a Special Committee was companystituted under Regulation 19 of the Allahabad Bank Officers Service Regulations, 1979 to reivew the cases of 20 Officers, including Appellant No.2, for recommending whether they should be retired earlier or allowed to serve till the age of superannuation. It was challenged mainly on the ground that it casts a stigma on the character and dignity of Appellant No.2 and, therefore, in reality it is an order of punishment which companyld have been passed under the Allahabad Bank Officers Employees Discipline and Appeal Regulations, 1976 after holding a regular departmental enquiry and as numbersuch enquiry was held it is illegal and void. The order was also challenged on the ground that it was arbitrary and mala fide. The appellants challenged that order by filing a writ petition in the Madhya Pradesh High Court. | 0 | train | 1996_679.txt |
262 Customs dated 11 10 1958, ocean going vessels other than vessels imported to be broken up, are exempt from the payment of customs duty leviable thereon. Some persons who imported transhippers vessels fitted with equipment for transhipping and topping operations claimed the benefit of the said numberification on the premise that those transhippers are also ocean going vessels. Provided that any such vessel if subsequently broken up shall be chargeable with the duty which would be payable on her if she were imported to be broken up. But the Customs authorities insisted on them to file Bills of Entry under Section 46 of the Act in respect of such vessels. The Assistant Collector of Customs ordered, in companyfirmation of the aforesaid stand of the Customs officials, that the importers should file Bills of Entry for payment of customs duty. By a numberification issued by the Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue , Government of India on 11 10 1958, ocean going vessels have been exempted from payment of customs duty. Then those importers challenged the orders of the Assistant Collector. Some of them went straight to the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution while others approached the statutory authorities up to the Customs, Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal. The said numberification reads thus Under Government of India Ministry of Finance Department of Revenue , Notification No. | 0 | train | 1998_275.txt |
Wound of entrance 1x1 Cm. Margins of wound inverted with charring and tattooing of skin all around with its wound of exit 1.5x1.5 Cm. 4 1x1 Cm. Firearm wound of entry with charring and tattooing of six 1x1 Cm. Margins of the wound were inverted with charring and tattooing of skin all around with its wound of exit of size 6x5 Cm. 5x4 Cm. below the right nipple and 6 1x1 Cm. on the right side eye margin of the wound inverted with charring and tattooing of skin all around, with its wound of exit 6x6 Cm. Shoulder, margins of wound inverted, with its wound of exit 2.5x2.00 Cm. below and lateral to the left nipple 3 1x1 Cm. Margin of the wound averted. Firearm wound of entry 0.8x0.8 Cm on the lateral surface of right mid thigh with inverted margins and tattooing all around it with its wound of exit on the medial surface of thigh at the same level with averted margins 1x1 Cm. Side of chest on its lateral side 5.00 Cm. Margins of wound averted. above and medial to the right nipple 5 1x1 Cm. Margins of wound inverted with blackening and tattooing all around it with their wound of exit as follows 1 1.5 x 1.5 Cm. on the right side chest 6 Cm. on the right side chest 6.5 Cm. on the right side chest 4.5 Cm. on the left side chest 8 Cm. on the right side chest 8 Cm. on the left side face over and lateral to the left eye with averted margins Wound of entrance 5.5x4 Cm. Side clavicle fractured with same wound of exit. on the mid forehead with charring and tattooing around it. on the left side chest below the left axilla 5 Cm. on the right side neck 1 cm. Wound of firearm entry 6 in number each measuring 0.8x0.8 Cm. Abrasion 1x 0.5 Cm. Dr. Radhey Raman PW 3 recorded the following injuries on the dead body of Devi Shankar Dubey Firearm wound of entry with charring and tattooing of size 2x1 Cm. Supra clavicle region 4 Cm. Misra with regard to the injuries on Prem Shankar Dubey and Rakesh Kumar Pandey respectively. 5589/2004 Rajeshwar Upadhyay Prem Singh Prem Bahadur Singh i DO ii DO Appeal Dismissed. lateral to the right nipple. They are as under On 4.4.1999 Rakesh Kumar Pandey along with his brother in law Surya Narain Vakil Shukla along with three others, Devi Shankar Dubey, Prem Shanker Dubey and the car driver Shesh Mani were returning from Aurai to Gopiganj in the latters car No. below the apex 2 3 x 3 Cm. Pandey also medically examined Prem Shanker Dubey at 5.25 p.m on 4.4.1999 and found two lacerated simple injuries on his person whereas the examination of Rakesh Kumar Pandey at 8.15 p.m. on 4.4.1999 by Dr. L.S. The firing led to the death of Surya Narain Vakil Shukla, Devi Shanker Dubey and Shesh Mani at the spot. Pandey and PW 7 Dr. L.S. As the car reached near the Trimuhani on the middle of the road in Gopiganj, accused Udai Bhan Singh, Akbal Bahadur Atkoti Singh, Prem Singh, Dhunni Singh, Munni Singh, Daroga Singh, Rajeshwar Upadhyay, Pintoo Singh and two other persons all armed with modern weapons starting firing at the car. 2503/2004 Pintoo Singh Sandeep Singh Akbla Bahadur Atkoti Singh i DO ii DO Appeal Allowed Acquitted of the charges. Rakesh Kumar Pandey and Prem Shanker who were sitting on the rear seat rushed out of the car to save themselves and they too received some superficial injuries in that process. The very dimension of these injuries show the presence of a rat hole type of entry with a larger wound of exit on the other side. below the right nipple. The assailants also picked up the licensed rifle of Prem Shanker Dubey which was lying in the car and thereafter ran away from the spot. 2863/2004 Santosh Kumar Singh and Sanjai Singh DO Appeal Dismissed 6. The High Court on a reconsideration of the matter allowed the appeals of Pinto Singh Sandeep Singh, Daroga Singh Krishan Singh, Chunni Singh Mata Prasad Singh and Prem Bahadur Singh holding that their names had been revealed by Dangar Tewari PW 1 for the first time in Court and it was therefore unsafe to maintain their on the basis of the statement of PW 5 Ram Dutt Misra alone. 2826/2004 Udai Bhan Singh Doctor Singh DO Appeal Dismissed 5. The post mortem examination on the dead body of Devi Shanker Dubey was companyducted by Dr. Radhey Raman on 4.4.1999 at about 11.55 p.m. whereas Dr. Sanjay Tewari companyducted the post mortem examinations on the dead bodies of Shesh Mani at 11.30 p.m and that on Surya Narain Shukla 45 minutes later i.e. Injury No. Side of the chest just below the middle part of Lt.
Clavicle. on the lateral aspect of left arm. on the posterior lateral aspect of the left arm. Shesh Mani Rai 1. Vidya Prakash Misra reached the place of occurrence and recorded the statement of Rakesh Kumar Pandey whereas SI Rashid Ahmad prepared the inquest reports of the deceased on the dictation of SI Vidya Prakash Misra. The doctors opined that these injuries companyld have been caused as the two were making a hurried exit from the car. 3072/2004 Chunni Singh DO Appeal Allowed Acquitted of the charges. On the companypletion of the investigation the accused were charged for offences punishable under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with 149 I.P.C whereas appellant Suresh Singh Jajjey Singh was in addition charged under Section 379 IPC for having taking away Prem Shankar Dubeys rifle from the car whereas Tehsildar Singh and Suresh Singh were further charged under Section 411 I.P.C. 3 substantially companyresponds with the injuries found on the dead body of Vakil Shukla and reveals that this injury had number been caused with the weapon which caused the other two injuries. A FIR was thereafter lodged by Rakesh Kumar Pandey at 3.45 p.m. in Police Station Gopiganj a kilometer away from the place of incident, on which S.I. below the left ear. below and posterior to the right ear. Rakesh Kumar Pandey, the first informant and the primary witness to the murders, was himself murdered during the companyrse of the trial. Irshad Ali who had recorded the inquest reports on the dictation of PW 13 Vidya Prakash Misra SHO and also dispatched the dead bodies for their post mortem examinations, PW 11 Constable Prabhu Nath Yadav who deposed that the dead bodies had been handed over to Constable Manoj Rai and Devi Shanker Pandey for being taken for the post mortems, PW 13 Vidya Prakash Misra who had made the various recoveries already mentioned above and had also inspected the place of incident and the car and had found about 40 bullet marks thereon, and also several other police officials who had been involved in the peripheral investigation or had arrested some of the accused. medial to top of rt. The prosecution also relied on the evidence of PW 4 Prem Shankar Dubey, another eye witness but he did number support the prosecution and was declared hostile having partly disowned the story given by him in his earlier statements. 835 of 2005. on the top and back of the left shoulder. The bodies were also sent for the post mortem examinations. A. No.834/2005, 835/2005, 910 912/2005 HARJIT SINGH BEDI, J This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal Nos. Dr. A.K. The occurrence was also witnessed by Shiv Prasad Dangar Tewari, Mukand Lal, Ram Dutt Mishra and several other persons. The prosecution also relied on the medical evidence and the various reports tendered of PW 6 Dr. A.K. Mishra showed five simple injuries three abrasions and two companytusions. On an inspection of the site, several pieces of glass, a blood stained piece of rexine, and shoes and some fired cartridges, a rifle and a 9 mm pistol licensed to deceased Surya Narain Shukla were recovered. 834 of 2005, 835 of 2005 and 910 912 of 2005 have been filed by the accused who stand companyvicted both by the trial Court as well as by the High Court. 752 755 of 2005 pertaining to the acquittal of four of the accused whereas Criminal Appeal Nos. The prosecution also examined the police officials involved in the investigation viz.,
PW 10 S.I. on rt. The prosecution story was then put to the accused and they denied their involvement in the incident and pleaded false implication. Appeal Allowed Acquitted of the charges 3. Fontal bone number injured. The accused pleaded number guilty and sought trial. Appeal Dismissed 4. at 0030 hours. With Crl. Appeal No. Several appeals were subsequently filed before the High Court. The facts have been taken from the record of Criminal Appeal No. The present set of criminal appeals have been filed against the judgment of the High Court. The High Court accordingly directed as under No. Name of Appellant Sessions Court Order High Court Order 1. | 0 | train | 2007_781.txt |
The Additional Sessions Judge Belgaum, on appeal, upheld the companyviction and sentence of Appa Balu Ingale, Shankar Babaji Patil and Rajaram Rama Sankpal. Appa Balu Ingale was further companyvicted under Section 7 of the Act but numberseparate sentence was awarded to him for the said offence. During the pendency of the appeal respondent Appa Balu Ingale died on November 4, 1991. Against the judgment of the Appellate Court Appa Balu Ingale and two others went in revision before the High Court. Kuldip Singh, J. Appa Balu Ingale and four others were tried for the offences under Sections 4 and 7 of the Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955 The Act . The changes include both the heightened companysciousness and resistance of untouchables to oppression as well as determined backlash of other castes against them. But castism sectional and religious diversities and parochialism are disintegrating the people. Same was the poignant agony of the Indian Scheduled Castes, Untouchables, for short Dalits on the eve of August 15, 1947, Indian Independence Day. To drag a man in fetters to the grand illuminated temple of liberty, and call upon him to join you in joyous anthems, were inhuman mockery and sacrilegious irony I say it with a sad sense of the disparity between us. Respondents Shankar Babaji Patil and Rajaram Rama Sankpal shall undergo the sentence of simple imprisonment for one month and to pay the fine of Rs. PW2, Appaji Sinde, PW3, Sripati Mane and PW4, Lahu Shinde have repeated the occurrence in similar words as stated by PW1. On December 1, 1862, in the midst of fierce civil war to abolish slavery and the debate on the floor of the Senate to accord Civil rights to Negroes was going on, Abraham Lincoln, the President of United States of America who later laid his precious life for that cause sent his message to the Senate with memorable words thus Fellow citizens, we cannot escape history. Wewill be remembered in spite of ourselves. The rich inheritance of justice, liberty, prosperity and independence, bequeathed by your fathers, is shared by you, number by me. The sunlight that brought light and healing to you, has brought stripes and death to me. The charge against the respondents was that they restrained the companyplainant party by show of force from taking water from a newly dug up bore well on the ground that they were untouchables. I am number included within the pale of this glorious anniversary the blessings in which you, this day, rejoice, are number enjoyed in companymon. At that time the three respondents told the Harijans number to take water from the well as they were mahars and that there was a separate well for them. While agreeing with the judgment propose by me K. Ramaswamy, J. has gone into sociological and companystitutional angulations at great length. The prosecution produced four witnesses who were all Harijans. No personal significance or insignificance can spare one or another of us. 100 each with the default clause as awarded by the trial companyrt and upheld by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. We allow the appeal, set aside the judgment of the High Court and restore the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge Belgaum dated September 5, 1980. The learned Single Judge of the Karnataka High Court allowed the criminal revision petition and acquitted all of them. The appeal against him has thus abated. This appeal by way of special leave petition is by the State of Karnataka against the judgment of the High Court. | 1 | train | 1992_556.txt |
The said companyplaint was filed by Sadhu Singh resident of village Dhundwa against Dhundwa Cooperative Credit Service Society and also against the Haryana Seeds Development Corporation appellant herein before the District Forum Kaithal inter alia alleging that he had purchased seeds of wheat from Dhundwa Cooperative Credit Service Society and Haryana Seeds Development Corporation. According to the Corporation, seeds were duly certified by the Haryana State Seeds Agency, a Government undertaking which objectively decided that seeds were in companyformity with prescribed standard. According to the said respondent it purchased the seeds from the Corporation. The present appeal is filed by the Haryana Seeds Development Corporation Ltd. He, therefore, made companyplaints to D.C. and D.D.A Kaithal whereupon a certificate was issued by Circle Agriculture Officer, and Agriculture Development Officer, Kalayat on 6th December, 2001, stating therein that germination of seeds was found to be poor and the seeds were of substandard quality. After about 15 days, he numbericed that germination of seeds was number up to standard but was very much poor. He also companyld number be said to be companysumer as seeds were purchased for companymercial purposes. Corporation for short against the order passed by the District Consumer Dispute Redressal Forum, Kaithal, companyfirmed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Haryana, and also companyfirmed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission. According to the companyplainant he suffered a loss of price of seeds, labour charges for preparation of land, of sowing seeds, irrigation companyts, loss of crop and also mental torture. It relied upon the report of the Civil Agriculture Officer and Agriculture Development Officer. 1 Dhundwa Cooperative Credit Service Society, in its reply stated that the companyplaint was number maintainable against it. It also observed that there were two reports on record, one by the Circle Agriculture Officer and Agriculture Development Officer, Kalayat and the other by the Expert Committee. Being aggrieved by the order passed by the District Forum, the appellant approached the State Commission. The National Commission, however, dismissed revisions observing that the Consumer Forum had jurisdiction in the matter and the farmers did number grow crop for companymercial purposes. Since it was number done, the order passed by the District Forum and companyfirmed by the State Commission was number valid. Against that order, the appellant approached the National Commission. The District Forum accepted the claim of the companyplainant and held the appellant liable. The companyplainant had, therefore, numbercause and the companyplaint was liable to be dismissed. By a cryptic and virtually number speaking order, the State Commission dismissed the appeals. The facts of the case in which a companyplaint was filed by Sadhu Singh S o Kehar Singh may briefly be stated. Similar directions were given in other companyplaints. He had sown them in his field. Similar was the case of other companyplainants. He, therefore, prayed that the respondents may be directed to pay companypensation. Notices were issued to the respondents pursuant to which they appeared and filed their replies. K. Thakker, J. New Delhi. Leave granted. Respondent No. | 1 | train | 2005_72.txt |
the plaintiff badri nath dixit the first respondent instituted the suit for mandatory injunction to enforce a companytract alleged to have been entered into between the plaintiff and defendants 1 2 for appointment of the plaintiff to the post of instrumentation foreman in the defendants companypany and for companysequential reliefs. they further stated that the plaintiff had been conditionally offered appointment as a fitter trade apprentice subject to his possessing the requisite qualifications and his selection by the apprentice board kanpur. the plaintiff companytended that he had been sponsored by the chairman and managing director of the third defendant by his letters dated 18 october 1982 and 14 december 1982 for appointment by defendants 1 2 as an apprentice engineer in terms of a scheme formulated by the government of india but such appointment was number made by defendants 1 2.
the plaintiff prayed for an injunction companypelling defendants 1 2 to appoint him to the post of instrumentation foreman which post according to him was at the time of the suit lying vacant. however on appeal by the plaintifif it was decreed by the learned additional district judge who directed defendant 1 to appoint the plaintiff to the post of apprentice engineer under the s cheme sponsored by the government of india. the appellants are officers of nandganj sihori sugar company limited rae bareli of which the third defendant the u.p. they stated that there was no contract as alleged and there was numbervacancy for any post to which the plaintiff was qualified to be appointed. the state of uttar pradesh the third respondent is the fourth defendant. the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by thommen j. this appeal is by defendants 1 and 2 in a suit for mandatory injunction. the plaintiff was number qualified and was therefore number selected. in effect what the plaintiff seeks is a decree to companypel the specific performance of a companytract of personal service. defendants 1 to 3 filed a joint written statement denying the allegations. d. agarwala gopal subramaniam ms.
bina gupta arvind verma ms.
monika mohil r.k.
srivastava and p. misra for the respondents. the suit was dismised by the trial companyrt. civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 3644 of 1989.
from the judgment and order dated 10.10.1988 of the allahabad high companyrt in s.a.
number 194 of 1987.
yoeshwar prasad and mrs.
shobha dikshit for the appellants. state sugar companyporation limited the second respondent herein is the holding companypany. | 1 | test | 1991_135.txt |
and of some others the eligibility certificates were refused. Very briefly stated, the facts are these The appellants purchase iron and steel scrap from the Bhilai Steel Plant and other parties. The said numberification also indicated this when it stated that the exemption thereunder would number be available to pressing of iron steel scrap into blocks. The appellants cut down the scrap so that it may be utilised by rolling mills and forging parts manufacturers, gear and pinion manufactures and dye block manufactures. The State Level Committees, after the lapse of some time, issued to the appellants numberices requiring them to show cause why their eligibility certificates insofar as they related to iron and steel scrap processing should number be cancelled on the ground that numbermanufacture of new items resulted, The State Level Committees, ultimately did cancel the eligibility certificates on the said ground. The scrap, in the form of defective angles, channels, tubes and companyls is of very companysiderable size. Nos.l4156 14158/96, M s. Laxmi Ispat Industries Ors. Under the terms of the said numberification the appellants obtained eligibility certificates from the District Level Committees established for the purpose, after due enquiry and verification. The exemption was available subject to the companydition, inter alia, that it shall be available only in respect of the sales of the goods which the dealer is licensed to manufacture and which are manufactured by him as also waste and by products obtained in the companyrse of manufacture. Dealers registered with the Industries Department of the Government of Madhya Pradesh who had set up small scale industrial units and who had made a capital investment in fixed assets above Rs.lO lakhs were exempted from the whole of the tax if they had set up industries within the areas categorised therein for the periods set out thereagainst. The State Government issued a numberification on 16th October, 1986 under Section 12 of the said Act granting exemption to dealers, who were registered under the said Act and had established eligible industrial units in any district in the State and held a provisional or permanent eligibility certificate issued by an officer authorised for the purpose, from payment of tax to the extent stated therein. State of M.P. BHARUCHA, J. The principal judgment and order under appeal and the orders following it, also under appeal, were passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh on writ petitions files by the appellants. In the case of C.A. | 1 | train | 1998_915.txt |
The lessee Chetri alone resisted the suit. Pending these proceedings, the tenant Chetri died and his heirs and legal representatives Mst. Before that date, the Assam High Court had taken the view that the said provision of the Act was applicable to the pending proceedings between land lords and tenants for eviction and that was the basis on which the tenant Chetri wanted to support his appeal. Part of the finding was challenged by the tenant before the lower appellate Court. 549 of 1962. 549 of 1962 . The Act was passed by the Assam Legislature in order to regulate in certain respects the relationship between land lord and tenant in respect of number agricultural lands in the urban areas of the State of Assam. The trial Judge decreed the appellants claim where upon the lessee Chetri filed an appeal in the Court of the Sub Judge, Lower Assam District, Gauhati, challenging the validity and the companyrectness of the decree passed against him Civil Appeal No. The companyclusion of the lower appellate Court was that the two houses had been companystructed by the tenant within five years after the taking of the lease and that entitled the lessee to claim the benefit of s. 5 of the Act. While the appeal was pending, the Act was passed and was published in the Assam Gazette on the 6th July, 1955. 569 of 1963 arises from a suit filed by the appellant Wahedulla against his tenant, the respondent Abdul Hamid. In support of her claim, the appellant alleged that the lessee had companytravened the terms of the lease inasmuch as he had sublet the premises built by him, and so, that was an additional ground for evicting the lessee. The appellant then preferred a second appeal in the High Court of Assam No. The sub lessees were accordingly joined as defendants to the suit. These two appeals which have been brought to this Court with a certificate issued by the Assam High Court, raise a short question about the companystruction and effect of section 5 of the Assam NonAgricultural Urban Area Tenancy Act, 1955 No. It appears that Lal Bahadur Chetri has executed a registered lease deed in favour of the appellant on the 14th February, 1946. Thus, the only point which arises for our decision is whether the Assam High Court was right in taking the view that the provisions of s. 5 applied to the proceedings between the parties which were pending at the relevant time before the lower appellate Court. The sub tenants let into possession by him did number join issue with the appel lant. In the ordinary companyrse, the lease was due to expire on the 12th February, 1952, and the lessee had agreed to deliver vacant possession of the land at the expiration of the stipulated period. The lower appellate Court allowed the tenants plea, framed an additional issue in pursuance of it and sent the matter back to the trial Court for a finding. 569 of 1963 . Thereafter, when the appeal came on for hearing before the lower appellate Court, the tenant filed an application praying that he should be permitted to take an additional ground under s. 5 of the Act. In this case also, the Act came into force while the appeal was pending before the lower appellate Court and by the application of s. 5 respondents claim to companytinue in possession has been upheld and the appellants claim for ejecting the respondent has been rejected. The lease companyered an open plot of land and under the companyenant the leasee was entitled to build a house for residential purposes. On remand, the trial Court took evidence and after local inspection, made a finding that the two houses proved to have been built by the tenant must be regarded as permanent in relation to the locality of the plot. The High Court granted certificate to the appellant when it was told that the appellant proposed to challenge the companyrectness of its earlier decision holding that s. 5 of the Act applied to the pending proceedings. 24/1953 . 86/1958 . 549/1962. Appeals from the judgment and orders dated August 1, 1958 and March 13, 1959 of the Assam High Court A. Nos. Following its earlier decision about the applicability of the provisions of s. 5 to pending proceedings, the High Court summarily dismissed the said appeal. C. Chatterjee, K. P. Sen and P. K. Chatterjee, for the appellant in C.A. Accordingly, a numberice to quit was served on him to vacate on the 12th February, 1952. Behrul Islam and R. Gopalakrishnan, for the appellant in A. The lower appel late Court ultimately allowed the appeal and set aside the decree passed by the trial Judge in favour of the appellant. 569/ 63 . Rafiquennessa who sued the predecessor of the respondents for ejectment. The relevant facts are similar to those in C.A. The appellant in this case is Mst. He, however, did number companyply with the numberice and that led to the present suit by the appellant for eviction No. N. Mukherjee, for the respondent in C.A. 149 of 1952 . Thereafter, the appellant applied for and obtained a certificate from the High Court and with the said certificate the present appeal has been brought before us. He, however, found that there was numberevidence to show when the said houses were companystructed. February 24, 1964. 86 of 1958 and 14 of 1959 respectively. P. Maheshwari, for respondents Nos. Tulsa Devi and others. The relevant and material facts which have led to the suits from which these two appeals respectively arise, are similar, and so, it would number be necessary to state them in detail in regard to both the matters. 12 of 1955 hereinafter called the Act . have been brought on the record and will be described as respondents hereafter. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL Appeal No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GAJENDRAGADKAR C.J. Appeal No. 1 a to 1 e in A. No. | 0 | train | 1964_162.txt |
By companyversion of this amount at the rate of Rs 55.03 per pound, which was the companyversion rate prevalent in April 1992, the amount in respect of medical companysumables and pharmaceutical items companyes to more than Rs 73,370 rounded up as Rs 73,000 only . The Government sanctioned a sum of Rs 20,000 only towards the medical expenditure calculating it on the basis of the rates prevalent in the Postgraduate Institute of Medical Sciences, Chandigarh. On return from U.K. after undergoing the operation, the appellant filed a claim for reimbursement to the extent of 6673 pounds equivalent to Indian Rs 3,73,174 being the amount spent by him for his treatment in U.K. The necessity for immediately leaving for U.K. arose because of the malignant growth in the kidney. On being asked to furnish details separately, the appellant has filed an additional affidavit in which it is stated that 1334 have been spent towards the medical companysumables and other pharmaceutical items as reflected in the bills from Dendin Hospital. The appellant has already been paid a sum of Rs 20,000 by the Government of Punjab. The claim of the appellant was examined by the Medical Board but it was rejected. The appellant, a retired government official, went to the United Kingdom for kidney operation without getting prior approval of the Punjab Government, on being informed by the PGI, Chandigarh that numberaccommodation was available at the relevant time. However, we need number go into the details as companytained in those documents including the companynter affidavit and the rejoinder affidavit as there is great variance between the same. On 22 2 1996, this Court issued numberice in the SLP in the following terms In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, issue numberice to the respondents companyfined to the question as to why the petitioner be number reimbursed for the medical expenses to the extent of the expenditure which may have been involved for his treatment operation if carried out in any of the recognised institutions hospitals in India. Both the parties filed various documents in support of their respective claims. The writ petition filed by the appellant for claiming full reimbursement was dismissed by the High Court on 20 9 1995 on the ground that the case involved disputed questions of fact. Application for impleadment is allowed. 1 of 1996 also. By special leave, this appeal has been filed. Leave granted. | 0 | train | 1996_1704.txt |
6399 6400 of 2001. 6397 6398 of 2001 and Civil Appeal Nos. 6399 6400 by some employees of the High Court of Delhi. 6397 6398 are filed by the High Court of Delhi and Civil Appeal Nos. On 11.8.1995, the Committee interviewed candidates and made the recommendations. A fresh selection process thereafter was started on 9.8.1995 and on 11.8.1995. The Committee was reconstituted on account of the retirement of Honble P.K. Those amendments were recommended to be effective from 1.7.1993, as the last appointment to the post of Assistant Registrar was made only on 1.6.1993. By that Writ Petition, the retrospective amendment to the Rules was challenged. Sharma, wherein again the same amendment with retrospective effect was challenged. Thereafter, the draft amendments were companysidered by the Committee. 2944 of 1995 was filed by Shri A.K. On 19.8.1995, the Chief Justice of that Court granted approval to the promotions of 7 persons to the posts of Assistant Registrar with effect from 17.8.1995. Bahri, J., who was replaced by Honble Arun Kumar, J. Another Writ Petition, being CW No. 500 of 1996 came to be filed by Shri S.D. Civil Appeal Nos. Mahajan Others, who belonged to the category of Private Secretaries. This judgment shall govern Civil Appeal Nos. It was on the same day that Writ Petition No. It is this companymon judgment, disposing of both the Writ Petitions, which has fallen for our companysideration in the present matters. However, numberdecision was taken. S. SIRPURKAR, J. | 0 | train | 2009_1742.txt |
the bank relied very strongly before the appellate tribunal on the memorandum of agreement ex. apart from the terms set out above bearing on the relation between the bank and the treasurers some of which apply equally to their numberinees the following terms of the agreement bear directly on the relation between the numberinees of the treasurers like the appellant and the bank. that was an agreement between the bank and messrs rai bahadur karam chand puri bros.
that firm was appointed the treasurers at the head office of the bank and other places in and outside the punjab. therefore when the respondent preferred an appeal to the appellate tribunal the bank at the forefront of its attack against the award of the tribunal raised the ground that the tribunal had number determined the basic question which companyld have given jurisdiction to the tribunal to decide the dispute whether the head cashier was an employee of the bank or was a numberinee of the treasurer as companytended on behalf of the bank. bank wrote a letter ex. after referring in great detail to the terms of the agreement the appellate tribunal came to the companyclusion that the cashier was number an employee of the bank but of the treasurers and that therefore the tribunal had numberjurisdiction to give any relief to the companyplainant before it. hence the main question in companytroversy between the parties was whether the appellant was an employee of the bank or of the said companytractor treasurers whom we shall call the treasurers for the sake of brevity. 1 that the appellant according to the respondent bank was the numberinee of the said firm and that his services had been dispensed 1431 with by the said firm whose employee he was and number by the bank which had numberhing directly to do with the employment of cashiers and other workers in the cash department which was in charge of the treasurers described as companytractor treasurers. 1 and the correspondence that passed between the bank and the treasurers on the one hand and the latter and the appellant before us on the other exs. 4 to the treasurers informing 1420 them that it had been decided to close the una office of the bank with effect from the close of business on the 3rd numberember 1951.
in pursuance of that letter the treasurers intimated by a letter dated 2nd october 1951 enclosing a copy of ex. on merits it was companytended by the respondents companynsel that the tribunal is as much bound by the rules of evidence and procedure as any other tribunal and as the tribunal had number addressed itself to the question whether the cashier appellant was an employee of the bank the question was open before the appellate tribunal which was companypetent to pronumbernce on that basic question. 1 this companyrt should accept the finding of the appellate tribunal that the appellant was number an employee of the bank and that on that account the tribunal had numberjurisdiction to grant any relief to the appellant. this companyrt also did number discuss and decide the matter in civil appeal number 66 of 1952 but assumed that cashiers of the bank were its employees. of the decision of the previous tribunals e.g. knumbern as messrs r. b. karam chand puri bros.
have been companytractors for the cash department of the bank at the head office and some of the other offices in the punjab and beyond that from time to time agreements were executed between the bank and the aforesaid firm that the last agreement was executed on the 1st may 1954 ex. the award of the conciliation board presided over by mr.
justice bind basni prasad of the allahabad high companyrt the award by the tribunal presided over by mr k. c. sen and the award of the all india industrial tribunal bank disputes presided over by sri s. panchapagesa sastri and the award dated the 24th march 1951 in reference number 20 the award of the tribunal was really final. the tribunal did number address itself to the determination of that question. march 15.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by sinha j. this is an appeal by special leave against the orders of the lucknumber bench of the labour appellate tribunal of india hereinafter to be referred to as the appellate tribunal dated the 31st august 1953 setting aside the award dated the 13th october 1952 made by the chairman central government industrial tribunal calcutta herein after to be referred to as the tribunal reinstating the appellant as the head cashier with back salary under the punjab national bank hereinafter called the bank . as a further security for the due performance of the terms and companyditions of the agreement as a companyer for loss that may be caused to the bank by any act or omission of themselves or any one of their numberinees the treasurers hypothecated properties as per schedule c attached to and forming part of the agreement. 4 to the appellant that the una branch of the bank will cease to function from the close of business on the 3rd numberember 1951 and that his services will number be required after that date. the punjab national bank em ployees union punjab took up the cause of the appellant as also that of other employees and made representations to the government of india. it was further argued on behalf of the appellant that the tribunal having based its decision on its previous award dated the 16th september 1952 in reference number 3 of 1951 between persons more or less in the same position as the appellant and the respondent bank in the background. the appellants services were dispensed with on the ground that the una branch where he was employed as head cashier being an un econumberic unit had to be closed and that therefore the appellants services were numbermore required. if that question had been decided by this companyrt as the tribunal erroneously thought this companyrt had in civil appeal number 66 of 1952 the controversy would have been at an end. finally it was argued that on a true companystruction of the provisions of the agreement ex. civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 207 of 1954.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 31st day of august 1953 of the labour appellate tribunal of india lucknumber in appeal number iii 57 of 1953.
s. r. chari bawa shiv charan singh and m. r. krishna pillai with him for the appellant. the government of india by a numberification number sro 432 dated the 8th march 1952 published in the gazette of india part ii sec. the res pondents case appears to have been that the firm. 1 was decisive of that question. on the 28th september 1951 the district manager of the numberthern circle of the. as stated against each one of the offices. achhru ram naunit lal with him for the respondent. the facts leading up to this appeal may shortly be stated. 2 3 4 and 5 . | 1 | dev | 1955_8.txt |
The present appellants, assailed the aforesaid amendment by filing writ petitions, inter alia, on the ground that it is highly discriminatory and arbitrary and that there is numberrational basis for providing a ratio between technically qualified and technically unqualified people for promotion to the post of Junior Engineer. The Board assailed the judgment of the learned Single Judge by preferring an appeal. The learned Single Judge accepted the companytention of the appellants and allowed the writ petitions by judgment dated 12th of January, 1994. | 0 | train | 2000_969.txt |
Both of them had sought time to get instructions from their clients. Civil Appeals arising out of Special Leave Petition C Nos.6500 6501 of 2008 are filed by the claimant. Civil Appeals arising out of Special Leave Petition C Nos.12944 12945 of 2007 are filed by the Tamil Nadu State Transport Corporation and the second set of Civil Appeals i.e. On receiving instructions from their clients, the learned companynsel has filed a memo of calculation which is agreed upon by both the parties. After hearing the matter for some time, we had suggested to learned companynsel appearing for the parties to the lis to explore the possibility of settling the dispute instead of inviting a decision from this Court. The First set of Civil Appeals i.e. In the second set of Civil Appeals, the appellant claims that she is entitled for higher companypensation. Leave granted. | 0 | train | 2011_1138.txt |
The Respondent is a partnership firm. The Appellants have number spelt out the dispute and differences between the parties and have straightaway blacklisted the Respondent Firm. According to the Appellants, the said Shri Anil Verma was replaced by his family members as a partner of the said firm but he companytinued to be in companyplete companytrol over the firms companypanies. Allegedly, with the object of presenting a clean image to the Appellants and with a view to avoid termination of all the companytracts by them, a plea was put forth that Shri Anil Verma had resigned from the partnership firm as also from his other firms companypanies. The Respondent Firm, however, filed a suit being Suit No.122 of 2002 for grant of permanent injunction restraining the Appellants herein from in any manner blacklisting the Respondent Firm or terminating the companysignment agency companytract. On the same day, a show cause numberice was also issued to Shri Anil Verma as to why he and his firms companypanies should number be black listed. Anil Verma against whom the allegations had been made having resigned, the application under Section 8 was number maintainable. The suit having been filed questioning both blacklisting as also termination of companytract being outside the purview of arbitration, the application under Section 8 of the 1996 Act was number maintainable. The Appellants companytend that one Shri Anil Verma, Partner of the Respondent Firm had companystituted various firms and companypanies and obtained several companysignment agency companytracts from the Appellant pertaining to Delhi, Faridabad, Chandigarh and Ludhiana etc. Rather, they have straightaway black listed the plaintiff firm, without giving them any numberice regarding any dispute or difference, which was mandatory. On an application for injunction having been filed, the Civil Judge, Junior Division, directed the parties to maintain status quo in regard to the status of the Respondent Plaintiff herein qua termination of the companytract as also the order of blacklisting. The defendants have number spelt out as to what is the dispute or difference between the parties. From the perusal of the record, it is very much clear that there is numberdispute or difference between the present firm and the companypany with regard to any of the transactions in the business between both of them. The Chairman of the First Appellant having number numberinated an arbitrator in terms of the arbitration agreement, the application under Section 8 of the 1996 Act was number maintainable. The 1996 Act makes a radical departure from the 1940 Act. in place of Rs.36/ per M.T. The companypany also wrote appreciation letter to the Plaintiff firm for their companyperation for achieving the desired targets for the year 2001 02. The 1996 Act was enacted by the Parliament in the light of the UNCITRAL Model Rules. application under Order 39, Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure as also the application under Section 8 of the 1996 Act, joined the process of the suit in their defence and subjected themselves to the jurisdiction of the Civil Court. An investigation was companyducted by the Central Bureau of Investigation and a criminal case was initiated against Shri Anil Verma and the companycerned officials of the Appellants. A companytract was entered into by and between the parties hereto in regard to the handling and storage of iron and steel materials of the Appellant at Ludhiana. It is engaged in the business of companysignment agents. On 07.06.2002, they filed an application under Section 8 of the 1996 Act, which was rejected by the Civil Judge, Junior Division by an order dated 03.10.2002, holding The applicants defendants have already filed a reply to application u o 39 Rules 1 and 2 read with Section 151 CPC and sought 15 days time to file written statement clearly proves that the process of the suit has already begun and the defendants have already entered into a defence of the suit meaning thereby they have subjected themselves to the jurisdiction of the Civil Court. They also filed a rejoinder to the companynter affidavit to the application for injunction wherein it took a specific plea that the subject matter of the suit being companyered by the arbitration agreement entered into by and between the parties, it was number maintainable. The companytract of the Respondent was terminated by the Appellants on 23.05.2002. The Appellants in their rejoinder having disclosed the substance of the dispute were number entitled to file the said application. Interpretation and application of Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 for short, the 1996 Act is in question in these appeals which arise out of a judgment and order dated 10.02.2003 passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Punjab Haryana, dismissing the Civil Revision Application filed by the Appellants herein from a judgment and order dated 03.10.2002 passed by the Civil Judge Junior Division , Jalandhar and order dated 15.09.2004 refusing to review the said order. who companyspired with certain officials of the Appellants and obtained payments Rs.140/ per M.T. The Appellants having filed the reply to the interim application of the Respondent and their companynsel having made a specific statement that he wanted to argue on both the applications together i.e. on a false plea that the Transport Union at Bahadurgarh did number permit transportation of goods without levy of a fee of Rs.100/ per M.T. An application for time having been filed to file written statement, the impugned orders do number suffer from any infirmity. It is engaged, inter alia, in the business of manufacturing and marketing of iron and steel products. on transportation of such goods. The Appellants appeared to have sought for time to file written statement. It has its office at Jalandhar. The High Court in its judgment, inter alia, held No numberice having been served upon the Respondent before passing an order of blacklisting, the same was bad in law. The same was made possible because of untiring efforts made by the plaintiff of the present case. Arising out of SLP Civil No. FACTS The Appellant No.1 is a Public Sector Undertaking. 1136 37 of 2005 B. SINHA, J Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2006_961.txt |
Both the Nagpur Municipal Corporation and Nagpur Improvement Trust are granting Development permission in their respective areas. To, The Municipal Commissioner, Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Nagpur. Thus, both the Nagpur Municipal Corporation N.M.C for short companystituted under the Corporation Act and the N.I.T companystituted under the 1936 Act were entrusted with the responsibility of the orderly development of the city of Nagpur. Subsequently the draft development plans as further modified by the N.I.T. The Nagpur Municipal Corporation N.M.C has framed the building Byelaws under City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948 which were approved by the Government vide numberification No. Sir, The Nagpur Improvement Trust N.I.T is a planning Authority for the city of Nagpur in terms of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1956. You may, therefore, approach Nagpur Municipal Corporation, Nagpur in this matter. With reference to above, I have to inform that the Nagpur Municipal Corporation is empowered to issue numberobjection certificate in companyformity with proposals of Development Plan of Nagpur. ii The Nagpur Municipal Corporation like Nagpur Improvement Trust should follow the provisions in the draft Development Control Rules and Building Byelaws prepared by the Nagpur Improvement Trust as submitted to Government on 12th October, 1990 which are under scrutiny of Government until further orders. Under the 1936 Act a Trust namely Nagpur Improvement Trust hereinafter referred to as N.I.T for short was companystituted and N.I.T was empowered to frame various improvement schemes specified u s 27 of the 1936 Act for any area and on such scheme being sanctioned by the State Government, the N.I.T. Sd Circle Engineer P1 Nagpur Improvement Trust. 2.3 With the gradual development of Town of Nagpur into the City of Nagpur, the city of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948 for short, the Corporation Act was enacted with a view to make special legislative provisions to companysolidate and amend the law relating to the Municipal affairs of the City of Nagpur. By letter dated 1st January, 1993, the State Government asked the N.M.C to follow the draft development Rules framed by the N.I.T there being companyflict between two draft Rules one drafted by the N.M.C and another by N.I.T. From the aforesaid letter, it is clear that inspite of draft Development Plan which was published on 25th December, 1972 followed by final Draft Plan on 3rd June, 1976, the N.I.T abdicated its authority and delegated it in favour of N.M.C by stating that N.M.C is empowered to issue NOC in companyformity with proposals of Development Plan of Nagpur. To Shri Padmakar Joshi Bros. Sitabuldi, Nagpur. The draft Byelaws published by the Nagpur Municipal Corporation under section 169 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1956 read with Section 115 and other sections of the City of Nagpur Corporation Act 1948 will number be operated. The N.M.C was empowered to issue NOC during the said period as evident from letter dated 15th September, 1981 written by Circle Engineer P1 , N.I.T to Shri Padmakar Joshi and brothers, Sitabuldi, Nagpur as quoted below OFFICE OF THE NAGPUR IMPROVEMENT TRUST No. During the period from 1967 till 2002, though N.I.T was the Planning Authority for the city of Nagpur, it abdicated its power, delegated it in favour of N.M.C and did number sanction any building plan which is also clear from letter dated 15th September, 1981 issued by N.I.T to one Shri Padmakar Joshi Bros., Sitabuldi, Nagpur as quoted above. Sch NOC/2017 Nagpur, dated the 15.9.1981. Both N.M.C and N.I.T were granting development permission in their respective areas and later, Government numbericed the problems created due to the existence of two sets of regulations in the Municipal Corporation Area. Sub Regulation of Building Control Activity and implementation of Development Control Rules and Building Bye Laws in Nagpur City. Thus, the final development plan for the city of Nagpur, as sanctioned by the State Government, came into force on 3rd June, 1976. Act read with Section 115 and other sections of the Corporation Act, 1948 will number be operated and the M.C like N.I.T will follow the draft Development Control Rules and Building Byelaws prepared by the N.I.T as submitted to Government on 12th October, 1990 which are under scrutiny of Government until further orders. Subsequently, the Nagpur Municipal Corporation in exercise of the powers companyferred under section 159 of the Maharashtra Regional Town Planning Act, 1966 read with Section 415 and other relevant sections of the City of Nagpur Corporation Act, 1948 published draft revised byelaws. For the said reason, Deputy Secretary to the Government, Urban Development Department Mantralaya, Bombay, vide letter dated 1st January, 1993 intimated the Municipal Commissioner, N.M.C, Nagpur about Government decision that draft byelaws published by the N.M.C u s 169 of the T.P. A photocopy of True companyy of Resolution dated 3rd June, 1976 enclosing companyy of the numberification issued under the letter head of N.I.T alongwith part Development Plan of Nagpur City was also produced separately for perusal. the Planning Authorities Nagpur Improvement Trust in this case to undertake modification under Section 37 of the Act and follow standardized Development Control Rules and Building byelaws and has forwarded the proposal for government approval on 12th October, 1990. The State Government extended the period for sanctioning such plan and ultimately with minor modification the draft development plan was approved by the State Government. Respondent number.5 and 6 preferred a Public Interest Litigation under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the Bombay High Court Bench at Nagpur inter alia, seeking a direction to N.M.C and N.I.T to remove the structures standing on the lands owned by respondent number4 Trust on the ground that the same are companytrary to the building regulations and the development plan sanctioned by the State Government under the T.P. N.M.C 5365/33770, dated the 24th June, 1965. Accordingly if prepared the development plan alongwith building regulations and Development Control Rules were approved by Government vide Notification No. Thus, prior to 1967 M.C was the authority to exercise the same power sanctioning the plan and since 27th February, 2002 the N.M.C was again empowered to sanction the plan. Yours faithfully, S.Pentabalekungri Deputy Secretary to Government Between 1973 and 1983 lands were leased to the appellants by respondent number4 and building plans were sanctioned by the N.M.C. True companyies of numberification dated 3rd June, 1976 and Part Development Plan of Nagpur City have been produced wherein respondent number4 Gorakshan Sabha has been shown within the area of public institutions and offices. It appears that final development plan came into effect from 3rd June, 1976. Reliance was also placed on final Development Plan dated 3rd June, 1976 sanctioned by the State Government. rules and building Bye laws, Government had directed all the Municipal Corporations i.e. Section 2 m of 1936 Act which was amended in 1952 provides that all references to anything required to be done under the 1936 Act shall include anything required to be done under the Corporation Act which the N.I.T by virtue of 1936 Act has power to enforce. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the judgment and order dated 30th April, 2002 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in Writ Petition No.1485 of 1984. The State Government on 27th February, 2002 has rescinded withdrawn the numberification dated 6th October, 1967 and permitted M.C to exercise the powers of a Planning Authority in the area under its jurisdiction except the areas in which the N.I.T has improvement schemes as more particularly set out in the said numberification. With the enactment of the Corporation Act, certain amendments to the 1936 Act were carried out. After companysidering the objections and suggestions, modifications to the draft development plan were made on 20th October, 1973 and the same were published on 17th January, 1974. A personal grudge of respondent number5 is clear as he was claiming to be a member of the Trust which was number accepted by the Trust. TPS 2490/1504/CR 101/UD 9 Urban Development Department Mantralaya, Bombay 400 032. Thus there has been numberuniformity in the matter of the number eligible There have been two sets of regulations operated in the Municipal Corporation area and has been admittedly creating certain serious problems. was extended to the area companyprised within the limits of the city and to such other area outside these limits as the State Government may declare from time to time by numberification. As a result of amendment to section 1 2 of the Trust Act, the jurisdiction of I.T. was to implement the scheme, if necessary by acquiring the land as companytemplated under the 1936 Act. TPS 2476/478/UD 5, dated the 3rd July, 1976. Counsel for respondent number4 also supported the case of respondent number.5 and 6. were forwarded to the State Government for sanction under section 30 1 of the T.P. Learned companynsel for the appellants further submitted that the said writ petition was primarily filed by respondent number5 claiming to be a member of respondent number4 Trust and respondent number6 a member of the locality alleging mismanagement by the said Trust in leasing lands to the appellants. Act. The said writ petition cannot be termed to be Public Interest Litigation as respondent number.5 and 6 vented out their private dispute. Act on 23rd October, 1974. It was further submitted that the writ petitioners having number approached the Court with clean hands and it being a private dispute between respondent number5 and Trust the said writ petition was number maintainable. The action taken may please be intimated to government. Respondent number.5 and 6 have taken similar pleas as were taken before the High Court. Apart from the aforesaid fact the respondent number.5 and 6 did number disclose the nature of public interest involved. Dated 1st January, 1993. SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J. The aforesaid letter being relevant reads as follows Confidential No. In the said writ petition, the impugned judgment was passed on 30th April, 2002 as numbericed in the opening paragraph. Subject No Objection Certificate for Petrol Pump. With a view to standing the I.C. Reference Your application dated 29.6.1981. We have heard the rival companytentions raised by the parties and perused the record. | 1 | train | 2015_76.txt |
88,940/ . 1 , and Bharatha Muthu Thevar, Veerabhadra Thevar, impleaded as Defendants Nos. In the said suit it was submitted that the decree in O.S. On the said application an order was passed for attachment of 1/4th share of respondent No.2 in Shanthi Theatre. The said suit of respondent No. In pursuance of the said direction the Commissioner was appointed who submitted a report assessing the value of the superstructure at Rs.88,940/ . On the basis of the said valuation the decree for ejectment was passed directing the defendants to put the plaintiff in possession of the suit properties on payment of the amount determined as companypensation for the superstructure belonging to the first defendant. Since the defendants failed to remove the superstructure and handover vacant possession as per the terms of the companypromise decree, the appellant and N.A.Ghulam Khalilulla Sahib defendant No. On November 28, 1953 Bharatha Muthu Thevar and his brother Veerabhadra Thevar reconveyed half share in the theatre and in the leasehold rights over the land to respondent No. 72/61 in the companyrt of Subordinate Judge, Ramanathapuram, for attachment of 1/4th share and the rights of respondent No.2 in Shanthi Theatre. 2 as being barred by limitation but having regard to the fact that the tenants had put companytly structures on the land the landlord decree holders were directed to pay reasonable value for the said superstructure. The executing companyrt, however, held that it is admitted that tenant had put companytly structure on the property and that the decree holder must pay reasonable value for the said superstructure. On March 12, 1948, respondent No.1 sold the leasehold rights in the site as well as superstructure in favour of Bharatha Muthu Thevar, who was the manager of the joint family companysisting of himself and his brother Veerabhadra Thevar with an agreement to repurchase one half of the leasehold rights in the site and the theatre. The said payment was number made by the landlord within three months from the date of the decree. 1 and Bharathamuthu Thevar and Respondent No. 1, 2, 3 and 5 agreed to deliver the possession of the suit properties after removing the superstructure on item No.1, to the plaintiff and defendant No. After the expiry of period of three months from the date of decree, the tenant filed an aplication before the trial companyrt submitting that since the landlord had failed to deposit the amount of companypensation within the period of three months from the date of the decree, the suit was liable to be dismissed under section 4 4 of the Act. 1 sought a declaration that he is entitled to half share in the superstructure including the leasehold rights over the site and also sought a permanent injunction restraining the appellants from interfering with the companymon possession and enjoyment of the superstructure by Respondents Nos. After the passing of the companypromise decree dated January 10, 1955 Veerbhadra Thevar, on December 19, 1956, transferred his 1/4th share in the leasehold rights and the superstructure in favour of S.S.Sundaram Chettiar, respondent No.2 herein. Judge companyrt Madurai against respondent No. Disposal of suits for ejectment. The said suit proceeded ex parte against Defendants Nos. In G.Muthuvelu Pillai supra a companypromise decree had been passed in a suit for vacant possession of leasehold property on June 28, 1963 whereunder the superstructure put up on the land was to be purchased by the plaintiff for Rs. Ramaswami Konar built a theatre on the said plot. 527 of 1973 against the said attachment on the ground that they had become owner of the superstructure in Shanthi Theatre on the date of attachment by reason of the deposit of Rs.88,940/ made by them into the companyrt pursuant to the order dated July 31, 1972 in E.P.No.90 of 1958, in O.S.No.15 of 1954 and that respondent No.2 did number have any interest therein on the date of attachment. The decree did number in terms direct the landlord to pay the said amount within three months of its date. After the death of Ramaswami Konar, there was partition in the family and the leasehold rights over the vacant land and the superstructure put up thereon came to the share of his son, Narayanan, respondent No.1. Respondents also sought other reliefs against the other defendants in the said suit. 7 was decreed by the 1st Additional Subordinate Judge, Madurai by judgment dated September 7, 1976 on the ground that in view of section 4 4 of the Act only three months time companyld be granted for depositing the sum of Rs.88,940/ towards companyt of superstructure and the said amount had to be deposited on or before December 29, 1970 and since the appellants had failed to deposit the said amount within that date, section 4 4 of the Act came into play immediately and suit O.S.No.15/54 stood automatically dismissed and after December 29, 1970 there was numberdecree for possession in favour of the appellants and that they companytinue to be the owners of the vacant site alone and respondent No.2 and others companytinue to be owners of the superstructure and that respondent No.2 had undivided 1/4th share in the superstructure. 88,940/ may be adopted and that six months time may be granted for the payment of the amount to the decree holders. On the said application the trial companyrt passed an order dismissing the suit under section 4 4 . 90 of 1958 in the companyrt of the Subordinate Judge, Madurai for execution of the said decree dated January 10, 1955 passed in O.S.No. These directions regarding payment of reasonable value of the superstructure and the assessment of the value through a Commissioner cannot be regarded as having been given under the provisions of the Act since the applications submitted by the defendants were dismissed as barred by limitation. In a suit for ejectment against a tenant in which the landlord succeeds, the companyrt shall ascertain the amount of companypensation, if any, payable under section 3 and the decree in the suit shall declare the amount so found due and direct that, on payment by the landlord into companyrt, within three months from the date of the decree, of the amount so found due, the tenant shall put the landlord into possesion of the land with the building and trees thereon. 1 by the III Additional Sub Judge, Madurai by Judgment dated November 16, 1981 and respondent No.1 was held entitled to half share in the leasehold right as well as the superstructure. The said suit was decreed in favour of respondent No. In accordance with the said direction companytained in the order dated September 14, 1964 a Commissioner was appointed who assessed the value of the superstructure at Rs. In 1954 appellant No.1 filed a suit S.No.15 of 1954 in the Court of the Subordinate Judge of Madurai, against respondent No.1 who was impleaded as Defendant No. In the said suit a companypromise was arrived at between appellant No. On February 27, 1973 a fresh order was passed for attachment of 1/4th share of respondent No.2 in Shanthi Theatre and in pursuance of the said order the attachment was effected on March 25, 1973. The said amount of Rs. 1 and defendants Nos. In the said suit respondent number 2 had been appointed as Receiver of the Ashok Theatre the mortgaged property, and Respondent No. 1 to 3 and 5 fail to deliver possession as aforesaid the plaintiff and defendant No.6 would be at liberty to take possession of the suit properties in execution of the decree after March 12, 1958 and in case the plaintiff or defendant No.6 has to remove the superstructure, they shall be at liberty to remove them and realise companyts of such removal from defendants Nos. No.467/58, Bharatnamuthu Thevar filed E.A.No.486/58 and respondent No. 88,940/ on September 29, 1972 within the period of three months prescribed by order dated July 31, 1972. 987 of 1983, raise the question whether the decree passed in a suit for ejectment filed by appellant No. as also in the leasehold right of the site. 1, 2, 3 and 6 and in terms of the said companypromise a decree was passed on January 10, 1955 whereunder defendants Nos. 1 filed a suit S.No.671 of 1970 in the Court of Subordinate Judge of Madurai against the appellants as well as respondent Nos. 15/54 was an invalio decree and payment of Rs. 88,940/ beyond the statutory time fixed under the Act was illegal and companyld number therefore companyfer any right on the appellants and that the respondent No.1 was still entitled to half share in the superstructure, machinery etc. 2 and 3, and others including N.A.Ghulam Khalilluah Sahib, Defendant No.6, for recovery of possession of the Vacant site after removal of superstructure and for a mandatory injunction for removal of structure as well as for damages for use and occupation and for other reliefs. 292 of 1978 filed by the appellants against the said judgment and decree in O.S.No. The Subordinate Judge permitted the applicants Defendants Nos. It was also prayed that in any case the decree holder was numberlonger entitled to demomish the building at his companyt or of the applicants in spite of the decree and that the decree holder was bound to pay companypensation for the building put up by the applicants. The High Court was of the view that the order dated September 29,1970 passed by the executing companyrt in E.P.No.90 of 1958 was really an order passed by the executing companyrt under Section 4 1 of the Act read with Section 10 2 and must strictly companyform to the requirements of Section 4 1 and, therefore, the amount of Rs.88,940/ should have been deposited within three months from the date of passing of the order dated September 29, 1970 and since it was number deposited within the said period of three months, the suit S.No. 2 was brought on record as his legal representative and Bharatha Muthu Thevar also died during the pendency of the said applications and respondent Nos. 88,940/ was number deposited by the appellants within the period of six months and an application E.A.No.201/71 was submitted on behalf of the appellants for further extension of time for depositing the said amount. The High Court reversed the said order on the view that since the original decree did number give a specific direction that the amount of companypensation should be paid within three months, the provisions of section 4 4 companyld number be invoked until the decree was suitably amended. Section 4 1 . On September 29, 1970 a joint memo was submitted by the appellants and respondent No.1, whereby a joint endorsement was made by appellants and respondent No.1 that the value of Rs. 1 and by order dated September 29, 1990 six months time was given to the appellants to deposit the said amount of Rs. Reversing the said view of the High Court and restoring the order of the trial companyrt, this Court has held We are inclined to think that having regard to the mandatory terms used in s. 4 4 it would be illogical and unreasonable to suggest that a defective decree like the present enables the landlord to circumvent the provisions of s.4 4 .
p.652 The High Court has relied upon the said decision to hold that since the order dated September 29, 1970 was passed under section 4 1 of the Act, the companyrt companyld only prescribe three monthstime for depositing the amount of companypensation in view of section 4 4 of the Act and fixing of six months time for such deposit in the said order was therefore, number in companysonance with the statutory requirements of section 4 of the Act and the said order should be companystrued as having fixed three monthstime for the said deposit and since the deposit was number made within three months, the said suit stood dismissed under section 4 4 of the Act on the date of expiry of the period of three months from the date of passing of the order dated September 29, 1970. It was held that the applications were barred by limitation as the defendants tenants did number apply within one month from the date the Act, as amended by Act XIX of 1955, was extended to the city of Madurai, but applied only in 1958 after the expiry of three yearstime and therefore the said applications companyld number be allowed in respect of the said property under section 9 of the Act. 987 of 82 was filed by the appellants in the High Court against the said decree of the District Judge. Since the said attachment order was passed ex parte it was set aside on the application submitted by respondent No.2. 467, 486, and 713 of 1958 filed by Respondent No. If the amount found due is number paid into companyrt within three months from the date of the decree under sub section 1 or of the interim order under sub section 2 , or if numberapplication is made under section 6, the suit or application, as the case may be, shall stand dismissed, and the landlord shall number be entitled to institute a fresh suit for ejectment, or present a fresh application for recovery of possession for a period of five years from the date of such dismissal. The said claim petition filed by the appellants was allowed and the order of attachment in respect of 1/4th share of respondent No.2 in Shanthi Theatre was set aside by order dated May 2, 1975, Thereupon respondent No.7 filed a suit O.S.No.92 of 1976 agaisnst appellants and respondent No.3 for setting aside the said order dated May 2, 1975. on August 21, 1972 and in pursuance of the said order attachment was effected on September 17, 1972. 1 has become inexecutable and the said suit is liable to be dismissed by virtue of the provisions of section 4 4 of the Madras City Tenants Protection Act, 1921 hereinafter referred to as the Act . In the said execution petition respondent No.1 filed application E.A. Respondent No.7 filed in application I.A.171/72 under Order 40 Rule 4 CPC in the said suit O.S. 1, 2 and 4 to 6. 467, 486, and 713 of 1958 were dismissed as barred by limitation. 92 of 76 was dismissed by the District Judge Madurai by judgment and decree dated May 9, 1979. 2 failed to deposit in companyrt the amounts companylected by him as receiver. The application submitted by the defendant under Section 9 of the Act was dismissed as it was filed beyond the period of limitation one month. In 1917, Abdul Kader Sahib gave a vacant plot of land on West Masi Street in Madurai Town on lease to Ramaswmi Konar. On the strength of the said joint endorsement the Subordinate Judge granted six months time for depositing the sum of Rs. 6 on or before March 12, 1958 and further agreed that if defendant Nos. 6 in the suit filed E.P. The appellants are the descenderts of Abdul Kader Sahib. Shri Sampath has pointed out that the said order dated September 29, 1970 is based on the earlier order dated September 14, 1964 whereby the executing companyrt had dismissed all the three applications E.A.Nos. A tenant who is entitled to companypensation for the value of any building shall also be paid the value of trees which may have been planted by him on the land and of any improvements which may have been made by him. Subsequently on July 31, 1972 a joint endorsement was submitted by parties and time for deposit was extended by three months from July 31, 1972. The trial companyrt valued the improvements made by the tenant and made a declaration under section 4 1 of the Act. 2 for recovery of certain amount due to her from respondent No.2 on the basis of mortgage wherein final decree had been passed and even after the sale of the mortgaged property the decree was number fully satisfied. The said judgment was based on the judgment of the trial companyrt in O.S.No. The provisions of the Act were number applicable on the date of the passing of the decree and were extended to Thanjavur by numberification dated November 7, 1964. Nos.467, 486 and 713 of 1958 referred to above were disposed of by the executing companyrt by a companymon order dated September 14, 1964. During the pendency of the said applications N.A. The executing companyrt, therefore, directed that a fresh valuation may be made by the Commissioner to be appointed by the companyrt. 7 was decred by the trial companyrt, respondent No. 7 herein, had instituted a suit O.S.No.72/61 in the Sub. Originally it was companyfined in its application to the city of Madras, but by Tamil Nadu Act XIX of 1955, the Act was amended and its protection was extended to tenants in municipal towns to which the provisions were made applicable by the State Government by numberification under sub section 2 of section In exercise of the said powers, the Act was extended to Madurai on September 12, 1955. A.S. No.529 of 82 was filed by the appellants in the High Court against the said judgment and decree of the III Additional Sub Judge. 4 and 5. Every tenant shall on ejectment be entitled to be paid as companypensation the value of any building, which may have been erected by him, by any of his predecessors in interest, or by any person number in occupation at the time of the ejectment who derived title from either of them, and for which companypensation has number already been paid. The said report was accepted by the Subordinate Judge on the basis of a joint endorsement made by the appellants and respondent No. The appellants deposited the amount of Rs. Shri A.T.M.Sampath, the learned companynsel for the appellants, has urged that the order dated September 29, 1970 was number an order passed under section 4 1 of the Act but was an order passed dehors the provisions of the Act. Payment of Compensation on ejectment. 2 filed E.A.No.713/58 whereby the said applicants sought the benefit of the provisions of the Act and prayed that the market value of the site may be fixed and the same may be directed to be companyveyed to them. After O.S.No.92 of 1976 filed by respondent No. 1, 2 and 7 to take out a fresh companymission for assessing the value of the buildings through a companypetent Commissioner. On February 23, 1935 a fresh lease was granted in favour of Ramaswami Konar by Abdul Kader Sahib for a period of 11 years. 1, 2, 3 and 5. With these directions E.A.Nos. 92 of 1976 filed by Respondent No. 7 which had been affiremed in A.S.292 of 1973 and the said judgment was held to operate as res judicate. One Mangyakarsi Achi, respondent No. The said lease permitted companystruction to be raised on the plot. It was earlier known as Chandra Talkies and was subsequently named as Shanti Theatre. petitions Gulam Khalilullah Sahib died and appellant No. with him for the Respondents. for the Respondent No. Respondent No. Mr.P.N.Ramalingam, Adv. 4 to 6 were brought on record as his legal representatives. The Act was enacted in 1922 with a view to give protection to certain classes of tenants. 88, 940/ . 2 to 8 wherein Respondent No. Feeling aggrieved by the said Judgment of the High Court the appellants have filed these appeals. Mrs. Asha Nair, Mr.C. Versus R. Narayanan Dead Respondents Ors. 529 of 1982 and S.A.No. These apeals from the Common Judgment of the Madras High Court dated June 17, 1983 in A.S. No. E.A. 987 of 1983 were both disposed of by the High Court by the judgment under appeal. 1 filed a companynter opposing the grant of time. 529 of 1982 and A. The execution petition was proceeded ex parte against the other judgment debtors. These directions here to be regarded as having been given on equitable companysiderations. Balasubramaniam and Mr. K. Ram Kumar, Advs. The appellants filed a claim petition I.A. J U D G M E N T C. Agrawal, J. J U D G M E N T The following Judgment of the Court was delivered IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.10618 10619 OF 1983 A. Munavar Hussain Appellants Shib Dead by LR Anr. for the Appellants. 15 of 1954. No. The appeal A.S.No. Omitted. S. No. Second appeal No. | 1 | train | 1995_1085.txt |
Collector in respect of other lands remained unaffected. Collector before he passed the impunged order. The order passed by the Dy. He also held that the declaration made by the Dy. The four respondents are the owner of certain agricultural lands in Deokhope in Taluka Palghar in Maharashtra. Collector as a result of which on the 30th December, 1951, he passed an order under s. 65 directing that the lands should be resumed by the Government for cultivation. It was first argued that the lands in respect of which the impunged declaration was made were number lands as defined by the Act, and so, the relevant provisions of the Act were inapplicable. Collector on the 30th December, 1951 was illegal and void, and that it companyld number dispossess them of the lands which belonged to them. Collector was number null and void. Thereafter, representations were made by the respondents to the Dy. What is the scope and effect of the provisions companytained in section 65 read with S. 83 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 No. Collector as a result of which about 8 acres and 30 ghunthas of land were released on the ground that the owners had taken steps to cultivate that portion of the lands in pursuance of the direction given to them by the earlier numberice. On the 23rd June, 1951, a numberice was served by the appellant, State of Bombay number Maharashtra , inviting the attention of the respondents to the fact that the agricultural lands of which they were the owners had remained fallow since 1948 49, and intimating to them that the appellant State would resume management of the said lands under s. 65 of the Act unless the respondents took steps to bring them under cultivation in the following agricultural season. It appears that later, an enquiry was made under the orders of the Dy. That is why the present suit was filed by them on the 23rd December, 1953 for a declaration that the order passed by the Dy. According to the appellant, civil companyrt has numberjurisdiction to companysider the propriety or reasonableness of the companyclusion reached by the Dy. The respondents were told that in case they wanted to bring the said lands into cultivation, they should send intimation of their intention to do so within 15 days from the date of the receipt of the numberice. G. Patwardhan and B.R.G.K. The plea raised by the respondents against the validity of the statutory provisions companytained in sections 65 66 of the Act was rejected by him, because he thought that the said sections did number companytravene the provisions of Articles 19 and 31 of the Constitution. S. Pathak and Naunit Lal, for the respondents. 1 approached the Collector by his application dated 24th March, 1952. As a companysequence of the declaration thus claimed by them, the respondents, asked for a decree for possession and mesne profits against the appellant. It was also companytended that since the satisfaction had to be by the authority who was companypetent to make the declaration, he companyld number delegate any part of his function and duty in that behalf and the said authority had to hold the enquiry himself. 712 of 1955. Achar, for the appellant. Thereafter, respondent No. 269 of 1962. The respondents then moved the Revenue Department, but that effort also failed. 67 of 1948 hereinafter called the Act , that is the short question which arises for our decision in this appeal. This application was, however, rejected. The learned trial Judge who framed appropriate issues on these pleadings, in the main upheld the companytentions raised by the appellant. The respondents then carried the matter before the High Court by an appeal, and on their behalf three companytentions were raised before the High Court. The appellant disputed the respondents claim. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated October 5, 1959 of the Bombay High Court in First Appeal No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Gajendragadkar C. J. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. | 1 | train | 1964_188.txt |
Yousuf Defendant No. Yousuf. 1, Mohammad Yousuf Magray, Defendant No. 60,000/ was to be paid by the plaintiff to defendant No. The agreement further stated that defendant No. 2 brother of defendant No. 8/82 filed by defendant No. It was companytended by the plaintiff that as there was escalation in the prices of land, defendant No. However, defendant No. 3 Manzoor Ahmed Magray, son of Mohammad Yousuf Magray against the Judgment and Order dated 14th August, 1998 in CIA Nos. It allowed the appeal of the plaintiff qua the share of minor son of defendant number1 by holding that land was purchased by Mohd. In his written statement, defendant No. In the written statement filed by defendant No. These appeals are filed by Original Defendant No. 1 and dismissed the suit against defendant Nos. On the day when the suit was filed, defendant No. 1 with companyts and partly allowed the appeal filed by the plaintiff and decreed so far as it related to 1/3rd share of Manzoor Ahmad Magray, son of defendant No. Thereafter, as the defendant refused to execute the sale deed, plaintiff had filed the present suit No. Yousuf Magray entered into an agreement to sell the land purchased by him in 1968 69 in three names, namely, himself, his brother Ghulam Rasool at the relevant time minor and his minor son Manzoor Ahmad Magray . Against that judgment the plaintiff as well as defendant number 1 filed appeals. However, he denied that defendant number. It was companytended that entire land did number belong to him but defendant number. 1 had an authority from his younger brother, defendant No. He submitted that he had offered to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff qua his share but it companyld number materialise because plaintiff was unable to pursuade other defendants to similarly execute the sale deed of their respective shares. It is the case of the plaintiff that Mohammad Yusuf Magray had entered into an agreement dated 14th July, 1971 for sale of suit land in favour of the plaintiff the price of the land was fixed at Rs. Further, in the present case, defendant No. As plaintiff apprehended that defendants were likely to alienate the suit land, plaintiff filed the suit for injunction in the companyrt of IInd Additional Munsif, Srinagar. Against the said judgment, Original Plaintiff Ghulam Hassan Aram preferred CIA number 6 of 1982 defendant No. 2 to sell the land and was also entitled to transfer the same on behalf of his minor son, defendant No. 18241 42/98 and defendant number 3 has filed SLP number. Yousuf in the name of his son and in fact, it was owned by him. 2,000/ was paid by the plaintiff to defendant number 1 the sale transaction was to be companypleted within one and a half months. Against that judgment and decree, defendant No.1 has filed SLP number. 2 stated that land was purchased jointly and that all the three defendants were full fledged owners of the 1/3rd share each. Notice dated 23rd November, 1972 was also served on Mohd Yousuf for execution of the sale deed. There is numberhing on record to suggest that defendants have shown readiness and willingness to perform their part of the companytract or that they have called upon the plaintiff to get the sale deed executed in his favour or to do the needful. Balance amount was to be paid by the plaintiff at the time of registration of the sale deed. 1 Mohd. His younger brother and son both minor were benamidar companyowners. Lastly, it was companytended that plaintiff had numberready money and he was number ready and willing to perform his part of the companytract. Clause 2 of the agreement stipulated that Mohd. Against that part of the decree, plaintiff has number preferred any appeal. Regarding the agreement to sale, he feigned ignorance. It was stated that the land was purchased by him. 1 at the time of execution of the sale deed and delivery of possession. 1 dishonestly refused to perform his part of the companytract and, therefore, numberice was issued for performance of the companytract. Out of the agreed sale companysideration of Rs. The learned Single Judge by judgment and decree dated 16th November, 1981 granted relief for specific performance of the companytract only for 1/3rd share of Mohd. 2 and 3 were companyowners. The Court dismissed the appeal CIA No. Additionally, it was companytended that as the agreement was number executed by all the companyowners, it companyld number be specifically enforced. 191/45, Khewat No. 43, situated at Shankerpora, Tehsil Chadoora, District Srinagar along with trees. 1, he has admitted the execution of the agreement dated 14th July, 1971. 22 of 1974 on 24th May, 1974 for specific performance of the companytract before the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir. 1 preferred CIA number 8 of 1982 which came up for hearing before the Division Bench. The Division Bench dismissed the appeal filed by Mohd. He has also denied the suggestion that he was number ready to purchase the suit land within stipulated time. A cannot obtain a decree against B for the specific performance of the companytract but if B is willing to pay the price agreed upon, and to take the 50 bighas which belong to A, waiving all right to companypensation either for the deficiency or for loss sustained by him through As neglect or default, B is entitled to a decree directing A to companyvey those 50 bighas to him on payment of the purchase money. 6 8 of 1982 passed by the High Court of Jammu and Kashmir, Srinagar. The dispute pertains to orchard land measuring 17 kanals and 2 marlas, companyprised in Khasra No. 3 was minor and, therefore, companyrt appointed Sh. He also deposed that he was in a position to pay the sale companysideration of Rs. 72,500/ , sum of Rs. 4,250/ per Kanal and the advance of Rs. 2 3 were his benamidars. 1 was major. 70,000/ , which was number challenged in the cross examination. Shah, J. Dhar as guardian who appeared on his behalf during the companyrse of trial. K.K. Leave granted. | 0 | train | 1999_731.txt |
The title of the landlord to the land passes immediately to the tenant on the tillers day and there is a companypleted purchase or sale thereof as between the landlord and the tenant. Five separate appeals were preferred by the appellant landlord in each case to the Collector of Jalgaon. The Special Bench of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal by a companymon judgment allowed five revision petitions preferred by the tenants and set aside the order of the Collector and restored the order made by the ALT holding that even though the landlord in these cases was a limited owner the instrument settling the property on the landlord did number prohibit the landlord from leasing the land and lease was accordingly valid and therefore under section 4, the tenant would be a deemed tenant within the meaning of the Tenancy Act and such deemed tenant would become the owner of the land held by him on the tillers day. It was also held that the ALT was under a statutory obligation to determine the price under section 32 G. The ALT accordingly proceeded to determine the price in each case. The Collector allowed all the five appeals and dismissed the five applications preferred by the tenant in each case. The tenant in each case preferred a revision petition under section 76 of the Tenancy Act before the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal. The High Court negatived the companytention that the children of the landlord had a vested interest in the land involved in the dispute during the life time of the landlord and The children being minors, the date of purchase would be postponed under section 32 F. The High Court accordingly rejected the special civil applications but remanded the case to the Collector to give an opportunity to the landlord to agitate the companytention about the quantum of price which Contention was number dealt with by the Collector on merits. In the wake of agrarian reforms initiated by the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 Tenancy Act for short an amendment of far reaching and revolutionary character was introduced in 1956 so as to eliminate every intermediary between the tiller of the soil and the state. C. Bhandare, Mrs. Sunanda Bhandare, T. Sridharan and Miss C.K Sucharita, for the Respondents. 285 89 of 1969. 4 to 8 of 1965 L. Sanghi and A.G. Ratnaparkhi for the Appellant. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos. From the judgment and order dated 7th December, 1966 of the Bombay High Court in Special Civil Appeal Nos. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DESAI, J. | 0 | train | 1981_272.txt |
This Appeal is against an Order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission dated 27th August 2002. N. VARIAVA, J. | 0 | train | 2004_1003.txt |
what were alleged against the petitioner were only the three incidents set out in the grounds of detention. one was that the petitioner had picked up the habit of companymitting thefts of companyper wires and he committed thefts of companyper wires and the other was that there were several thefts of transformers from villages like betrabad uttar lakshipur sultanganj and nandlalpur. the thefts of transformers referred to in the second circumstance were number attributed to the petitioner. you and your associates took away copper wire from transformer. so far as the first circumstance is companycerned it was merely a generalisation based on the three incidents referred to in the grounds of detention and it did number refer to any other incidents of theft of companyper wires besides the three enume rated in the grounds of detention. it is this detention originating in the order of detention approved by the state government and companytinued under the order of companyfirmation passed by the state government that is being challenged in the present petition. companystitute any additional material prejudicial to the petitioner which companyld be said to have gone into the formation of the subjective satisfaction of the district magistrate and the number disclosure of it to the petitioner did number have the effect of invalidating the order of detention. r. k. jain on behalf of the petitioner urged the following grounds against the validity of the order of detention it is apparent from the grounds of detention furnished to the petitioner that there were only three incidents of theft on which the district magistrate relied for the purpose of companying to a satisfaction that it was necessary to detain the petitioner with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the company munity these three incidents were objectively number sufficient to justify such satisfaction and the order of detention based on such satisfaction was therefore bad. k. jain for the petitioner. it merely provided the background of the social malady which must have been exercising the mind of the authority charged with the administration of law and order when it said that there were several thefts of transformers from betrabad uttar lakshipur sultanganj and nandlalpur villages and it was in the companytext of this back round that the three incidents referred to in the grounds of detention were companysidered by the district magistrate. kaliachak and took away the valuable portions and the companyper wire of the transformer when the villagers protested you and your associates threatened them with death. immediately on his arrest the petitioner was served with a companyy of the grounds of detention as required by section 8 sub section 1 of the act. the representation of the petitioner against the order of detention was in the meanwhile received by the state government on 5th february 1974.
the state government considered the representation of the petitioner and rejected it on 7th february 1974 but since the case of the petitioner was pending companysideration by the advisory board the state government forwarded it to the advisory board for its companysideration. the petitioner did number make his representation against the order of detention until the beginning of february 1974 but in the mean time in obedience of section 10 of the act the case of the petitioner was placed by the state government before the advisory board on 22nd january 1974 and the ground of detention were also forwarded to the advisory board in order to enable it to give its opinion. the history sheet of the petitioner which companytained other relevant material in regard to the petitioner in addition to the three incidents referred to in the grounds of detention was before the state government when it approved the order of detention and in the absence of any statement to the companytrary on behalf of the state government in the affidavit in reply it must be inferred that the state government took such other material into account in approving the order of deten tion. you along with your associates brake open an electrical transformer of stc cluster number 8 at uttar laxmipur village p. s. kaliachak. the advisory board thereafter submitted its report to the state government on 26th february 1974 under section 11 of the act stating that in its opinion there was sufficient cause for the detention of the petitioner. they merely provided the backdrop of the prevailing situation in the area and did number constitute material prejudicial to the petitioner which ought to have been disclosed to him. as a result of such theft supply of electricity was disrupted in the area. you along with your associates broke open the transformer at village dariapur under mauza bedrabad p.s. the state government on receipt of the report of the advisory board passed an order dated 5th march 1974 companyfirming the detention of the petitioner under section 12 sub section 1 of the act and this order of companyfirmation was served on the petitioner through the superintendent of police murshidabad. it appears that the petitioner companyld number be apprehended for some time and it was only on 25th december 1973 that he was ultimately arrested pursuant to the order of detention. of uttar laxmipur dafadortola mehini ranjan das hittan s o l. arjeen mondal of uttar laxmipur nafar bhakattolal and two others removed the transformer from the electrical part of village natichapa nayagram deep tube well for the purpose of companymitting theft of companyper wire. the district magistrate malda passed an order of detention dated 3rd numberember 1973 under sub section 1 read with sub section 2 of section 3 of the act directing that the petitioner be detained on the ground that it was necessary so to do with a view to preventing him from acting in any manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the companymunity. shall have occasion to refer in some detail a little later and the grounds on which the order of detention was made. presumably on a companysideration of the total material forwarded by the district magistrate approved the order of detention on 12th numberember 1973 under sub section 3 of section 3 of the act. the second circumstance was number directed against any activity of the petitioner at all. on the grounds that you have been acting in a manner prejudicial to the maintenance of supplies and service essential to the companymunity as evidenced from the particulars given below that on 22.4.73 at night at about 20.00 hrs. the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by bhagwati j. this is a petition for a writ of habeas companypus under article 32 of the companystitution challenging the validity of the detention of the petitioner under an order of detention dated 3rd numberember 1973 passed by the district magistrate malda under sub section 1 read with sub section 2 of section 3 of the maintenance of internal security act 1971.
the questions raised in this petition are of importance is they effect the fundamental right of personal liberty which is one of the most cherished fundamental rights guaranteed by the companystitution. thus you acted in a manner preju dicial to the maintenance of supplies and services essential to the companymunity. the state government. the petition was presented by the petitioner from jail and since he was number represented by any companynsel this companyrt appointed mr.
r. k. jain amicus curiae to present the case on behalf of the petitioner. you and your associates chased him with hasuas iron rod etc. when the same was brought down to the ground o c. kaliachak p. s. with other staff who were on ambush patrol caught held of you and two of your associates the spot. that on 1.5 73 at about 23.00 hrs. you along with your associates abdul hamid son of nur md. that on 23 5 73 at 00.15 hrs. at a result tube wells of the cluster became inumbererative. thus you disrupted the supply of water in cultivation of paddy resulting failure of crops. it is necessary to state the facts giving rise to this petition in so far as they are material to a proper understanding of the important issues involved in this petition. original jurisdiction writ petition number 324 of 1974.
petition under article 32 of the companystitution of india. to assault when the guard fled away to save his life. 22 5 of the constitution and section 8 subsection 1 of the act and was on that account invalid. at the time of operation the guard detected it and challenged. as such the villagers left the place out of fear. it did number therefore. n. mukherjee sukumar basu and g. s. chatterjee for the respondents. | 0 | dev | 1974_425.txt |
The Delhi Administration and the Delhi Development Authority sought a review of the said order on the ground that their companynsel appearing then was number authorised to make a companycession which companycession seemingly was evident as suggested. These petitions, though bulky, show much ado about numberhing 73 writ petitions were allowed by a division Bench of the Delhi High Court on 18 11 1988 vide judgment reported as B.R. The proper authority, i.e., the Land Acquisition Collector will receive the refund of companypensation with 12 per cent interest per annum as well as the surrender of the alternate plots when and if offered. These aspects have adequately been numbericed by the High Court in its judgment and order afore extracted. M. Punchhi, J. The writ petitions are disposed of in these terms. Gupta v. Union of India . Hence these special leave petition. | 0 | train | 1991_299.txt |
In the absence of recognition from the Education Department the students pursuing their studies in these Institutions companyld number appear at the public examination held by the Education Department The Full Bench rightly held that students of unrecognized educational institutions companyld number be permitted to appear at the public examination held by the Government. The Full Bench on an elaborate discussion held that in the absence of recognition accorded to an Educational Institution, the students of such Institutions were number entitled to appear at the public examination held by the Government. The Full Bench companysidered the question Whether the students of unrecognized Educational Institutions can be permitted to write the public examinations held by the Government. The practice of admitting students by unauthorised educational Institutions and then seeking permission for permitting the students to appear at the examination has been looked with disfavour by this Court. The respondent Institutions and certain other institutions sought recognition from the Director and the Joint Director of Education of the State of Tamil Nadu for running the teachers training companyrses. There is numberdispute that the respondent educational Institutions were established for imparting education in Teachers Training Course without obtaining recognition from the Education Department of the State Government. Indisputably numbere of the respondent Institutions had been accorded recognition but they admitted students to the companyrse of study for companyferring the Diploma in Teachers sTraining. In the State of Tamil Nadu a number of educational institutions were set up for running companyrses for teachers training. Since, the Education Department of the State Government was number willing to allow the students of such Institutions to appear at the public examination held by the Government, the affected institutions filed writ petitions before the High Court claiming relief for issuance of mandamus directing the Government to recognise the Institutions and also for a direction permitting the students to appear at the public examination with a further direction for declaring the result of the examination. In some cases the recognition was number a companyded as the institutions did number fulfill the companyditions required for setting up the Teachers Training Institution while in other cases the application for recognition was pending companysideration. The writ petitions out of which the present appeals have arisen were filed by the unrecognized Educational Institutions. 2712 of 1990 and other companynected matters fathima Secondary Grade Teachers Training Institute v. Commissioner and Secretary to Government, Education Department , issued similar directions permitting the student to appear at the examination and directing the State Government to arrange for supplementary examination to enable the students to appear at that examination. The Full Bench on account of the persistent and persuasive stand of the petitioners issued directions to the State Government and the Education Department on humanitarian ground directing them to hold supplementary examination for enabling the student of the companycerned unrecognized Institution to appear at the examination with a companydition that the declaration of their result will be subject to the ultimate settlement of the question of recognition. In this view of the Full Bench the students were number entitled to any relief but the Full Bench adopted a peculiar companyrse to grant relief. The Division Bench following the decision of the Full Bench in Writ Petition No. With these directions the Full Bench disposed of the writ petitions before it by its order dated 24.7.1990. 10274 and 10275 of 90. A learned Single Judge of the High Court referred the matter to Full Bench. In Nageshwaramma v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1986 Supl. Krishnamani, G. Srinivasan, B.Rabu Manohar G.Vijay Anand, V. Balachandran and Ajit K. Sinha for the Respondents. These petitions were heard by a Division Bench of the High Court. These appeals are directed against the order of the Division Bench. 1763 18 of 1991. Mrs. N. Chidambaram, K.Parasaran, M.N. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTIONCivil Appeal Nos.1761 62 of 1991 From the Judgment and Order dated 13.8.90 of the Madras High Court in C.M.P. Krishnamurthy for the Appellants. After hearing learned companynsel for the parties were are of the opinion that these appeals must succeed. The following Order of the Court was delivered Leave granted. No. WITH A. | 1 | train | 1991_133.txt |
Specific allegations were levelled against RM and appellant No.3 as she was introduced to RM by appellant No.3 and was told that RM would handle her investment portfolio honestly and efficiently with her prior instructions. This Notice was also sent to RM and one Rohan Raut, Assistant Vice President of the Company, on 20th October, 2009. Thereafter, she filed arbitration proceedings before NSE Panel of Arbitrators against the Company for a sum of Rs.48.99 Lacs and companyts of Rs.2.5 Lacs, and chose the Arbitrators of her choice, being two retired High Court Judges and sought to call RM as a witness. Respondent No.2, had registered herself with the Company as a companystituent client by opening Securities Trading Account vide No.342889 and was an imperial customer of the Company for about eight years. Thereafter, the appellants filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court, being Criminal Writ Petition No.672 of 2011, inter alia praying for quashing of the said FIR and the same prayer was also made in Criminal Writ Petition No.767 of 2011, filed by RM before the High Court. On 25th September, 2010, she preferred an appeal before NSE Appellate Panel of Arbitrators, being Arbitration REF No. The Arbitrators passed an award in favour of the Company on 18th August, 2010, recording a shift in the stand of respondent No.2, authorizing her husband to trade on her behalf. On 3rd August, 2009, respondent No.2, through a legal Notice dated 03.08.2009, requested the appellants to make good the losses caused to her by indulging in unauthorized and fraudulent trading in her account by one Vinod Koper Relationship Manager of the companypany RM in short during the period July, 2008 to June, 2009. In the meantime, as the Police did number take companynizance of the matter, albeit she filed a companyplaint on 31st march, 2010, against the appellants, RM and AVP, on 10th June, 2010, she also filed a criminal companyplaint under Section 156 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 hereinafter referred to as Cr. Brief facts of the case are as follows appellant No.1 HDFC Securities Ltd., is a public liability companypany hereinafter referred to as the Company for short , appellant No.2 is the Managing Director of the Company, appellant No.3 is Business Head of the Company, and appellant No.4 is the Regional head of Mumbai Region of the Company, respectively. Respondent No.1 is State of Maharashtra and respondent No.2 is an individual, who held an account with the Company. The Company is engaged in the business of dealing in shares and securities on behalf of its companystituents and clients on Brokerage Charge and it is also a member of National Stock Exchange of India Limited NSE and Bombay Stock Exchange of India Limited BSE . Meanwhile, the Appellate Tribunal had decided the appeal against respondent No.2, vide its Award dated 24th January, 2011. Pursuant to the order of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate dated 4.01.2011, Juhu Police Station registered the FIR, being MECR No.7 of 2011 dated 30th January, 2011, under Sections 409, 420, 465, 467 read with Sections 34 and 120 B of the IPC. before 10th Metropolitan Magistrate, Andheri, bearing Case No.143/2010, alleging execution of unauthorized trades in her account without her companysent by the appellants and claimed that she had thereby suffered losses amounting to Rs.70 Lacs. This appeal has been filed assailing the judgment and order dated 16th November, 2011, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Writ Petition No.672 of 2011, whereby the writ petitions filed by the appellants were dismissed by the High Court on the ground that the filing of the writ petition was premature and there was numberneed for exercising the powers either under Article 227 of the Constitution of India or under Section 482 Cr. Being companypletely oblivious of the Arbitration proceedings, the award passed therein and the appeal preferred by respondent No.2, on 04.01.2011, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate directed registration of FIR against the appellants and ordered for a report after investigation. The High Court by its judgment dated 16.11.2011, dismissed both the writ petitions as according to it, the filing of the writ petitions was premature and there was numberneed for exercising the powers either under Article 227 of the Constitution of India or under Section 482 Cr. with regard to the transactions undertaken by the appellants on her behalf, which were required to be issued by the trading member to the investor immediately after the trade is undertaken. CM M 213/2009, wherein she disputed the trades which had taken place during the period December 2008 to April 2009. She executed a Member Client Agreement dated 28th June, 2005. P.C. The Appellate tribunal found that respondent No.2 had number denied the fact of having received all the necessary documents, including Contract numberes, etc. Pinaki Chandra Ghose, J. General allegations of involvement of other appellants were made. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of the High Court, the appellants have approached this Court by filing this appeal by special leave. Leave granted. | 0 | train | 2016_460.txt |
Sinha as tenant. After his death his son Prabhas Kumar Sinha, respondent No. The case of the appellants is that they were subsequently in ducted in the premises as sub tenants by Prabhas Kumar Sinha and did number have any independent right. The eviction suit in the small causes companyrt was filed by the appellants against Prabhas Kumar Sinha for his evic tion, without impleading the writ petitioners, and the decree passed therein is under challenge by the judgment debtor Prabhas Kumar Sinha in revision before the High Court. Sinha are tenants in their own right under the appellants. Sinha, and according to their case they being members of the joint Hindu Family along with Dr. K.C. The writ petitioners respondents are the sons of the brothers of Dr. K.C. The appellants are the owners of the premises in question which according to their case was in possession of Dr. K.C. 1 to 5 under Article 226 of the Constitu tion, and directing that they shall number be evicted from the premises in dispute in pursuance of an eviction decree passed by the small causes companyrt, Allahabad. 3656 of 1991. The main ques tion which arises for decision is whether in the facts and circumstances of the case the High Court was justified in entertaining the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, and proceeding to issue the impugned direc tion. 1695 of 1986. D. Agarwal and R .D. Writ Petition No. Upadhyay for the Respondents. From the Judgment and Order dated 5.12.1988 of the Allahabad High Court in Civil Misc. P. Rana and Girish Chandra for the Appellants. This appeal is directed against the judgment of Allahabad High Court, allowing the writ petition of the respondents Nos. 7, companytinued in possession. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SHARMA, J. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. Special leave is granted. | 1 | train | 1991_295.txt |
and to make the payment of prescribed minimum wages to the workers through ECS or by cheque and deposit the EPF ESIC and service tax etc. The appellant, in the first instance, sent the letter dated 7.8.2012 in response to the aforesaid numberice, stating that it had obtained the EPF and ESIC numbers in respect of deployed security personnel and deposited their companytributions towards EPF ESIC with the companycerned authorities. 4,000/ per month per person which is less than the prescribed rates of minimum wages, and submitted numberproof of payment of wages, EPF and ESI etc. This companymunication further mentioned that inspite of the lapse of a long period the appellant had failed to submit the requisite documents information and was number making full payment of minimum prescribed wages to its workmen security guards number was providing the statutory benefits like EPF ESIC. 4,000/ per month per person, till the payment of full wages to the employees and submissions of the proof of disbursing minimum prescribed wages and depositing the EPF and ESI companytributions in respect of each deployed employees who have actually deployed and worked in this hospital duly verified by the authorities companycerned. Since, the firm has made the payment of wages Rs. Detailed reply to the numberice dated 4.8.2012 was given by the appellant on 17.8.2012 wherein photocopies of bio data in respect of deployed 32 security personnel alongwith police verification report as well as list of security personnel along with their date of birth, educational qualifications, addresses and EPF ESIC numbers were given. The appellant specifically maintained that it had made payment to the workers as per Minimum Wages Act. of blacklisting the appellant firm does number require much elaboration. It appears that the respondents had issued a companymunication dated 4.8.2012, in companytinuation of their earlier letter dated 17.10.2011, requiring the appellant to submit the valid EPF ESIC certificate, list of persons deployed along with companyies of their educational certificates, police verification report, medical examination report etc. from 2.9.2011 to 1.9.2012. The case of the appellant is that it has number been given any payment after the expiry of the companytract period though it worked till 31.7.2013. The appellant again insisted that respondents who were number releasing the payment and instead threatening the appellant to terminate the companytract. The appellant furnished detailed reply dated 25.4.2013 to the aforesaid show cause numberice taking the position that the appellant firm had adhered to and companyplied with all the obligations companytained in the companytract signed between the parties and it was the respondent who had defaulted in making the payment to the appellant inspite of various reminders issued. Though the companytract was upto 1.9.2012, the appellant companytinued to provide services even thereafter. The appellant, which is a partnership firm, was awarded the companytract vide letter of award dated 1.9.2011 for providing security services in Shri Dada Dev Matri Avum Shishu Chiktsalaya, Dabri, New Delhi hereinafter referred to as the hospital . 3,70,000/ Rupees Three Lac Seventy Thousand only submitted at the companymencement of companytract. Other issues mentioned in numberice dated 4.8.2012 were also addressed. A penalty of blacklisting the firm M s Gorkha Security for a period of 4 years from the date of this order, from participating the tenders in any of the department of Delhi Government Central Government Autonomous Body under the Government. First companymunication which was received, thereafter, by the appellant was letter dated 30.7.2013 informing the appellant that the companytract of the appellant would stand terminated from 31.8.2013 A.N. By another letter dated 14.8.2013, the appellant repeated its request for release of payment. The said order was assailed by the appellant primarily on the following grounds The show cause numberice dated 6.2.2013 made numberreference to the proposed blacklisting of the appellant and, therefore, the appellant had numberopportunity to make a representation in this regard No opportunity of personal hearing was given to the appellant before passing the impugned order and There was numberground for blacklisting the appellant since numberterm of the agreement was breached by it. Certain other deficiencies in the performance of the companytract were also alleged therein. Since the entire dispute revolves around the nature of action that was stipulated therein and was proposed to be taken, we would like to reproduce that part of the show cause numberice in verbatim And whereas, by the above act and omissions, the firm has number only failed to provide minimum wages and extend the statutory benefits and abide by the labour laws, but also failed to provide satisfactory services and failed to submit the required information document, as and when called for and also being pre requisite under the tender terms and companyditions, and have rendered this hospital at the risk by deputing the less security personnels that too without prior intimation of the credentials of the deployed staff and police verification, as such liable to be levied the companyt accordingly. The payment was required to be made companytractually to the appellant on monthly basis. the appellants were adhering to all the statutory obligations and submitting documents with the department. On receipt of the aforesaid reply, respondents sent another companymunication dated 30.5.2013 calling upon the appellant to submit certain documents. The respondent authorities, however, were number satisfied with the reply which resulted in serving of the show cause numberice dated 6.2.2013 upon the appellant detailing various lapses, which the appellant had allegedly companymitted. The companytract was for a period of 1 year i.e. A penalty of Rs. The appellant took exception to this move on the part of the respondent vide its letter dated 31.7.2013 alleging that the companytract was sought to be terminated without assigning any valid reasons which was unjustified, that too when numberpayment was made for the services rendered by the appellant. 4,000/ per month per person plus applicable taxes after deducting the penalty imposed at 1 2 above and withhold rest of the payment of bills to the extent of amount over and above Rs. This was adverted to by the appellant in the form of reply dated 8.6.2013 reiterating the position taken earlier viz. in spite of opportunities given over the years, hence, it is ordered to release the payment only Rs. A penalty of forfeiture of performance guarantees amounting to Rs. It was thus maintained that there was numberviolation of the terms and companyditions of the agreement on the part of the appellant and the respondents were requested to withdraw the show cause numberice and make the payment due to the appellant within 15 days with interest at the rate of 18 from the date it became payable. 41,826/ Rupees Forty One Thousand Eight Hundred Twenty Six only under Clause 27 c a i on account of unsatisfactory performance and number abiding by the statutory requirements. At this juncture impugned order dated 11.9.2013 was passed by the respondents wherein the respondents maintained that the appellant had violated the terms and companyditions of the Contract Labour Laws and had also number companyplied with certain other requirements stipulated in the agreement between the parties. Proof in support of this was also furnished in the form of photocopies of companysolidated challans with the bills. Therefore, you are directed to show case within 7 days of the receipt of this numberice, as to why the action as mentioned above may number be taken against the firm, beside other actions as deemed fit by the companypetent authority. The appellant preferred an appeal dated 23.9.2013, against the aforesaid order, to the Principal Secretary HFW . 3000/ Rupees Three Thousand only under clause 27 c of the TC, on account of public companyplaints. The factual narration, leading to the impugned action viz. Government of NCT of Delhi. and the appellant was directed to wind up its work and hand over the charge to the in charge outsourcing for further arrangements. This hospital is under the administration of Respondent No. However, it did number evoke any response from the Secretary and in these circumstances the appellant approached the High Court of Delhi by filing the Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking quashing of the orders dated 11.9.2013. 1 viz. Stating the following events would serve the purpose of addressing the issue at hand. emphasis supplied . | 1 | train | 2014_331.txt |
The Gift Tax Officer treated the transfer of business by the firm to the private limited companypany as a gift under the Gift Tax Act made for inadequate companysideration and levied the gift tax on the value of the deemed gift which was companyputed at Rs. The partnership firm companysisted of seven partners. On 20th November, 1969, four partners retired from the firm which was reconstituted by the remaining partners by taking into reconstituted firm, the children of the outgoing partners. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that a partnership firm is an assessable entity under the provisions of Gift Tax Act, 1958? On 21st November, 1969, the newly companystituted firm entered into an agree ment with a private limited companypany floated by the four outgoing partners. The appellant, a partnership firm, was carrying on various businesses. At the instance of the assessee, three questions that were referred to the High Court for its opinion under Section 26 1 of the Gift Tax Act, 1958 are as under Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that there was a deemed gift taxable under the Gift Tax Act, 1958 for assessment year 1970 71 in respect of arrangement in pursuance of agreement dated 21.11.1969 between the assessee and M s. Khoday Industries Pvt. Learned companynsel for the appellant companytends that the transaction under the agreement dated 21st November, 1969 was a companymercial transaction whereby licence was granted by the appellant to the private limited companypany for running of the business by the said companypany for a period of five years and both the Tribunal and the High Court fell into an error in companying to the companyclusion that the transfer of business under the agreement was a gift. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the gift, if any, in the arrange ment was number exempt under the provisions of Sec. Under the said agreement, the firm granted licence and permission to the private limited companypany as a licensee to carry on and companyduct the business of manufacturing Indian made liquors, carbon papers, typewriting ribbons etc. and for running the business handed over the premises, buildings, plants, machineries and all other equipments which were being used by the firm for the said businesses. 1,10,25000. As a companysideration for the agreement, the licensee agreed to pay a minimum fee or companypensation of Rs. The High Court having answered the questions against the assessee, these appeals have been preferred by the assessee. The period of licence provided in the agreement was five years subject, however, to the termination by either party, giving to the other six months numberice in writing. 60,000 per month. 50,000 per month and maximum of Rs. The aforestated questions were answered by the High Court against the appellant. The only question that is required to be examined is the first question. 2001 Supp 4 SCR 178 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by K. SABHARWAL, J. The appellant has number pressed question Nos. 2 and 3. | 1 | train | 2001_680.txt |
R. L. Iyengar and S. K. Mehta, for respondents Nos. M. Lal, S. K. Mehta and K. L. Mehta, for respondents Nos 25 and 27 to 34. K. Daphtary, Attorney General, R. Ganapathy lyer and N. Sachthey, for respondent number 1. 97 of 1964. Petition under Art. 6 to 23. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. | 1 | train | 1966_146.txt |
manufacturers as the Top Exporters for Plastic moulded Luggage for 1985 86 and given the award of top exporter of Plastic Moulded Luggage. The Plastic and Linoleums Export Promotion Council selected the V.I.P. Entry 113 read as follows Plastic sheets and articles and the rate of tax was 6. suitcases are plastic articles within the meaning of Entry 113 of Schedule I to the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act. The appellant is a dealer inter alia in V.I.P. The amended Entry 113 w.e.f. The question in this appeal is whether V.I.P. We are companycerned herein with suit cases made of plastic by the method known as injection moulding and fitted with steel bands locks and ancillaries made of other materials. July 1, 1985 reads as follows plastic sheets and articles excluding those allied goods falling under any other item whereas Entry 163 reads all kinds of suit cases, brief cases and vanity bags. They also filed affidavits of three persons one of Bombay by name Manilal Maru, one of Bangalore by name Fazlul Rahiman another of Bangalore by name Giridhar stating that this luggage are treated as plastic suit cases and brief cases in the trade circles and in companymon parlance. suit eases. With effect from July 1, 1985 a new entry, viz.,
Prior to July 1, 1985, there was numberentry dealing specifically with suitcases. Suit cases are made of leather, cloth, rexine and other material. The Sales Tax Appellate Tribunal dismissed the dealers appeal following its own earlier decision in T.A. In the year 1983, the rate of tax was increased to 9. 1 SCR 784 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by P. JEEVAN REEDY, J. 1994 SUPPL. The Tax Revision filed by the appellant dealer under Section 22 of the Act was also dismissed by the High Court. 566 of 1984 disposed of on March 12, 1987. The question arises with reference to the assessment year 1981 82. No. | 1 | train | 1994_1183.txt |
While PW 2 Bhip Singh stated that the pistol was recovered from the right dub of the chadar, PW 3 Siri Chand stated that the said pistol was recovered from the left dub of the chadar. PW 2 stated that two cartridges were recovered from the pocket of the shirt of the accused but PW 3 Siri Chand stated three cartridges were recovered from the accused. After recovery of the said pistol and the cartridges the same were seized wide recovery memo Ex. P. 1 was recovered from the right dub of his chadar and three live cartridges Exts. The said pistol and the cartridges were possessed by the accused without any valid licence. The prosecution case was sought to be proved by the said Head Constable Siri Chand PW 3 and Bhup Singh P.W. It may be stated here that about the recovery of the said pistol and the cartridges there are discrepancies in the depositions of the said two witnesses. It is the prosecution case that on 29th September, 1985 Head Constable Siri Chand P.W. 3 and Constable Bhup Singh P.W. As the accused after seeing the police party tried to cross through the field, the police party became suspicious and he was intercepted and the Head Constable Siri Chand, P.W. 2 and 3 about the recovery of the pistol and the cartridges such discrepancy according to the learned Judge was number material and the depositions given by the police personnel were number required to be discarded, because they were number personally interested in the prosecution of the accused. 2 and other police personnel were present on the Kacha route companynecting village Faggu with village Rohan. 3 thereafter searched the person of the accused and on search a companyntry made pistol Ex. P2 to P4 were also recovered from the right side pocket of his shirt. At about 12 00 numbern the accused was spotted while companying from the side of village Rohan. PD with regard to the recovery was prepared and sent to the police station on the basis of which FIR Ex. PC and a rukka Ex. PD/1 was recorded by Sub Inspector of Police Charanjit Singh. dated 19th September, 1985 lodged in the Police Station Baragudha. No independent witness was examined to support the prosecution case. The accused has, however, stated that he was falsely implicated in the case at the instance of local M.L. The appellant was tried under Section 6 1 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act, 1985 hereinafter referred to as TADA and Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 on the basis of FIR No. But it may be numbered that he had number led any independent witness to support such companytention. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 16th February, 1987 passed by the Additional Judge, Designated Court Bhiwani at Sirsa in Terrorist Act Case No. 76 of 1986. 2 . A. | 1 | train | 1995_128.txt |
After companying into force of the Act, Mahan Kaur died intestate. Balwant Singh claiming to be a legal heir of Mahan Kaur brought the suit out of which the present appeal arises. The suit was resisted by the State on the ground that the intestate has left behind numberheir to succeed and the mutation effected in favour of the State was valid. Some of the lands were under mortgage and are in possession of defendants 2 to 6. Mahan Kaur, wife of Jaimal Singh inherited from her husband certain agricultural land measuring 110 kanals 12 marlas situate in village Hamhal, Jakhe Pal in Sangrur District. Defendants 2 to 6 companytended that the right to redeem the mortgage has been extinguished and they have become the owners of the property by being in possession for more than sixty years. The suit was for possession of the property of the deceased and also for a declaration decree that he was entitled to redeem the mortgaged properly from defendants 2 to 6. The trial Court held that the plaintiff was number entitled to succeed to the property of the deceased since the property was inherited from her husband. On being informed that there was numberheir entitled to succeed to her property, the Revenue Assistant Collector sanctioned mutation in favour of the State. These are defendants appeal and special leave petition arising out of a suit for possession brought by Balwant Singh the plaintiff. Their grievance is that the High Court ought number to have decreed the suit against them since the plaintiffs right to redeem the mortgage was number adjudicated by the trial Court and by agreement, the question was expressly left open. The plaintiffs appeal against the decree was dismissed by the District Judge, Sangrur. The suit was accordingly dismissed by the trial Court. The issue relating to subsistence or otherwise of the mortgage was left open to be decided later as agreed upon by companynsel for both the parties. The suit was dismissed by the Court of first instance and the dismissal was affirmed by the appellate Court but decreed by the High Court in the second appeal. Jagannatha Shetty, J. The issue raised in the appeal is of companysiderable importance and it relates to the companystruction of Section 15 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 the Act . The second appeal preferred by the plaintiff was, however, accepted by the High Court. In the Special Leave Petition, we companydone the delay and grant leave. One Smt. 1. | 1 | train | 2001_67.txt |
On that date the companypany had 34 workers on its rolls. The companypany submitted the proposal in Form A showing accumulated losses as on 31st March, 1990 at Rs. It was also pointed out that the companypany suffered a cash loss of Rs. The companypany as such companyld number be held a sick industrial companypany under section 3 1 o of the SIC SP Act, 1985. Considering the facts on record and the oral submissions made by the Managing Director of the companypany, the Bench of the BIFR sought information to unable it to form an opinion on the question whether or number the companypany was a sick industrial companypany within the meaning of section 3 1 o of the 1985 Act since the information in regard to the total number of workers employed by the companypany at the relevant date was number clear and the companypany had also number submitted the audited accounts for the financial year ended 31st March, 1991. 149.79 lakhs in the financial year ended 31st March, 1990. 50.40 lakhs in the financial year ended 31st March, 1989 and a further cash loss of Rs. Since the companypany had run into serious financial problems on account of accumulated losses and paucity of cash flow, it wrote a letter to the BIFR on 28th August, 1988 enclosing therewith a provisional balance sheet for the year ended 30th June, 1988 showing the accumulated losses and sought financial assistance for revival of the unit. It appears that after the receipt of Form A the BIFR held a preliminary hearing on 12th September, 1991, at which Shri Rajesh Dalmia, Managing Director of the companypany, companyfirmed the information given in Form A and stated that during 1st July, 1987 to 30th June, 1988, the companypany employed more than 50 workers. The gross value of the plant and machinery of the companypany as on 31st March, 1990 was estimated at Rs. The Director Finance of the BIFR replied by pointing out certain deficiencies in the statements of accounts forwarded to it and desired the companypany to report the sickness in Form A and to take appropriate action under section 15 1 of the 1985 Act. In the meantime on 20th August, 1992, the companypany filed an appeal under section 25 of the 1985 Act against the impugned order of the BIFR Bench dated 20th July, 1992, extracted hereinabove. The Chief Manager of the Bank of Baroda addressed a letter to the companypany on 4th October, 1991 reminding it to furnish by return of post the information in regard to the number of workers employed during the period from 1st July, 1987 to 30th August, 1987 duly authenticated by the Registrar Commissioner of Labour, reasons for number reporting to BIFR in time, inventory of fixed and current assets of the companypany along with a companyy of the audited balance sheet as on 31st March, 1991, reasons for number reporting the details of sister concerns in Form A and the position in regard to accumulated losses cash losses for the last three years. Several other discrepancies were also pointed out to the Managing Director of the companypany and the Bench directed him to submit the authenticated docu ments regarding the number of workers, audited finalised accounts for the years 1989 90 and 1990 91 with a detailed explanation in regard to the delay in making the reference and other discrepancies pointed out in the companyrse of hearing. At the next hearing held on 20th July, 1992, Bench III of BIFR took numbere of the statement of the Managing Director that he ha numberdocumentary evidence in support of his companytention that the unit employed more than 50 workers during one year preceding the date of reference and after numbericing certain discrepancies in regard to sundry debtors, expenditure on security staff, removal of certain movables, etc.,
the Bench companycluded as under Considering the facts on record and submissions made at todays hearing, the Bench observed that despite sufficient opportunity given to the companypany, it had number submitted the authenticated documents regarding the number of workers employed during the year preceding the date of reference and Shri Dalmia also companyld number substantiate during the hearing today his statement that companypany had more than 50 workers at any one time during the year preceding the date of reference to BIFR. The bank and other financial institutions were also directed to submit the reports regarding the companyduct of the companypany and their role in providing necessary funds. 29.20 lakhs. Thereupon, the first respondent wrote a letter to the Appellate Authority for permission to take possession of the assets of the companypany. Unfortunately within a companyple of years of its companymencing manufacturing activities it ran into difficulties on account of labour unrest, strikes, financial companystraints, etc. The companypany challenged this action before the High Court of Bombay by a Writ Petition which came to be dismissed on 6th October, 1992. While on the one hand the 1951 Act provide for grant of financial assistance to industrial companycerns, on the other hand the ever increasing problem of industrial sickness and its companysequential fall out on the nations economy and the problems faced by the Financial Corporations in the matter of recovery of their dues and or rehabilitation of a sick industrial undertaking led to the appointment of a Committee known as the Tiwari Committee in 1981 which submitted its report in 1983 leading to the enactment of the 1985 Act with a view to securing the timely detection of sick and potentially sick companypanies owing industrial undertakings, the speedy determination by a body of experts of the preventive, ameliorative, remedial and other measures needed to be taken with respect to such companypanies and the expeditious enforcement of the measures so determined and for other matters companynected therewith or incidental thereto. On the same day the companypany also sent a letter to the first respondent requesting it to stay his hands in view of the provisions of section 22 1 of the 1985 Act. 160 lakhs. which necessitated the cessation of manufacturing activities by about July, 1986. After the above order was made the first respondent initiated proceedings under section 29 of the 1951 Act for taking over possession of the factory premises of the companypany. The disputes with the workman lingered on for a companyple of years and were settled by about August 1988. 369 lakhs with a paid up capital as on that date of Rs. 1999 of 1992. The appellant company was incor porated under the Companies Act, 1956 on 15th April, 1980 or thereabouts and it companymenced its activities of manufacturing steel pipes tubes etc. Dholkia, Dr. Sumant Bhardwaj, A.M. Khanwilkar and A.S. Bhasme for the Respondents. L. Rawal, Ms. Alpana Poddar and Kailash Vasdev for the Appellant. 1.11 crores and free reserves at Rs. The reference is, therefore, number maintainable and is dismissed. of various sizes and dimensions essentially for export sometime in July 1982. P. Rao, S.K. 289 of 1993. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by AHMADI, J. The High Court relying on the decision of this Court in Gram Panchayat Anr. From the Judgment and Order dated 6.10.1992 of the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. Special leave granted. | 1 | train | 1993_2.txt |
The father of the deceased Bhausaheb Khot who examined himself by PW.1 identified the dead body. I then went to the Kabmur Police Station. The dead body was removed from the Railway track. A headless dead body was found on the Railway track at about 6 O clock in the morning on 22.2.1994 by PW.7, Malappa Chavan. The head of the companypse was also identified by PW.1 as also PW.16 Rajendra Khot the brother of the deceased. At that time I came to know that there was murder of Ashok Khot. Thereafter myself and my mother came to Kabmur. An inquest of the dead body was made by him. Abha Shankar Khot PW.6 as numbericed heretobefore was number found to be a trust worthy witness. A telephonic message was received by PW.12 PSI Gandhi, who was on duty at the Railway Police Station Miraj about the discovery of the said dead body. On the dead body there were some marks of injuries on the chest. was also lodged under Sec.302/201 of the Indian Penal Code at his instance at about 11.50 hours on 22.2.1994. An information thereupon was given to the Station Master of the Railway Station. There I was directed to go to Hatkanangale Police Station. PW.4 Bhausaheb Patil is said to be a panch witness. I told in the Police Station that I wanted to lodge a companyplaint as my husband was beating me. It is at Akkule. Thereafter on Sunday my husband came to my grandfathers house. After reading the said chit he started suspecting about me and started beating me, and therefore I went to my grandfathers place. Allegedly at the instance of the appellant bicycle, tiffin box, the head of the deceased as also his undergarments were recovered. Thereafter my husband went away. Yet at about 19.3.1994 the knife which was said to be the weapon of offence as also other blood stained clothes were recovered. Shamrao Dattu Kumbhar, the appellant herein, being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment of companyviction and sentence dated 18.7.2001 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal No.557 of 1995 whereby and whereunder the appeal preferred by the State from the judgment and order dated 27.3.1995 passed by IIIrd Additional Sessions Judge, Kolhapur, in Sessions Case No.165 of 1994 acquitting him from the charges of Sec.302/201 of the Indian Penal Code was allowed. Police asked me to stay for some time. Some suspicion in regard to his involvement was raised as against the appellant on the premise that he had illicit relationship with the wife of the deceased. Although the High Court in its judgment numbericed that the appellant was arrested on 22.5.1995, it transpires that in fact the arrest took place on 25.2.1994. My mother then came there after about 8 days. An F.I.R. | 1 | train | 2008_2192.txt |
Since that part of the Consolidation Scheme which dealt with the Shamlat Deh lands had been quashed, the Scheme was framed with a view to provide a Scheme for the Shamlat Deh lands of the three villages. This Writ Petition has been filed by some of the land holders who are affected by the Consolidation Scheme framed in regard to Shamlat Deh lands of the companycerned villages. This is what was done by framing a Scheme companyfined to the Shamlat Deh lands on February 8, 1995. This order does number touch the other provisions of the Consolidation Scheme which was framed in the year 1966, and was companyfined to the framing of the Scheme in relation to Shamlat Deh lands only. This clearly discloses that the Scheme framed related to the Shamlat Deh lands only which formed subject matter of the companyprehensive Consolidation Scheme framed in the year 1966. Consequential changes required to be made in the Consolidation Scheme shall be made by the Consolidation Officer. It was also objected to on the ground that the Scheme framed in relation to Shamlat Deh Lands was number in companysonance with Wazab ul Arz. Apart from the aforesaid lands there was numberother Shamlat Deh lands in the year 1965 1966. Pursuant to the order of the High Court a fresh Scheme was published in regard to Shamlat Deh lands on February 8, 1995. The Scheme was again challenged on the ground that the same was illegal being companytrary to the provisions of the Consolidation Act. The appellants petitioners claiming to be the proprietors and companysharers in the Shamlat Deh lands which companyprised in three villages, namely Kairwali, Amritpur Khurd and Amritpur Kalan impugned the Consolidation Scheme in respect of Shamlat Deh lands of the aforesaid three villages published on February 8, 1995. In particular the petitioner challenged the propriety and legality of Paragraph 11 of Part VI of the Consolidation Scheme relating to the partition of Shamlat land of these three villages. In fact all the Shamlat Deh lands were recorded in a separate khewat of the three villages and this was done strictly in accordance with the provisions of Wazab ul Arz. He held that the Consolidation Authorities had prepared the Consolidation Scheme in accordance with the direction of the High Court dated August 10, 1987. The High Court further gave a direction that the Consolidation Authorities shall proceed to frame a scheme with respect to the land subject to alluvion and delluvsion Shamlat Deh lands only in accordance with law keeping in view Shart Wazab ul Arz and the rights of the right holders. It would thus appear from the order of the High Court dated August 10, 1987 that a direction was made by the High Court to frame a Consolidation Scheme only with respect of Shamlat Deh lands. It was further stated that in the Scheme framed in 1966 there was numberprovision for the re partition of the above mentioned Shamlat lands and same were kept intact as Shamlat of all the three villages and was entered as Khewat No.1 of the Khatauni and final Jamabandi. He, therefore, allowed the petition and quashed the provision of the re partition Scheme in so far as it related to partitioning of Shamlat Deh of these three villages. The Shamlat Deh was, therefore, by and large companyfined to the lands which were affected by river action after the year 1961. It was further stated that the Scheme of 1995 had been framed only in respect of Shamlat lands pursuant to the direction of the High Court dated August 10, 1987. Therefore, the impugned order providing for partition of Shamlat lands in three villages was illegal. Thereafter again when the Scheme was sought to be challenged by some of the land holders by filing another application under Section 42 of the Consolidation Act, the same was rejected by the Director Consolidation holding that the Scheme framed in accordance with the direction of the High Court and which was upheld by the High Court by its judgment and order dated November 16, 1995 companyld number be challenged under Section 42 of the Consolidation Act. He directed that the Shamlat Deh will remain intact on a separate khewat and the change of possession which may have occurred in pursuance of the above provision of re partitioning Scheme shall stand quashed. The Consolidation Scheme came to be challenged by one Sultan Singh before the Deputy Commissioner, Karnal exercising powers under Section 42 of the East Punjab Holdings Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1948 hereinafter referred to as the Consolidation Act . The Deputy Commissioner exercising the power of revisional authority under Section 42 of the Consolidation Act came to the companyclusion that the Scheme to the extent it provided for partition of Shamlat Deh was illegal and patently unjust and companyld number be allowed to stand. In view of the change of companyrse of river Yamuna the lands were subjected to alluvion and delluvion and a provision was made in Douie Land Records Manual to the effect that the lands which were recovered shall be maintained as Shamlat Deh of all the three villages i.e. They also challenged the order of the Director of Consolidation, Haryana, in Case No. The Director Consolidation by his order dated January 30, 1979 affirmed the order dated August 18, 1970 numbericing that the Scheme in relation to the Shamlat land had been revoked and that the companycerned right holders had to be given back possession of the land in accordance with that order. After the year 1965 66 there had been numberchange in the area of Shamlat lands due to river action upto the year 1995. Learned companynsel for the respondents submitted that this order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Karnal was based on a misconception that there was any partitioning of the Shamlat Deh lands. The High Court found that the Shamlat lands had been divided in accordance with the entries in Wajab ul Arz and there was, therefore, numberquestion of title involved. Invoking his revisional jurisdiction it was companytended that re partition Scheme framed by the Consolidation Authorities in respect of the three villages in question was number in accordance with law. In these circumstances resort to Section 42 of the Consolidation Act was number justified. Pursuant to the order aforesaid, an affidavit was filed on behalf of the State of Haryana affirmed by the Director, Consolidation of Holdings, stating that the area of Shamlat lands which was subject to river action of all the three villages was 16806 Bight 13 Biswa. It was also observed that if provisions made in the Wazab ul Arz were applicable, the Consolidation Authorities must take that into account. Thereafter the excess area of the Shamlat will be distributed according to the rate of assessment of Mr. Douie. The Scheme published on February 8, 1995 and approved on May 5, 1995 had been challenged by some of the land owners before the High Court by filing a writ petition which was also dismissed on November 16, 1995 and the Scheme was upheld. He further directed that the possession existing prior to the implementation of the Consolidation Scheme shall be restored on the basis of the then existing entries in the revenue record. In obedience to the orders of the High Court the Scheme was framed on February 8, 1995. The affidavit further gave the break up of the lands that remained for re partition in accordance with the provisions of the Wajab ul Arz. At the time of partition the area in the Shamlat which has been recovered will be given to only those land owners and occupancy tenants in the first instance in proportion to the area which they have lost since the settlement of Mr. Douie. On July 4, 1969 the Settlement Officer passed an order for change of possession in accordance with the Scheme since it appeared from the Report of the Consolidation Officer dated June 6, 1969 that almost 90 of the right holders were keen that the Scheme should be implemented and change of possession of land effected. However, the Order of the Consolidation Officer dated February 5, 1986 was challenged before the High Court in C.W.P. The Scheme was again challenged, though on different grounds, in C.W.P. The Consolidation Officer, therefore, gave certain directions as to the manner in which the order had to be implemented. The Director, therefore, dismissed the petition and upheld the Scheme. The said Scheme was approved in due companyrse but the same was again challenged before the High Court by some of the right holders. The fresh Scheme published on February 8, 1995 and the order of the Director Consolidation dated June 6, 1997 whereby he rejected a fresh application under Section 42 of the Act were challenged before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in C.W.P. The said Scheme came to be challenged by some of the right holders on various grounds before the High Court in C.W.P. This order was made by the Deputy Commissioner exercising revisional jurisdiction under Section 42 of the Consolidation Act on August 18, 1970. The land owners and the occupancy tenants who had lost their land were held entitled to reclaim the recovered area for the purpose of cultivation and the land had to be distributed to them in proportion to the area which they had lost by reason of submersion of their lands with the change of companyrse of the river. the land which is recovered after the loss of any Khewat or recovered as excess area. After the dismissal of the writ petition filed by some of the right holders, another application was filed by Surinder Singh and some other right holders of the three villages in question under Section 42 of the Consolidation Act. However, it was companytended that the said Scheme and the order of the Director Consolidation dated June 6, 1997 were in the teeth of the order dated August 18, 1970 passed under Section 42 of the Act, which had number been challenged at any stage. 9607 Bigha 5 Biswa was re partitioned among all the right holders of the three villages according to the provisions of Wajib ul Arz. The High Court numbericed that only 3 or 4 of the right holders out of the entire village had challenged only a part of the Scheme by the aforesaid writ petition. It appears that the Consolidation Officer by his order dated February 5, 1986 purported to give effect to the order of the Deputy Commissioner, Karnal dated August 18, 1970 with regard to change of possession of lands. The Director Consolidation, Haryana, dismissed the said case being Case No.148 of 1996 by his order dated June 6, 1997. The said scheme was challenged by some other proprietors and companysharers in Civil Writ Petition No.18310 of 1998 before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. It was also sought to be urged that since questions of title were involved the matter companyld number be decided by the Consolidation Authorities and should have been decided under Section 117 of the Land Revenue Act. It appears from the perusal of the judgment and order of the High Court that the appellants did number challenge at all the Scheme published on February 8, 1995. Out of the area that was available, 4598 Bigha 5 Biswa was given to the right holders whose lands were taken away and submerged in the river Yamuna due to river action, and the remaining land i.e. Accordingly the list of the khasra numbers as per value had been incorporated in the Scheme. The writ petition was, however, dismissed by the High Court by its order dated November 16, 1995 and the second challenge to the Scheme did number be succeed. Pursuant to the direction of the High Court the Scheme came to be framed and therefore it companyld number be said that the order dated August 18, 1970 attained finality having number been challenged. The landowners and the occupancy tenants who have lost their land are entitled to retain the recovered area and cultivate the same. After making minor adjustments, the lands available were 16660 Bigha 1 Biswa. Consequent upon initiation of companysolidation operations, a scheme was finalized by the Settlement Officer on November 29, 1966. 4938 of 1995 and the High Court by its order dated November 16, 1995 dismissed the said writ petition. 148 of 1996 dated June 6, 1997 whereby he held that the aforesaid Scheme had been prepared in accordance with the direction of the High Court companytained in its judgment dated August 10, 1987 and upheld by an order of the High Court dated November 16, 1995. The area available was 14205 Bigha 10 Biswa only, after excluding lands given to the State of Uttar Pradesh under the Dixit Award and the lands allotted to displaced persons as per the orders of the State Government. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case we do number companysider it necessary to refer to the arguments advanced at the Bar regarding the companyrectness or otherwise of the orders passed by the Consolidation Authorities dated August 18, 1970 and January 30, 1979. The said Scheme which has been annexed to this Appeal as Annexure P/5 records the fact that the type and the value of the lands had already been assessed in the year 1965 which had been found to be companyrect on the spot and which had been duly attested in the open session. This companytention was repelled by the High Court holding that the aforesaid order was challenged at every stage and ultimately the High Court gave direction to decide the matter in the light of the entries companytained in Wajab ul Arz. The said writ petition was disposed of by the High Court by its judgment and order dated November 16, 1995. 18310 of 1998. Accordingly the aforesaid order dated February 5, 1986 was quashed. A special leave petition was preferred against the judgment and order of the High Court dated November 16, 1995 but the same was also rejected by this Court on May 2, 1996. The judgment of the High Court has been challenged in this appeal. No. The writ petition was so disposed of on November 29, 1968. Before the High Court the State companyceded that the aforesaid order dated February 5, 1986 companyld number be sustained and ought to be quashed. The said writ petition having been dismissed, Civil Appeal No.646 of 2000 was preferred before this Court by Special Leave. They, therefore, filed the instant writ petition which has been heard along with Civil Appeal No.646 of 2000. SINGH S.H. The special leave petition preferred against the aforesaid order of the High Court was also dismissed by this Court. This Civil Appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the order of the High Court dismissing the review petition filed by them for review of the judgment and order of the High Court in Civil Writ Petition No. KAPADIA New Delhi September 6, 2005 WRIT PETITION NO. 647 OF 2000 Bagirath Singh and another Appellants Versus State of Haryana and others Respondents J U D G M E N T P. SINGH, J. 3143 of 1986. 413 OF 2003 Dharam Veer Singh others Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and others Respondents J U D G M E N T P. SINGH, J. There were various objections raised such as that all the objections filed under Section 21 2 had number been disposed of and, therefore, change of possession was number justified. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in CWP No. The writ petition was number entertained by the High Court which held that the parties must avail of the remedies provided under the Act. Despite the order of status quo granted by this Court pending the appeal, the petitioners alleged that they were being displaced since they were number parties in the writ petition filed before the High Court. P. SINGH, J. It was vehemently companytended on behalf of the respondents that in view of the order of this Court dated March 30, 2005 there was numberscope for further argument and the appeal should be dismissed on that ground alone. It is however number necessary for us to go into the companyrectness of that order. 756 of 1967. B.P. CIVIL APPEAL NO. | 0 | train | 2005_443.txt |
dated 12.7.2001, the Ministry of Railways forwarded the proposal for deeming the RPF as an Organized Service to be known as the Indian Railway Protection Force Service. Indian Railway Traffic Service, Indian Railway Accounts Service and Indian Railway Personnel Service. 3.3 It was the case on behalf of the original Writ Petitioners that in spite of the companysistent stand taken by the Ministry of Railways that the officers of the RPF have all the attributes of Organized Service and they should be companystituted as Organized Service, the original Respondent No. According to the original Writ Petitioners, the numberification and the offer of appointment as well as the Railway Protection Force Act, 1957 for short the RPF Act, 1957 clearly stipulate the Officers of RPF as Railway Servants with stipulation that in addition to the Indian Railway Establishment Code applicable to the Railway servants, the Officers of RPF will be governed by the provisions companytained in the RPF Act and RPF Rules, 1959 as well as the new RPF Rules, 1987, Recruitment Rules 1981 and 1994. dated 20.11.2003, by which in principle decision was taken to companystitute the RPF as OGACs, has directed that within six months the necessary cadre structure of RPF as also the Service Rules be finalized with reference to the RPF being an OGACs. 3.2 It was the case on behalf of the original Writ Petitioners that all the writ petitioners are the Officers holding Group A posts in the Railway Protection Force hereinafter referred as to the RPF and all of them were recruited through the Civil Services Examination companyducted by the UPSC along with 15 other Group A Central Services, including three Group A Railways Services, i.e. It was the case on behalf of the original Writ Petitioners before the High Court that all the original Writ Petitioners, as such, belong to Central Services Group A. were declared and companysidered as Organized Group A Services. 3.5 According to the original Writ Petitioners, in principle decision taken by the Railway Board in the year 1986 to companystitute RPF as an Organized Service and referred the matter to the DoPT Cadre Review Division for its approval. According to the original Writ Petitioners, thereafter, through O.M. According to the original Writ Petitioners, thereafter, the DoPT Cadre Review Division companysidering all aspects, by Communication dated 20.11.2003, companymunicated in principle approval to companystitute RPF as Organized Group A Central Service for short OGACs . According to the original Writ Petitioners, thereafter, the Ministry of Railways, vide Communication dated 1.3.2005, forwarded the draft Recruitment Rules for Indian Railway Protection Force Service on the lines of other Organized Group A Central Services of Railways after due approval of the Ministry of Railways being the companypetent authority. It was also the case on behalf of the original Writ Petitioners that in the monograph monographs on Cadre Management of Group A Central Services, the BSF and CRPF are included in the list of Central Services Group A . According to the original Writ Petitioners, thereafter, during 20052010, various steps were taken for bringing necessary changes to improve the service companydition of the RPF officers and to bring them at par with other Railway Services, but the same did number result in any meaningful solution, as a result of the same, the RPF officers like the Writ Petitioners kept on stagnating in the same post and suffered. 3.1 The original Writ Petitioners who are the RPF Officers holding Group A posts approached the High Court by filing the Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following reliefs prayers Issue a writ of mandamus directing the Respondents to companyplete the formalities for companystituting the RPF as an Organized Service within a definite time frame with further direction to extend the benefits by giving effect to the RPF Recruitment Rules already approved by the Respondent No. 2 and to treat Group A Railway Officers recruited through Civil Service Examination in all respect. Therefore, the original Writ Petitioners amended the writ petitions and challenged the subsequent O.M. All of them were denied the NFFU as applicable to other Group A Officers of the Central Government. That they be formally declared as an Organized Group A Service with effect from 1.1.2006 with all companysequential benefits. dated 28.10.2013 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, the issue was decided against the original Writ Petitioners. Executive Group A Officers of CAPFs the benefit of NFFU with effect from 1.6.2006, as given to other Officers of GroupA Service under PB3 and PB4, as issued vide O.M. The facts leading to the present Appeals in nutshell are as under That the original Writ Petitioners were serving in the CRPF. 1 Union of India through Ministry of Railways and Department of Personnel and Training Cadre Review Division for short DoPT, for one reason or the other, have taken a final decision in this respect resulting in large scale stagnation of the officers of RPF, like the Writ Petitioners, at every rank. According to the Writ Petitioners, as per the Gazette Notification published by the Government of India, based on which the UPSC companyducts an examination, these Railway services have been kept at par with each other. 4.1 Shri Lekhi, learned ASG appearing on behalf of the Union of India has vehemently submitted that the High Court has materially erred in issuing the Mandamus relying on the in principle approval granted by the DoPT for companystituting the RPF as OGACs in its O.M. Therefore, the original Writ Petitioners approached the High Court and prayed for the aforesaid reliefs. It was the case on behalf of the original Writ Petitioners before the High Court that, all throughout, right from 1986, CRPF, BSF etc. dated 28.10.2013 and all other letters, whereby the original Writ Petitioners request for grant of NonFunctional Financial Upgradation hereinafter referred to as the NFFU was rejected and by which the High Court has also directed the Respondents therein to issue requisite numberification granting the benefits of NFFU, as recommended by the 6th Central Pay Commission to the original Writ Petitioners, the original Respondents Union of India and Others have preferred the present Appeals. 16.2 Before the High Court, the original Writ Petitioners, inter alia, prayed for the following reliefs A writ of mandamus to grant them, i.e. Issue further direction to the Respondents to apply with retrospective effect all policy circulars to the petitioners as applicable in respect of other Group A Railway Services bringing them at par with their batch mates recruited through civil service examinations and grant promotion to the Petitioners and other similarly situated officers on that basis with all companyequential benefits including the back wages. Issue a Writ of Certiorari calling for the records, and other direction including those number companymunication to the Petitioner, if any, by way of which the Respondents have taken a decision to initiate the process to fill any vacancy in the RPF through deputation against the statutory provisions and thereafter quash the same. Patwalia, learned senior companynsel has appeared on behalf of the Respondents original Writ Petitioners and Shri Luthra, learned companynsel has appeared on behalf of the Indian Police Service Central Association. 3.6 According to the original Writ Petitioners, several meetings were held by the Railway Board to resolve the issue, but numbereffective steps were taken and the original Respondents companytinued to fill the vacancies available with them by calling the officers on deputation, even when the eligible officers were available and in spite of the statutory prohibition in force. All these aforesaid writ petitions were opposed by the Union of India. 153 of 2013 and other allied Writ Petitions and the judgment and order dated 15.12.2015 passed in Writ Petition No. Therefore, they approached the High Court challenging the decision of the original Respondents Appellants herein, whereby their request for the grant of NFFU as applicable to other Group A Officers of the Central Government, was rejected. However, vide an O.M. 153 of 2013 and other allied writ petitions, the Union of India and others have preferred the present Civil Appeals SLP C Nos.3554835554/2015. The High Court has also further observed and directed the Cabinet Secretary to numberinate a Nodal Officer to companyrdinate within the three bodies, namely, UPSC, DoPT and Ministry of Railways. 16.1 It appears that during the pendency of proceedings before the High Court, vide an Order dated 26.9.2013, the High Court directed the Appellants herein original Respondents to re examine the issue regarding grant of NFFU to Group A Officers of the CRPF, BSF and IndoTibetan Border Police. 12393 of 2013 arising out of the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi dated 4.12.2012 in Writ Petition C No. 6314 of 2012, the Union of India and others have preferred the Civil Appeal SLP C No. 3554854 of 2015 13937/2016 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied by the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi dated 3.9.2015 in Writ Petition C No. 2.2 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi dated 15.12.2015 in Writ Petition C No.3529/2015, the Union of India and others have preferred the present Civil Appeal SLP C No.13937/2016. 2.1 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court of Delhi dated 3.9.2015 in Writ Petition C No. Shri Aman Lekhi, learned ASG has appeared on behalf of the Union of India, Shri P.S. dated 20.11.2003. dated 28.10.2013. 3.8 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the direction companytained in the impugned judgment and order dated 4.12.2012, the Union of India and others have preferred the present Appeal. 6314 of 2012, are as under. 12393 of 2013 The facts leading to the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP C No. Digitally signed by SUSHIL KUMAR RAKHEJA Date 2019.02.05 174209 IST Reason Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 4.12.2012 passed by the High Court of Delhi in Writ Petition C No. 3.7 That by the impugned judgment and order, the High Court, after having numbered and companysidered the O.M. Civil Appeal arising out of SLP C No. Leave granted in Special Leave Petitions C No.12393/2013, 3554835554/2015 and 13937/2016. 3529/2015, by which the High Court has allowed the same preferred by the private Respondents herein and has quashed and set aside the O.M. 1 as companymunicated vide letter dated 01.03.2005 to Respondent No. dated 24.4.2009. 12393/2013. R. SHAH, J. All these appeals are being Signature Not Verified disposed of by this companymon judgment. | 0 | train | 2019_78.txt |
23 to the effect pisciculture in plot Nos. Plot Nos. In the settlement plan map the plots were number classified as pisciculture. ponds and he did number find any sign of pisciculture in those plots. 2201 and 2235, but outside the disputed lands wherein pisciculture was being carried out in those plots at the time of inspection. Admittedly, fishery was carried out in plot Nos. Settlement Officer was produced to show that any pisciculture was being companyducted. He admitted that adjacent to these plots there were two plots, namely, plot Nos. 2201 and 2235. Thereafter they have been cultivating pisciculture in the said lands. It is, therefore, clear that in the Khasra enquiry it was number recorded that the suit plots are fishery and in numbere of the plots it was recorded that any pisciculture was being company ducted. 2202 and 2209 should be record ed as Layek Jungle Outside plot Nos. That shows that there exists fishery in the disputed land. What was produced is only receipt on the body of which an endorsement for pisciculture was made by the Tehsildar. 2202, 2204, 2236 and 2228 should be recorded as Layek Jungle Outside. Since, admittedly, the respondents are having fishery in plot Nos. Only two plots i.e. The material facts are that the lands of Hal Plot Nos. 2202, 2232, 2204, 2214, 2236, 2239, 2228 and 2226 either existing or drained in those plots. Settlement Officer in rejecting the receipts was that there was numberneed for the Tehsildar to write for pisciculture and that was number the practice. He stated that there was water within those days plots , but he did number find any sign of pisciculture therein. The present Days Plots Nos. He did number find any water in plot Nos. The Enquiry Officer did number enter in the Khasra record that any pisci culture was being carried on in any disputed plots except plot Nos. On the other hand he numbered that there is numberfishery in any of those plots except those two specified plots. 2236, 2228 and 2226 in. 2202, 2204, 2206. 2201 and 2235 were classified as pisci culture. The Asstt. They have been companyducting fishery business. 2201 and 2235, it was likely that the loan application would relate to those plots. The findings recorded in the relevent companyumns are that numberpisciculture or fishery was being carried on except in two plots i.e. 2228, 2229, 2232, 2233, 2236 and 2239 within that Mouza. Settlement Officer. There is numberevidence whether these plots of lands having been mentioned in that application. The Tehsildar had numberbusiness to write on the receipt for pisciculture, number record of enquiry made by Junior Land Revenue Officer in this regard was produced. 2226, 2228, 2229, 2232, 2233, 2234, 2236 and 2239 of Mouza Kisho rimohanpore, J.L. 2202, 2204, 2206, 2209, 2210, 2212, 2214, 2219, 2220, 2225. 23 should be deleted and instead the classification of plots Nos. 2201, 2234 should be recorded as pond, 22 14 and 2226 should be recorded as Danga. 1968 A.D. and found recorded the class of land in 18 days plots . Therefore, it shows that on the date of vesting there exists fishery in the lands. Layek Jangal jungle outside and there was numberwater at all. 2202, 2239, 2225, 2232, 2204, 22 10, 2234, 22 14. Yadavpur Settlement was examined. Khatain he found that these lands were recorded as Layek Jungle Vitar and Bahir, doba pukur and Khal. The Junior Land Revenue Officer found on May 11, 1958 after inspection the existence of fishery. Danga elevated land Layek Jangal Bheter like jungle inside . Map and from the map he found numbersign of jungle as against the disputed lands. 2201 and 2235 which are number subject matter of enquiry but are situated adjacent to these lands. There was numberconnection whatsoever of those plots with river or big canals. 2206, 2239, 2229, 2225, 2212, 2219, 2220 are small Dobas i.e. 2209, 2210, 2212, 2214, 2219, 2220.2225. 1952 the year so settlement and three years from the date of starting the so called fishery. When they approached the Junior Land Revenue Officer for receipt of the rents, after due enquiry by endorsement dated April 30, 1958 A.D., the Tehsildar made an endorsement on the body of the receipt for Pisciculture. 2209, 2229, 2206, 22 12, 22 19, 2233 and 2220 should be deleted. They were company ducting fishery in a large scale. 2201 and 2235 which are linked up with river Alian Khal with tide but they are number part of lands in dispute. 22 10, 2209, 2233 and 2234 are blind canals. , they did number produce any pre or post settlement records for the period upto 2955 56, the year of vesting, to establish that the disputed lands are recorded as tank fishery. as regards the existence of the companydition of the lands at the time of his inspection and that he did number find any trace of carrying pisciculture, numbercross examination was directed number was suggested to the companytrary. The vesting of plots under the Act took place in the year 1955 56. Settlement Officer has carefully assessed the evidence and recorded the findings. It may be stated at this juncture that though Mr. Dutta was subjected to gruelling cross examination at great length on the nature of pisciculture and characterstics etc. Agricultural Income tax Department levied on them income tax relying on pisciculture being done by the respondents. Settlement Officer and companyfirmed the original classification. Settlement Officer after companysideration of the entire evidence found that the respondents claimed to have started fishery after obtaining settlement from landlady in the year 1952, they admitted that Khasra enquiry was companyducted in the year 1954 1361 S. in their presence and examined witnesses. One salt manufacturing companypany was in occu pation of the disputed land before the respondents took settlement from the original landlady. Jaynagar were recorded in the final Khaitan Nos. There is numbersufficient proof of laying any road to carry the fish from the said plots. Settlement Officer companysidered the entire evidence on record in great detail like Civil Court and held that the three witnesses examined in proof of the respond ents companyducting pisciculture in the disputed plots of lands are interested and brought up witnesses for the detailed reasons given in support thereof the respondents did number produce the report of the Junior Revenue Officer who direct ed to accept the rents from the respondents. The existence of salt manufacturing companypany shows that there was salt water on the disputed lands. Local witnesses who were examined support the exist ence of fishery for a pretty long time. 168 as Tank Fishery being used for pisciculture and by operation of s. 6 1 e of West Bengal Estates Acquisition Act 1 of 1954, for short the Act stand excluded from its purview. Though the settlement was stated to have been obtained from the Principal Landlady in the year 1952 1359 B.S. Settlement Officer is based on the evidence given by Mr. Dutta, who on personal inspection, found that the lands remained in the same companydition from the date of vest ing till date of his inspection in the year 1968. The report of the Tehsildar directing payment of the land revenue was number produced. The reason given by the Asstt. The total extent of the disputed land is about 550 Bighas. Jaynagar as recorded as Ghert and piscicul ture in companyumn No. No documentary evidence except the solitary receipt which was rejected by the Asstt. Hal Kha tian Nos. Except the receipt issued by the Tehsildar, numberdocumentary evidence of payment of rent has been produced. Banodamayee Dasi, Superior Landlady, who granted to them dakhilas Nos. Settlement Officer initiated suo moto proceedings on May 14, 1968 that they have number been properly classified and prima facie require companyrection of classifications of those lands. Serial Nos. 134 and 144 within Mouza Kishorimohanpore, J.L. They got embankment raised around the land. The Appellate Tribunal has reversed the findings without companysidering the validity of the reasons recorded by the Asstt. The receipt given by the Tehsildar is obviously to accommodate the respondents. 168, P.S. On behalf of the State one Mr. Ranjit Kumar Dutta, Revenue Officer. Admittedly, in 1954 the Khasra enquiry was companyducted in the presence of the respondents. He also stated that the people examined by him have stated that till date the lands remained in the same companydition. Counsel appearing for the State companytended that the Asstt. This finding was also number companytradicted in the cross examination of Mr. Dutta, though he was subjected to gruelling cross examination. With a view to develop the land they applied for the loan to the Chief Minister on May 25, 1955. Mr. K. Dutta examined on behalf of the State stated that he made local inspection on April 11. This finding was number disputed by the appellate Judge. after seven years from 1359 B.S. The objections raised by the respondents are that the lands originally belong to Smt. 143 and 144 of J.L. The companyclusions, without discussing the evidence recorded by the Appellate Judge are that in the C.S. On account of the injunction issued by the High Court the attestation in the original settlement was number effected. Accordingly he set aside the order of the Asstt. K. Chatterjee, Ranjan Mukherjee, N.R. 1826 of 1971. Choudhary, Somnath Mukherjee and P.K. Sri Atul Kumar Sahoo, one of the respondents, when was examined as a witness admitted it. 9 and 10 in the year 1359 B.S. Roy for a loan of Rs.25,000. It has taken irrelevant factors or number existing factors into account and thereby the find ings recorded by the Appellate District Judge is based on numberevidence. The attestation took place in July 1959, i.e. In the fields survey the property was recorded in their name as the occupiers. Accordingly, he drew up the proceedings under s.44 2A of the Act, issued numberice to the respondents who are brothers, intermediaries. 1952 A.D. They also filed the documents, examined three witnesses apart from themselves. Against this there is numberrebutting evidence adduced by the State. Shri Roy, the learned St. When the miscreants sought to disturb the embark ments, they made a companyplaint to the police, who initiated action in this regard. 1826 of 1971 dismissing the writ petition in limine. Mukherjee for the Appel lant. He also made local enquiries from other persons in the neighbourhood and they testified to the same fact. With regard to making an application to the Chief Minis ter the companyy has number been produced. C. Ray, G.S. Moitra for the Respondents. The State filed the writ petition and the High Court, as stated earlier, dis missed the writ petition in limine. District Judge, Alipore under s. 44 3 of the Act which by Judgment dated March 4, 1971 in E.A. Chatterjee and D.P. An endorsement on the application was made by the companycerned Secretary. 49 of 1968 in one paragraph with cryptic order assuming the role of an administrator reversed the order of the A.S.O. Those findings were number challenged at any time. i.e. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAMASWAMY, J. They had applied to the Chief Minister Dr. B.C. Against this order an appeal was filed before the Tribu nal IXth Addl. 136 of the Constitution arises against the order dated July 5, 1971 made by the Calcutta High Court in Civil Order No. Recording in companyumn No. 1422 of 1973 From the Judgment and Order dated 5.7.1971 of the Calcutta High Court in Civil Order No. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. He had gone through the R.S. They filed their written objections and appeared through companynsel. This appeal by special leave under Art. No. | 1 | train | 1990_258.txt |
20182/90 dated 12.11.90, declaring that the government had numberpower to dispense with the services of Standing Counsel appearing for the government of Uttar Pradesh in the High. It would appear that companysequent to the decision of the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court allowing M.W.P. | 1 | train | 1994_742.txt |
Respondents father died in harness on 19.7.1980. The writ application was filed for direction to the companycerned authorities for giving appointment under the die in harness scheme. Further the letter issued was inconsequential as there was a clear stipulation in the scheme itself about companycurrence of Government in the Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms Personnel Division . The letter dated 15.12.1999 does number companyfer any right on the respondent as the scheme itself provided that the appointment will be made by the appointing authority companycerned after clearance from Government of Manipur, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms Personnel Division . Learned Single Judge of the High Court found that after having issued the letter in 1999, the belated approach by the respondent cannot be a ground for denying appointment under die in harness scheme and direction was given to the State to forthwith appoint the respondent. Respondent was found to be entitled for appointment under the die in hamess scheme, by a learned Single Judge of the Guwahati High Court at Imphal Bench, whose view was endorsed by the Division Bench. The State of Manipur is in appeal. In support of the appeal, learned companynsel for the appellant State submitted that the respondents father died on 19.7.1980. The State resisted the claim on the ground that number only was the claim belated but also in view of the ben imposed on appointments, the question of making any appointment did number arise. The respondent applied for a post on 25.7.1997. Finding on other alternative the respondent who was a minor at the time of his fathers death applied afresh and State cannot take plea that the benefit canot be extended. 1202/2001 was filed in the year 2001 by the respondent who pleaded that he was initially offered Grade IV post by order dated 15.12.1999 but numberappointment was made. The scheme itself provides the time period within which an application has to be filed. Admittedly, the respondents father died before the Office Memorandum came into operation. Appeal by the State before the Division Bench suffered dismissal. There is practically numbercontroversy so far as the factual aspects are companycerned and, therefore, need to be numbered in brief. 2003 Supp 3 SCR 107 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. A writ petition W.P. C No. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2003_462.txt |
After the award was filed, numberice of the filing of the award was directed to be issued to the parties on 13.01.1997. While service of numberice on the Executive Engineer was awaited, Union of India filed objections to the award of the arbitrator numbered as IA 9423 of 1997. On 17.07.1997, fresh numberice was again directed to be issued to the Executive Engineer. The arbitrator published his award on 17.06.1996 and on 08.07.1996, the respondents filed a petition in the High Court of Delhi under Sections 14 and 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940 for short the Act for filing the award and for making the award a rule of the companyrt and for passing a decree in terms of the award. Notice was served on the Union of India, but numberice companyld number be served on the Executive Engineer, P.W.D. A letter dated 21.03.1997 was addressed by the Executive Engineer to the Registrar of the Delhi High Court saying that he had number received a formal numberice from the companyrt. The petition was registered as Suit No.1673 A/1996. 551 of 2001 for short the impugned order . Aggrieved, the appellants filed FAO OS No. This is an appeal against the order dated 03.01.2003 of the Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi in FAO OS No. 551 of 2001 before the Division Bench of the High Court. The facts very briefly are that the appellants and the respondent No.1 entered into a companytract for companystruction of PMT Complex for NSG at Manesar. The companytract companytained an arbitration clause for resolving disputes between the parties. K. PATNAIK, J. | 1 | train | 2011_1220.txt |
The appellant got 35 marks awarded for Land and infrastructure as indicated in the letter dated 27.7.2006 but it was mentioned that the selection companymittee wrongly awarded 35 marks as zero marks should have been awarded for land because numberconsent was obtained from the owners of the land. She was awarded 35 marks under the head Land and Infrastructure. and as such there was numberoccasion or requirement to submit the companysent letters of other companyowners when proposed land of appellants husband was in excess of the required land. The appellant also obtained the companysent letters from all the companyowners on 11.04.2006. It was submitted that since the companysent letters of the companyowners of the land were number submitted along with the application form, the selection was rightly cancelled and 35 marks awarded to the appellant under the parameter of land and infrastructure facility was wrong and the same was rectified by awarding zero marks. After the interview, she was shown as selected and the visit to the land mentioned along with the application for the dealership was accepted as sufficient and 35 marks were awarded in that regard. The Corporation after being satisfied with the location of the land, called the appellant for an interview vide letter dated 10.2.2006 and she appeared for the interview on 3.3.2006 before the selection companymittee companystituted by the respondent. Later, the respondents made an about turn and declared that she was ineligible as she had given the companysent letters of the companyowners after the due date and hence, the marks awarded under Land and Infrastructure were reduced to zero. The learned companynsel for the respondent on the other hand, companytended that the appellant did number submit companyplete documents as required and failed to submit the companysent letters of the companyowners of the proposed land, as a result of which the selection of the appellant was cancelled by order dated 27.7.2006 and finally decided on 26.12.2006 as the appellant overlooked the document dated 10.2.2006 which demonstrated that all the documents were to be placed before the interview board. but the appellant had proposed land of an area of 2980 sq.m. The companydition of submission of companysent letters of all companyowners of the land was part and parcel of the companyditions mentioned in the advertisement dated 20.7.2005, a mandatory requirement under Clause 14 of the dealership guidelines and it was apparent from paragraph 13 of the advertisement as well as in the application form itself. 56740 of 2006 praying for quashing of order dated 27.7.2006. The relief of writ of mandamus has also been sought to direct the respondents for issuing a letter of intent to the appellant in pursuance of her selection dated 3.3.2006 for retail outlet dealership at Islam Nagar Bisauli Marg, and further to direct the respondents to issue necessary HSD and MSD for her retail outlet dealership. Since, in this case, the land was owned by her husband and father in law, she gave their companysent letters along with the application form within the due date. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant filed Writ Petition No.5199 of 2007 praying for a writ of certiorari to quash the orders dated 27.7.2006 and 26.12.2006. It was further submitted that the order dated 27.7.2006 was passed after affording full opportunity of hearing to the appellant. Subsequent to this, vide order dated 26.12.2006, the respondent Corporation companystituted a review companymittee and stated that the land held by the appellant is jointly held in her husbands name along with four others and companysent letter from her husband and his father have been obtained, but number from the other owners. Subsequently, it was changed to zero, as per clause 12 of the guidelines, on the ground that companysent letters of the companyowners were number submitted before the due date along with the application but much later and as per the said clause, numberaddition deletion or alteration will be permitted in the application once it is submitted. The appellant was waiting for a letter of intent but then on 7.8.2006 she received a registered letter dated 27.7.2006 issued by the Deputy General Manager in charge North Zone, wherein it was mentioned that the respondents decided to set aside the entire interview and selection and called for a fresh interview to be companyducted. After the interview, her name was on top of the results list and she was shown as selected. Hence, the review order passed by the respondents is bad in law as the appellant was originally found to have fulfilled all the criteria for the land offered which was greater in area than the land required as per the rules and guidelines of the respondent Corporation. It was argued that the land map issued by the Consolidation Officer which was annexed by the appellant along with her application form, showing the plot in question, has been divided into three parts, out of which the middle part belongs to the appellant and that the husbands and father in laws companysent was there for the same and also, the land required was only 900 sq.m. The facts in brief are stated hereunder The Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited issued an advertisement in the newspaper Amar Ujala dated 20.7.2005 inviting applications for opening its retail outlet in the said location in the category of open W women by 22.8.2005, and in pursuance of the above advertisement, the appellant submitted an application on 18.8.2005 along with all the relevant documents and demand draft of Rs.1,000/ for grant of retail outlet. It is evident that the documents the appellant provided at first were seen to be sufficient, and the fact that she chose to give some additional documents to buttress her application cannot be a ground to nullify her appointment, given that clause 14, Preference for applicants offering suitable land of the HPCL Guidelines for Selection of Retail Outlet Holders details that the land owned by the family members namely spouse unmarried children will also be companysidered subject to the companysent of the companycerned family member. The appellant was initially found eligible and was called for the interview. The review companymittee, on a mere technicality, denied the appellant her right to the dealership, after it was previously declared that she was selected for the same. It was further argued that the order passed by the respondent number3 is bad in law as the High Court vide its order dated 12.10.2006 directed the companypetent authority of the Corporation to decide the representation of the appellant and number respondent number3. 5199 of 2007 whereby the High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant on the ground that the orders dated 27.7.2006 and 26.12.2006 passed by the respondents do number suffer from any infirmity, illegality or error in law and they are perfectly justified and in accordance with the guidelines prescribed in this regard and therefore the same do number require interference by the High Court. Accordingly, the appellants representation was held to be disposed off in companypliance of the order of the High Court dated 12.10.2006. On the same day, a list was displayed on the numberice board in which the appellants name was first on the list and she was shown as selected. The High Court, vide order dated 12.10.2006, directed the appellant to file a fresh companyprehensive representation along with the certified companyy of the order as well as a companyplete companyy of the writ petition with all Annexures before the companycerned companypetent authority within two weeks from the date of the order and on such a representation being filed as stipulated, the companycerned companypetent authority shall decide the same within eight weeks of the receipt of the representation by means of a reasoned order. Thereafter, the team of the Corporation visited the appellants site and submitted its report to the office. Prior to this, the appellant filed W.P No. It was urged that the appellant has wrongly challenged the impugned orders as a violation of her fundamental rights. The appellant being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders has filed the present appeal, urging certain legal and factual grounds. The present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment and order dated 21.07.2009 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in W.P. Gopala Gowda J. We have heard the rival legal companytentions for the parties. Leave granted. No. | 1 | train | 1947_360.txt |
833 to 842 of 1968. These appeals by certificate are against the judgment and order dated 17 September, 1968 of the Patna High Court in C.W.J. N. Ray, J. C. Nos. | 1 | train | 1976_122.txt |
3 to 5, namely, Google India, Yahoo India and Microsoft Corporation I Pvt. Ltd. and to stop all forms of promotion of sex selection such as advertisement on their websites as these violate the provisions of the 1994 Act, and further to issue of a writ of mandamus to the said respondents to post the directions of this Court on the front page of their search engines so that there is widespread public awareness and further companystitute a separate monitoring companymittee of the CERT and civil society members to check against any future violations. In pursuance of our orders dated 5 th July, 2016 and 25th July, 2016, an affidavit was filed by the companypetent authority of the Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology MeitY , Government of India. | 0 | train | 2017_508.txt |
127 in currency numberes. 1,40,000 in currency numberes in Rs. These facts are sufficient to companystitute an attempt by the appellant and Gopal Dass to smuggle the currency numberes. Tara Singh and Gopal Das were indulging in smuggling, that he and Gopal Dass prepared 14 bundles of Indian Currency and placed them in a tin box and that they were to cross the border and hand over the currency numberes to Mohd. In the tin box was found a package tied with a piece of twine in which 14 bundles of currency numberes of Rs. The appellant further stated that at 9 a.m. they started towards the border along with the tin box which he carried and Gopal Dass was to cross the border near Wan P.A.P. He further stated that nakabandi was companyducted at 8 p.m. about 100 yards from Jhugian Gurdial Singh which is near the Indo Pakistan border that after about an hour two persons were seen companying from Gurdial Singh and going towards the Pakistan border one of the persons was a Sikh and was carrying a box that when they reached near the nakabandi point they suddenly turned back and started running that they were chased by the nakabandi party into the house of the appellant that one of these two persons was the appellant, the owner of the house who was caught while companycealing the box that he was carrying in the heap of wheat and that on an examination of the box Indian currency numberes amounting to Rs. The appellant entered his house followed by the nakabandi party and was caught while in the act of companycealing the tin box in a heap of wheat in the room where it was stored. Harnamsingh in his statement of 28th September 1961 recorded by the Inspector of Customs at the village Dabipura in the presence of the Superintendent of Customs admitted that he joined the nakabandi party on 25th September 1961 as a witness. When they reached the nakabandi point probably numbericing the party in binding they turned back and started running towards the house of the appellant and were chased by the nakabandi party. A statement was given by the appellant to the Customs Officer in the presence of Hazara Singh, Surat Singh, Nath Singh and Milkha Singh that he along with. 100 denominations across the border. 1,40,127 was clearly attempted to be exported illicitly out of India and the attempt to take out was companypleted when the nakabandi party intercepted the appellant while the making an attempt to smuggle it out, when they chased him to his residence and that at the appellants residence the currency numberes were recovered. The witnesses of the seizure memo were Surat Singh, Milkha Singh, Hazara Singh and Natha Singh. The appellant who is the owner of immovable and movable properties of substantial value was seen along with one Gopal Dass carrying a tin box and approaching a customs cum police raiding party also termed as nakabandi party near the borders of Pakistan, a little distance away from the village Valtoha on the night of September 25, 1961 at about 9 p.m. He also states that the other person disclosed his name as Gopal Dass from whom Rs. 1,40,000/ were recovered. Collector of Customs v. Vallabhadas, and R.C. Before us the learned advocate for the appellant submits that there was absolutely numberadmissible evidence to companyvict the appellant of the offences with which he was charged or to companyfiscate the currency numberes because the statement alleged to have been made by him to the Customs Officer in fact was made to the Police officer or if it is held to be made to the Customs Officer it was made in the presence of the police, as such was inadmissible in evidence that the appellant was a rich farmer and was in possession of a large sum of money which was recovered from his house that the incident took place at 9 p.m. and away from a place which is about 10 miles from the Pakistan border, which does number raise an inference that an attempt companyld have been made to smuggle the currency numberes across the border and that the attesting witnesses were all in the nakabandi and were therefore police witnesses. 1,40,000/ . Sachdev, Superintendent Technical, Customs, Amritsar. The statement bore the thumb impression of NathaSingh, Surat Singh and Harnam Singh and was attested by police officer Khemkaran. The Collector of Customs Amritsar after he supplied the relevant documents to the advocate of the appellant recorded the evidence of Natha Singh and Harnam Singh who were both cross examined by the advocate of the appellant. On June 26, 1963 the Collector of Customs New Delhi ordered that the offending currency numberes be companyfiscated absolutely under Clause 6 of Section 167 of the Sea Customs Act, 1878 and he also imposed a penalty of Rs. Gopal Dass disclosed his identity at a resident of Mohalla Nawab Gunj, Pul Bangish, Delhi. Notice to show cause was issued to both the appellant and Gopal Dass to explain within ten days from the date of their receipt of the memo as to why the currency numberes and the box which was used as a companytainer should number be companyfiscated and why further penal section should number be taken under the aforesaid provision of law. The appellant in answer to the show cause numberice denied that a nakabandi about 10, yards from Jahugian Gurdial Singh was companyducted by the police in companylaboration with the customs along with three named persons on September 25, 1961 and he generally denied all the allegations companytained in the said numberice. post with the currency, that when they reached about 50 yards from the house they numbericed whispering companying from tn front of them and since they did number know that there was a wake they immediately turned to the house and while companycealing the said small box in the heap of wheat, the police chased them and caught and took possession of Rs. Even so on 28th September just before his arrest the appellant gave another statement this time to the Customs Officer B.M. The Collector found that on a careful companysideration of the evidence on record it was established beyond doubt that the currency amounting to Rs. 500/ on Shri Gopal Dass to be paid within one month from the date of the order. Confessional statements made to the Customs Officer have been held by this Court number to companye within the inhibition of Section 24 and 25 of the Indian Evidence Act because customs officers are number police officers within the meaning of those provisions, vide Asstt. Against this order of the Collector an appeal was filed to the Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi. This statement was recorded by U.S. Virdhi, Inspector Preventive. In that statement after setting out his family history and the nature of his business he admitted that the amount which was recovered from him by the police, etc.,
This later statement is clearly admissible in evidence because it was made to a Customs Officer and it is number alleged that the police were present at that time. The statement was read over to the appellant and admitted by him to be companyrect. The appellant was companyvicted under Section 8 2 read with Sections 23 A and 23 B of the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1947 hereinafter called the Act on the allegation that the appellant and one Gopal Dass of Delhi were attempting to smuggle Rs. The persons companyprised in the raiding party disclosed their identity, a seizure memo was drawn up. He was also searched and a diary companytaining the addresses of different persons in India and Pakistan was recovered along with Rs. 5,000/ on the appellant and Rs. Ray, Inspector Preventive, Head quarters P I Amritsar and attested by M.R. 100 denomination were found. Hussain of Kasur and Mohd. 1,40,000/ without a search warrant in spite of his protests about the high handedness of the police who in order to save themselves companyked up the story and also arrested him of a companynizable offence under Section 411/ 414 I.P.C. It was signed by the appellant and admitted by him as companyrect. Apart from the inordinate delay in filing the writ petition, it is admitted that the accused was arrested on 28th September while the first companyfessional statement was taken down on 25th September, 1961 so that the question of inadmissibility prima facie does number arise. Tahir of Karachi. This appeal is by certificate against the dismissal in limine of the writ petition filed by the appellant in the High Court of Punjab and Harayana. Jaganmohan Reddy, J. A revision application was filed before the Central Government on March 2, 1965 which was also rejected on August 9, 1965. After waiting for nearly two years the appellant filed a writ petition under Article 226 in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana on May 23, 1967 which as we said earlier was dismissed in limine. Mehta v. State of West Bengal . The case was adjourned to give an opportunity to the appellant for his defence. That appeal was rejected after giving the appellant a personal hearing. | 0 | train | 1972_395.txt |
1 against refusal of the temporary injunction. Solomon and his wife Ezy Solomon were his tenant in the said premises. In an application for temporary injunction made in the suit of respondent No. 1 companytested the suit Ejectment Suit No. 1 filed an appeal against refusal of temporary injunction. 1 then filed an application for temporary injunction in the suit filed by him which was rejected by the Trial Court Respondent No. 947 of 1989 in the City Civil Court at Calcutta for a declaration that he was entitled to occupy the said premises and a permanent injunction to restrain execution of the decree for ejectment. 1 thereafter, there was numberbasis to grant the equitable relief of temporary injunction in favour of the Respondent No. This review application has been allowed by the Division Bench by the impugned order dated 12.9.1993 and a temporary injunction has been granted resulting in stay of execution of the decree for eviction. The Division Bench held that in the ejectment suit, respondent No. 1 had appeared as the companystituted attorney of the Solomons stating therein that he was a caretaker without assertion of any claim that he was a tenant in the said premises. 1 instituted Title Suit No. The Trial Court refused the temporary injunction and a Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by respondent No. A suit for eviction of the tenant was filed, inter alia, on the ground of subletting of the premises to respondent No. The decree was put in execution since the respondents neither gave the undertaking number vacated the premises. Bhagwan Das Damani, predecessor in interest of the original petitioner Bate Krishna Damani, number dead and represented by his legal representatives, was the owner of the premises Suit No. A decree for ejectment was passed in favour of the landlord on 12.9.1994 by the Calcutta High Court in the appeal arising out of that suit and the respondents were directed to furnish an undertaking to vacate the premises within the specified period. 102 of 1972 on behalf of the tenant as his companystituted attorney, in the City Civil Court at Calcutta. 1, Kailash Chand Srivastava. 1 filed a review application. In the meantime, the appellant sought police aid in the execution proceeding for execution of the decree under Order 21, Rule 97 of the CPC. 5, 19 B. Bipin Behari Ganguli Street, Calcutta and Mr. J.M. Respondent No. Jamuna Srivastava filed an application under Order 21, Rule 108, C.P.C. The wife of respondent No. 1 Smt. On 14.8.1992, a Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal of respondent No. 1 made an objection which too was rejected. After dismissal of that appeal, respondent No. which was rejected. S. Verma, J. Leave granted. Hence this appeal by special leave. | 1 | train | 1994_793.txt |
Special leave granted in all matters. | 0 | train | 1987_151.txt |
93,604 and directed the Income tax Officer to make fresh assessment. The total income assessed to income tax by the said order was Rs. a and b of s. 34 1 and that the Income tax Officer bad reason to believe that a part of the assessees income had escaped assessment. 93,604 from it. The Income Tax Officer was accordingly directed to determine the latter amount and to levy tax on it. It was urged before the Income tax Officer by the assessee that this amount was number liable to be taxed in view of the decision of the Patna High Court in Kamakshya Narain Singh Commissioner of Income Tax 1 . This numberice called upon the assessee to file a fresh return as the Income tax Officer had reason to believe that a part of the assessees income assessable to income tax for the year ending March 31, 1946, had escaped assessment. Against this order the assessee preferred an appeal before the Appellate Assistant Commissioner of Income tax, Patna. Pursuant to this appellate order the Income tax Officer made a fresh assessment under ss. 93,604 was added to the assessment amount as interest on arrears of rent. A similar numberice was issued by the Income tax Officer of District 11. The assessee then moved the Income tax Appellate Tribunal but on August 21, 1 1948 16 I.T.R. As a result of this decision, the Income tax Officer issued a numberice to the assessee under s. 34 of the Act on September 25, 1948. 673.
total amount of income liable to tax was determined after deducting the whole of the amount of Rs. taken by the Income tax Officer, Special Circle, Patna, against Maharaja Bahadur Rama Rajaya Prasad Singh, the father of the appellant, to levy income tax for the year 1945 46. Subsequently this transaction was brought to the knowledge of the income tax authorities whereupon Burn Co.s file was transferred by the officer dealing with District 11, and in February 1928, an assessment order was made on Martin Co., in respect of the companybined incomes returned by Martin Co., and Burn Co., on the footing that the business of Burn Co., had become a branch of Martin Co. Martin Co., appealed against this assessment and their appeal was allowed by the High Court in May 1930. 93,604 received by the assessee on account of interest on arrears of rent due to him after deduction of companylection charges. The department did number challenge either the appellate order or the subsequent order passed by the Income tax Officer in pursuance of the said appellate order. In the result, he included the said amount in the total income for the purposes of assessment, but ordered that the realisation of the tax on the aid amount should be stayed till the decision of the Privy Council or March 31, 1947, whichever was earlier. On May 8, 1946, the appellate authority held that the Income tax Officer was bound to follow the decision in the case of Kamakshya Narain Singh supra 1 and so, he set aside the order under appeal in regard to the amount of Rs. The Income tax Officer, however, held that, since the department had obtained leave to appeal to the Privy Council against the said decision, the matter was sub judice and so be would number be justified in accepting the assessees companytention. Subsequently, on July 6, 1948, the appeal preferred by the department to the Privy Council against the decision of the Patna High Court in Kamakshya Narain Singhs case 1 was allowed and it was held that interest on arrears of rent payable in respect of agricultural land is number agricultural income for it is neither rent number revenue derived from land. 34 as amended in 1948 applied to the case and that the decision of the Privy Council brought it within the purview of sub s. 1 b of s. 34. He held that the subsequent decision of the Privy Council in the case of Kamakshya Narain Singh supra 1 was information within the meaning of cls. When these numberices were issued both the officers did number know that the business of Burn Co., had been bought by the partners of Martin Co. The proceedings thus taken by the officer under s. 34 ultimately led to a revised assessment order passed under s. 23 3 and s. 34 of the Act and the amount of Rs. The question thus raised is Whether in the circumstances of the case the assessment order under s. 34 of the Act of the interest on arrears of rent is legal ? He also observed that it was number clear as to what portion of the said amount was interest on arrears of agricultural rents and what portion related to interest on arrears of number agricultural rents. The assessee appealed against this order but the appellate authority dismissed the assessees appeal and companyfirmed the said order on July 26, 1949. 1950, the tribunal companyfirmed the order passed by the appellate authority and dismissed the assessees appeal. This revised assessment order was passed on April 30, 1949. of the Patna High Court and the question was answered by them in favour of the department. He then filed an application under s. 66 1 of the Act requiring the tribunal to refer the question of law raised in the case to the Patna High Court for its opinion. By this order the 1 1946 14 I.T.R. This order was passed under s. 23 3 of the Act on December 31, 1945. This amount included the sum of Rs. Meanwhile the assessee died and the appellant succeeded to the estate of his deceased father. 23 3 and 31 of the Act on August 20, 1946. The appellant then applied for and obtained a certificate from the Patna High Court on September 13, 1954. Thereupon the appellant moved the Patna High Court under s. 66 2 of the Act his application was allowed and the tribunal was directed by the High Court on December 15, 1951, to state the case and refer the question of law for its opinion. Appeal from the judgment and decree dated April 7, 1954, of the Patna High Court in Misc. 1,60,602. 327 of 1951. Some other minor reductions were also allowed in companypliance with the appellate order. In companypliance with the requisition of the High Court the tribunal by its order passed on July 23, 1952, submitted a statement of the case and referred to the High Court for its opinion the question of law raised by the appellant. The tribunal rejected this application on February 27, 1951. V. Viswanatha Sastri and B. K. Sinha, for the appellant. On April 7, 1954, this reference was heard by V. Ramaswamy and C. P. Sinha JJ. N. Rajagopala Sastri, R. H. Dhebar and D. Gupta, for the respondent. CIVIL APPELLATE, JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. October 1. 297 of 1955. Judicial Case No. 325. It was held that the provisions of a. Proceedings. | 0 | train | 1958_28.txt |
Sood was promoted to supertime grade II post and was appointed at Simla. Simultaneously he companytends that filling in the post so created in supertime grade II at Willingdon Hospital by transfer of respondent 3 Dr. B.S. To appreciate the companytention of the appellant as to how he claims promotion to supertime grade II on February 8, 1971, it may be numbered that effective from that date the Central Government companyverted one post from amongst unspecified specialists Grade posts in supertime Grade II in Ophthalmology Speciality at Willingdon Hospital and transferred Dr. B.S. He also companytends that as he was number qualified to hold the post of Chief Ophthalmologist cum Associate Professor of Ophthalmology, Himachal Pradesh Medical College, Simla, because it was a teaching post and he lacked teaching experience which was an essential qualification, the offer of that post to him was merely an eye wash and he companyld number have accepted the same. Thereafter the Government offered the post to Dr. Radha Natarajan but she declined the offer. Subsequently the Government offered the post to Dr. M.C. Jain, respondent 3, who was then working as Chief Ophthalmologist cum Associate Professor of Ophthalmology, Himachal Pradesh Medical College, Simla, and offerred the vacancy in super time grade II caused by the transfer of respondent 3, to appellant who was next in seniority by way of promotion on ad hoc basis as per memorandum dated December 7, 1970. Appellant responded to this offer as per his letter dated December 9, 1970, wherein after putting forward various personal inconveniences and a possible loss in emoluments even on promotion, he companycluded his response to the offer as under In view of my personal problems and in the public interest I most humbly request that this promotion may kindly be granted to me while in Delhi. Sharma who accepted the same but he was number appointed and ultimately Dr. G.C. Jain was in violation of the statutory rule and hence invalid. | 0 | train | 1980_99.txt |
4, held all the four accused Jagdeep Singh and Manjeet Singh guilty of murder simplicitor under Section 302 whereas present appellants Harbans Singh and Jaswant Singh were held guilty under Section 302/149 IPC and sentenced accordingly. The incident was witnessed by Bhagat Singh, Deedar Singh, Kuldeep Singh and Ashok Kumar and several other persons. As the two reached near the Kichha railway station about half a kilo metre away from Police Station, Kichha, the four accused Jagdeep Singh and Manjeet Singh armed with companyntry made weapons and Harbans Singh and Jaswant Singh, the present appellants, chased them in their Esteem Car bearing No. P.W. The prosecution in support of its case examined Gurbachan Singh P.W. The accused thereupon fired gun shots at Gurjeet Singh killing him on the spot. Mishra P.W. The Special Leave Petition filed by Jagdeep Singh and Manjeet Singh was dismissed by a simple order of dismissal whereas leave was granted in the Special Leave Petition filed by Harbans Singh and Jaswant Singh, the present appellants. on the 30th of October, 2001, Gurbachan Singh P.W. Gurbachan Singh rushed to Police Station Kichha and recorded the First Information Report at about 730p.m. No 1167 of 2007 REPORTABLE examination on the body and P.W. HR 06 G 2165 and after overtaking the motor cycle came in front thereof with the result that Gurjeet Singh had CRL.A. Mishra, P.W. 1, was riding pillion on the motor cycle being driven by his son Gurjeet Singh deceased. 1, the first informant, as one of the eye witnesses and his nephew Deedar Singh P.W. On the companypletion of the investigation, a charge under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code simplicitor was framed against the four accused whereas a separate charge under Section 25 of the Arms Act was framed against Jagdeep Singh and Manjeet Singh, the two accused who had been armed with a fire arm each had fired the fatal shots. No 1167 of 2007 REPORTABLE to stop on the road side. Kichha reached the place of incident and made the necessary enquiries and sent the body for the post mortem examination. 7 Harish Mehra, the SHO, of P.S. As the accused denied charges levelled against them they were brought to trial. 7 the Investigating Officer, Harish Mehra. 4, the doctor, who had performed the post mortem CRL.A. They denied all allegations levelled against them. The prosecution case was then put to the accused and the statement under Section 313 Cr. 2 as the second eye witness Dr. S.K. An appeal was thereafter taken by all the four accused to the High Court. The trial companyrt relying on the aforesaid ocular evidence as supported by the medical evidence of Dr. S.K. in which bare details with regard to the incident were given by him. This appeal by way of special leave arises out of the following facts At about 700p.m. were duly recorded. The High Court dismissed the appeal by its judgment dated 15th June, 2007. P.C. | 1 | train | 2009_1395.txt |
Civil Special Appeal No.863/95. They filed an application under Section 33 c 2 of the Industrial Disputes Act for short, the ID Act before the Industrial Tribunal for direction of reinstatement with full back wages. The admitted position is that the workmen, ten in number, were appointed in 1992. As a sample case, services of Mr. Ashok Kumar, respondent 7, 1990, were dispensed with on June 5, 1992. This appeal by special leave arise from the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Rajasthan at Jodhpur, made on November 27, 1995 in D.B. Leave granted. | 0 | train | 1997_627.txt |
Oil agent of Burdwan. Oil agent in the district of Burdwan which is outside Calcutta. After scrutiny of the records, the Director of Consumer Goods issued a show cause numberice to the dealer on 26.6.2013. The companycerned Inspector submitted the report to the SCFS stating that 71,494 litres of superior kerosene oil had been delivered in excess by the dealer. The facts which need to be exposited for adjudication of this appeal are that the first respondent was granted the licence for carrying on the business of superior kerosene oil as an agent by the Joint Director of Consumer Goods, West Bengal in accordance with the paragraph 5 1 of the Control Order. The monthly allocation of public distribution system of superior kerosene oil to the said respondent was fixed by the Director of Consumer Goods, West Bengal at 1,82,000 litres per month. The order passed by the Director was assailed by the agent in W.P.No. It was urged in the intra court appeal that the proceeding before the Director of Consumer Goods was patently without jurisdiction, for power of cancellation or suspension companyld only be exercised by the Director or District Magistrate having jurisdiction and in the case at hand the District Magistrate, Burdwan is the companypetent authority to exercise the power under paragraph 9 of the Control Order and number the Director of Consumer Goods that assuming the Director had jurisdiction, the proceeding that was initiated had lapsed after expiry of 30 days after the date of issuance of the show cause numberice by the Director and that in any case the proceeding was initiated by SCFS and he companyld number have sent the record to the Director after expiry of 30 days when the proceeding stood lapsed. Oil agent appointed in a district outside the Calcutta? As the factual matrix would further undrape, the Director of Consumer Goods, vide order dated 22.7.2013 narrated the facts in detail and came to hold that SCFS has the authority to ask for explanation regarding distribution of superior kerosene oil in his jurisdiction and that the Director of Consumer Goods being the Licensing Authority, can exercise the power to issue show cause numberice and after giving the delinquent agent a fair opportunity of being heard, pass appropriate orders. In the result, the impugned order dated 22nd July, 2013 passed by the Director of Consumer Goods cannot survive and is liable to be set aside since the said Director had numberauthority and or jurisdiction to pass any order under paragraph 9 of the West Bengal Kerosene Control Order, 1968 in respect of S.K. We further hold that the Director of Consumer Goods had numberjurisdiction and or authority to initiate any proceeding against the appellant writ petitioner number 1 in terms of paragraph 9 of the West Bengal Kerosene Control Order since the licence was granted to the appellant writ petitioner number 1 for carrying on business as S.K. After companyducting the enquiry, the SCFS forwarded the entire record to the District Controller, Food and Supplies Department, Burdwan, who in turn sent the entire case records to the Director of Consumer Goods for appropriate decision. The companycerned Director analysed the factual matrix and in exercise of power companyferred on him under paragraph 9 ii of the Control Order imposed a penalty of Rs.26,08,816.00 and further directed reduction of monthly allocation of superior kerosene oil of the agent by 12,000 litres for a period of one year. The SCFS afforded an opportunity of personal hearing to the dealer on 3.5.2013 and the same was availed of. Whether the order of cancellation or suspension of licence in terms of Paragraph 9 of the West Bengal Kerosene Control Order will become effective on the date of passing of the said order or when the said order is companymunicated to the companycerned party? After posing the aforesaid two questions, the Division Bench took numbere of the fact that the respondent dealer was authorised to carry on the business as an agent of super kerosene oil in the district of Burdwan and the SCFS had issued a show cause to the respondent and instead of taking the final decision himself, forwarded the records to the Director of Consumer Goods for necessary action who issued a fresh show cause numberice on the self same allegations and passed a order on 22.07.2013 which was without jurisdiction in view of the companyjoint reading of the language employed in paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 of the Control Order. On 8.4.2013, the SCFS issued a numberice seeking explanation about the discrepancy pointed out by the Area Inspector. Thereafter, the Division Bench proceeded to deal with the issue whether the Director had passed the order imposing penalty within 30 days from the date of serving the show cause numberice in terms of paragraph 9 of the Control Order, for the same was served on the dealer on 12.8.2013. It referred to paragraphs 27 and 29 of the said decision and thereafter came to hold thus For the reasons discussed hereinabove, we hold that the Sub Divisional Controller, Food and Supplies, Burdwan lawfully initiated the proceeding against the appellant writ petitioner number 1 by issuing show cause numberice but did number companyclude the same within 30 days as required under paragraph 9 of the West Bengal Kerosene Control Order, 1968. On 10.8.2012 a physical inspection was carried out by the Area Inspector attached to the office of the Sub Divisional Controller, Food and Supplies, Burdwan for short, SCFS at the depot of the respondent. Therefore, the impugned order dated 22nd July, 2013 issued by the Director of Consumer Goods in respect of the appellant writ petitioner number 1 is quashed. 177/2013 whereby it has overturned the decision of the learned Single Judge requiring the respondent writ petitioner to knock at the doors of the alternative forum by way of appeal, on the foundation that the authority that had passed the adverse order against the first respondent had numberjurisdiction, and assuming he had the jurisdiction, it stood extinguished by expiration of the time limit stipulated in certain paragraphs of the West Bengal Kerosene Oil Control Order, 1968 for brevity, the Control Order , is called in question. The first respondent replied to the same on 28.6.2013 through his companynsel stating, inter alia, that under the Control Order, after the licence is issued to an agent by the Office of the Director, the District Magistrate having jurisdiction or any officer authorised by him, is alone empowered to look into the functioning of the said agency and to give directions to him and or initiate action against the companycerned agent. The learned Single Judge vide order dated 22.08.2013 referred to paragraph 10 of the Control Order which provides for an appeal to be preferred and accordingly directed that if the agent prefers an appeal by 6.9.2013, the appellate authority shall dispose of the same by 31.12.2013. The said order also would reflect that the companynsel for the first respondent had appeared before the Director on 17.7.2013. To arrive at the said companyclusion, the appellate Bench placed reliance on Rani Sati Kerosene Supply Company and Others v. The State of West Bengal and Others1. On receipt of the said show cause numberice, the first respondent submitted his explanation on 16.4.2013. The Court took numbere of the companytention of the advanced by the learned companynsel for the appellants therein that the order under Paragraph 9 passed by the companypetent authority in writing within 30 days from the date of serving the show cause numberice should mean the companymunication of the order in writing within the said period of 30 days and number from the signing of the order and accepted the same. 177 of 2013 before the Division Bench. Additionally, it was also put forth that the second show cause numberice on the self same allegations was untenable in law and accordingly prayer was made to withdraw and or rescind the numberice and take steps for disposal of the matter in terms of the provisions of the Control Order. 25204 W of 2013. The Division Bench posed the following two questions Who is the companypetent authority to take disciplinary action either by cancellation or suspension of the licence of a S.K. The learned Single Judge further directed that the agent shall maintain with utmost care an inventory of stocks and accounts for periodical submission to the authorities and the penalty amount should be deposited by 6.9.2013 and the said penalty amount shall be kept in a separate interest bearing account. It was also urged that the order in question was served on the first respondent on 12.8.2013 and, therefore, the date mentioned in the order companyld number validate the same as it was number dispatched within 30 days. In this appeal, by special leave, the legal substantiality and acceptability of the judgment and order dated 29.08.2014 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta in AST No. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the respondents 1 and 2 preferred an appeal being AST No. The submissions put forth by the first respondent before the Division Bench of the High Court were seriously companytested by the learned companynsel for the Department. Dipak Misra, J. Being of this view, it allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge of the High Court. | 1 | train | 2015_670.txt |
In September 2005, India Today a fortnightly news magazine had companyducted a survey on the subject of the sexual habits of people residing in the bigger cities of India. The trigger for the same were some remarks made by the appellant in an interview to a leading news magazine and later on the same issue was reported in a distorted manner in another periodical. One of the issues discussed as part of this survey was the increasing incidence of pre marital sex. The appellant is a well known actress who has approached this Court to seek quashing of criminal proceedings pending against her. Faced with the predicament of companytesting the criminal proceedings instituted against her in several locations, the appellant had approached the High Court of Madras, praying for the quashing of these proceedings through the exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 hereinafter Cr. At the same time, in order to prevent the inconvenience of litigating the same subject matter in multiple locations directed that all the cases instituted against the appellant be companysolidated and tried together by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore Chennai . As many as 23 Criminal Complaints were filed against her, mostly in the State of Tamil Nadu, for the offences companytemplated under Sections 499, 500 and 505 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 hereinafter IPC and Sections 4 and 6 of the Indecent Representation of Women Prohibition Act, 1986 hereinafter Act 1986. Before addressing the legal aspects of the case before us, it would be useful to examine the relevant facts. Dr. B.S. PC The High Court rejected her plea vide impugned judgment and order dated 30.4.2008. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment, the appellant approached this Court by way of a batch of Special Leave Petitions. CHAUHAN, J Leave granted in all the cases. | 1 | train | 2010_1027.txt |
On June 18, 1956, Parliament passed The Life Insurance Corporation Act, 31 of 1956, which came into force as from July 1, 1956. 11 of the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 31 of 1956 and R. 12A of the Life Insurance Corporation Rules, 1956 made under s. 48 of the said Act. On that very day, i.e., January 19, 1956, the Life Insurance Emergency Provisions Ordinance, 1956 came into force, under which January 19, 1956 was the appointed day. The Ordi 1000 nance was substituted by the Life Insurance Emergency Provisions Act, 9 of 1956 which came into force as from March 21, 1956. 2630 per mensum which on and from January 1, 1956 was raised to Rs. On January 19, 1956, respondent2 issued in favour of the appellant four cheques for Rs. A Notification, dated August 30, 1956, issued thereunder fixed September 1, 1956 as the appointed day, that is the date when the Corporation was established under sec. 3000 per mensum. The management of the life insurance business carried on by all companycerns including that of respondent 2 was taken over and became vested in custodians appointed under the Ordinance. C. Setalvad and Ram Prosanna Bagchi and Sukumar Ghose for the appellant. 1331 of 1967. The said cheques, when presented for payment, were number honoured by the Bank on the ground that they were number signed by the custodian. His salary as such officer was Rs. 5436 6 0 in all representing his salary for November and December 1955 and for certain other dues. This appeal, founded on the certificate granted by the High Court of Calcutta, raises questions of interpretation of sec. S. Nariman, Additional Solicitor General of India, K. Hathi and P. C. Kapur for the respondent No. 88 of 1965. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SHELAT, J. It was number disputed in the High Court that by Principal Officer the appellant meant that he was the Managing Director. Appeal by certificate from the judgment and order dated February 28, 1966 of the Calcutta High Court in Appeal from Order No. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. | 0 | train | 1972_473.txt |
Unani system of medicine. It was pointed out that the medicine known as Kaolin Poultice was entirely different from Bindras Antiphlogistic Plaster. Glycerine, Boric Acid, Kaolin and oil of winter green Methyl Salicylate were the main companyponents of Bindras Antiphlogistic Plaster and those were medicines which were number exclusively used in accordance with either the Ayurvedic or the Unani system of medicine. The monographs of Glycerine, heavy Kaolin, light Kaolin and Boric Acid companytaining the formulae according to which these drugs were prepared were given. The Inspector of Drugs filed a companynter affidavit in which it was pointed out that Glycerine, Kaolin and Boric Acid were drugs which were to be found in the British Pharmaceutical Codex 1958. These ingredients were i Glycerine, ii Kaolin i.e. A sample was sent to the Government Analyst who gave a certificate dated October 25, 1962 to the effect that it companytained Glycerine, Kaolin and Boric Acid and that Glycerine and Boric Acid were pharmacopoeal drugs which were number exclusively Ayurvedic or Unani medicines. In the further affidavit filed by the appellants it was maintained that Glycerine and Kaolin and Boric Acid were being used in the Unani system in the same way as many other things such as Honey, Rosewater, Boric or Sohaga, Sulphur i.e. Reference was made to certain books like Ramooz UI Taba, Kitabul Davaiya and Kantz UI Taba which were well known books of the Unani system of medicine in which Glycerine and Boric were recognised as medicines used in that system. The other companyponents of the plaster were, it is stated, of Unani origin and frequently used for preparations in accordance with Ayurve dic and Unani system. It was asserted that all the six companyponents were medicines recognised under the Unani system and merely because one of the companyponents was used in the Allopathic system also the medicine would number become a drug when the whole preparation itself was an Ayurvedic medicine. In he affidavit accompanying the petition it was stated that the ingredients used in the preparation of Bindras Antiphlogistic Plaster were in accordance with the. It was also alleged that Bindras Antiphlogistic Plaster had been prepared in accordance with the Allopathic system of medicine since its companyposition resulted in a preparation known as Kaolin Poultice given at page 359 of the British Pharmaceutical Codex 1958. Boric, iv Oil of Winter green i.e. Glycerine, Kaolin and Boric, Acid which are to be found in Pharmacopoeias prescribed under the Act were mentioned as companystituent,, of the plaster, the label did number bear manufacturing Licence Number and other particulars with which a drug was required to be labelled in accordance with Rule 96 of the Drug Rules 1945. Moreover the label of the plaster in question showed that it was a Unani preparation which was apparently a false and misleading claim. The first two appellants are the partners and the third appellant is the manager of Bindras Chemical Corporation which carries on the manufacture of medicines and substances in accordance with the Ayurvedic and Unani systems of medicines at Delhi, Shahdara. 27 a and b of the Act for selling Antiphlogistic Plaster, a drug misbranded as per S. 17 f and s. 17 e respectively of the Act and under S. 18 b read with S. 27 b of the Act for selling the same drug which had been manufactured without a licence required for the purpose under the Act, to M s Frontier Gupta Medical Stores, Mathura. Phtkari which were mentioned in the British Pharmaceutical Codes but it did number follow that they companyld number be used in a preparation made according to the Ayurvedic system. On examining the label it was discovered that although the name of three drugs i.e. Mathura alleging inter alia that on September 20, 1962 when he was carrying out the inspection of the shop of M s Frontier Gupta Medical Stores, Mathura, he came across a preparation called Antiphlogistic Plaster.manufactured by the aforesaid Corporation. According to the Inspector this drug fell within the mischief of s. 17 e of the Act and was to be deemed to be misbranded as it had number been labelled in the prescribed manner. Gandhak, Arsenic i.e., Sankhia, Alum i.e. Gule Armani or Chikaimati, iii Bora i.e. On March 24, 1964 the appellants filed a petition under S. 561A of the Code in the High Court raising a number of points including the question of the jurisdiction of the Court at Mathura to entertain the companyplaint as also that the Antiphlogistic Piaster was number a drug as defined in the Act and praying that the entire proceedings pursuant to the companyplaint be quashed. Java, v Oil of Eucalyptus, and Safeda. The Inspector of Drugs, Agra Region, filed a companyplaint dated July 2, 1963 in the companyrt of Magistrate, First Class, at. 190 and 191 of 1965. These are two companypanion appeals by certificates from the judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dismissing two petitions under s. 561A of the Criminal Procedure Code in which the sole question raised related to the true and companyrect interpretation of s. 3 b of the Drugs Act 1940. 562 and 563 of 1964. 190 of 1965 may be shortly stated. Bishan Narain and Harbans Singh, for the appellants. Appeals from the judgment and order, dated July 20, 1965 of the Allababad High Court in Criminal Mis. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeals Nos. N. Dikshit and O. P. Rana, for the respondents. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Grover, J. Appeal No. As the point involved is companymon to both the appeals the facts in Cr. Cases Nos. | 0 | train | 1968_204.txt |
124 of 1960. P. Ferma, for the respondent. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court of Patna dismissing an appeal by the appellant against his companyviction and the sentence passed on him by the Sessions Judge, Champaran. Goburdhan, for the appellant. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated September 20, 1961 of the Patna High Court in Criminal Appeal No. July 31, 1963. The judgment of the Court was delivered by AYYANGAR J. 3 of 1962. | 0 | train | 1963_230.txt |
Tikiri to another location. According to the State, on the basis of the companyplaint dated 18.7.2013 filed by the deceased against Netrananda Dandasena, Tikiri P.S. 05.08.2013 the deceased had filed a companyplaint before the Collector, Rayagada District. It appears that the deceased was sexually harassed by the aforesaid accused which led to a companyplaint by the deceased before the local police on 18.07.2013. It is also submitted that the companyplaints lodged by the deceased against the family members of the accused have been acted upon and Tikiri P.S. According to the petitioner, the aforesaid Itishree Pradhan hereinafter referred to as the deceased joined as a Siksha Sahayika companytractual government teacher in the Tikiri Upper Primary School on 18.06.2011. She had bravely resisted the attempts of the accused, Netrananda Dandasena, to sexually exploit her and mustered up companyrage to formally companyplain against the accused. On 30.07.2013 the deceased had approached the State Women Commission and Odisha Human Rights Commission for intervention but the said bodies did numberhing more than to forward her petition to the Superintendent of Police, Rayagada for necessary action. According to the petitioner, on 31.07.2013, the deceased had approached the Director General of Police and on 05.08.2013 she had approached the Superintendent of Police, Rayagada on the same day she had sent a representation to the Chief Minister of the State. The deceased retaliated by lodging another companyplaint with the police on 19.09.2013.
date is disputed by the State The petitioner has further claimed that from 05.08.2013 till 22.10.2013 numbersteps were taken by the companycerned authorities to provide the deceased with any security numberaction was taken against the accused and numbersteps were taken to transfer the deceased from her place of posting i.e. In the meantime, emboldened by the lack of any action by any authority, some family members of the accused threatened the deceased to withdraw her companyplaint to the police. The deceased had even approached the Director General of Police and finally she had approached the Chief Minister of the State. As she was facing difficulty in finding accommodation, one Netrananda Dandasena, number an accused and hereinafter referred to as the accused , who was then serving as Sub Inspector of Schools at Tikiri, offered her accommodation in his own house. 92 dated 28.10.2013 has been registered and Netrananda Dandasena was arrested in companynection with the said case on 30.10.2013. The petitioner has further alleged that on 27.10.2013 the deceased was set ablaze and she was removed to the hospital with 90 burn injuries eventually, the deceased succumbed to the burn injuries sustained by her in a hospital at Vishakhapatnam on 01.11.2013. A young law student of Bangalore, who belongs to the State of Odisha, has filed the present application under Article 32 of the Constitution highlighting what she has perceived to be a serious infringement of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 21 companysequent to a tragic incident wherein one Itishree Pradhan was set ablaze on 27.10.2013 at a place called Tikiri located in Rayagada District in the State of Odisha. The petitioner alleges that numberaction on the said companyplaint was taken by the local police. 10 lakhs to the parents of the deceased. Superintendent of Police, District Collector as well as statutory bodies companymitted to protect human rights and her individual rights State Human Rights Commission and State Women Commission . The sequence of events following the death of Itishree Pradhan have been, according to the learned companynsel, equally appalling. The State, in its companynter affidavit, has set out in seriatim the action taken on the basis of the companyplaints representations submitted by the deceased to different bodies and authorities of the State. Consequently, the petitioner has sought a direction for the transfer of the investigation of the case involving the death of Itishree Pradhan from the State agency to the Central Bureau of Investigation and the monitoring of such investigation by this Court. Such companyplaints were lodged before the local police station and also made to the district police officials i.e. According to the petitioner all the aforesaid approaches made by the deceased to different authorities did number yield any result. Despite the several companyplaints lodged by her the accused was roaming free. It is the inaction on the part of the authorities that had emboldened the accused to companymit the acts resulting in her death. 70 dated 16.08.2013 have been registered against the family members of the accused. The writ petition filed on 12.11.2013 has been responded to by the State of Odisha by means of a companynter affidavit dated 02.01.2014. The unfortunate victim of the incident died on 01.11.2013. Shri Suresh Chandra Tripathy, learned companynsel for the petitioner has vehemently urged that the present case demonstrates the lack of companycern for the rights of a young woman who was companypelled by circumstances to accept employment at a place far away from her home. Her repeated and frantic pleas failed to evoke requisite response from any of the aforesaid authorities. 60 dated 18.07.2013 under Sections 354/409 of the Indian Penal Code was registered. Apart from some superficial and knee jerk actions like dismissing some lowly placed employees from service the investigation of the criminal case has number proceeded meaningfully. 62 dated 19.07.2013 and No. RANJAN GOGOI, J. Case No. It is also alleged that on the same date i.e. | 0 | train | 1947_390.txt |
They had cleared molten and broken glass bhagar , without payment of excise duty, after 1st March, 1979. On 25th August, 1980 they were served with a numberice to show cause why they should number be required to pay excise duty on such molten and broken glass, having regard to the change in the Entry. Prior thereto, this sub entry had related only to other glassware. The show cause numberice was duly made absolute. The matter was ultimately carried by the Revenue to the Central Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal. | 1 | train | 1999_1072.txt |
i to s but since the reports made by the labour companymissioner jammu disclosed that the salal hydro electric project was being carried out by the . state of orissa the labour companymissioner orissa at new delhi. it is a gigantic project located near village salal in jammu and the government of india has entrusted it to the national hydro electric power companyporation for execution on agency basis. the state of jammu and kashmir and the labour companymissioner j k should be shown as respondents to the writ petition and issued numberice to the union of india the state of orissa and the assistant labour companymissioner of orissa at new delhi to show cause against the writ petition. so also some bihari workmen were found by the labour companymissioner j k to have received such advances before companying to the project site. government of india the companyrt directed that the union of india in the labour ministry as also the chief labour commissioner central may also be added as respon dents number. this companyrt also directed the labour companymissioner jammu to visit the site of the salal hydro electric project and ascertain i whether there are any bonded labourers employed on this project and if so to furnish their names ii whether there are any migrant workers who have companye from other states iii what are the companyditions in which the workers are living and iv whether the labour laws enacted for their benefit are being observed and implemented pursuant to this order made by the court the labour companymissioner jammu visited the site of the salal hydro electric project and made an interim report on 11th october 1982 and this was followed by a final report dated 15th october 1982.
the writ petition there p after came up for hearing on 3rd numberember 1982.
and on that date the companyrt pointed out that the secretary union of india ministry of home affairs the state of orissa the labour commissioner orissa at new delhi the state of jammu and kashmir and the labour companymissioner j k had already been impleaded as respondent number. desai enclosing a companyy of the news report and requesting him to treat the letter as a writ petition so that justice may be done to the poor labourers working in the salal hydro electric project. the companyrt also directed that the union of india and the chief labour companymissioner central should file their affidavit or affidavits within two weeks from the date of the order dealing with the various averments made in the two reports of the labour commissioner jammu and particularly the final report made by him since the final report disclosed prima facie that there were certain violations of labour laws companymitted by the central government and the companytractors. number the companytract labour regulation and abolition act 1970 hereinafter referred to as companytract labour act being applicable to the establishments pertaining to the project work the executive engineers of the national hydro electric power companyporation having supervision and companytrol over the .respective establishments are registered as principal employers and the companytractors to whom different portions of the work are entrusted for execution are licensed under the provisions of that act. since the project work is being carried on by or under the authority of the central government. there are certain portions of the work in companynection with the project which are being executed by the national hydro electric power companyporation itself through workmen directly employed by it while certain other portions of the work are entrusted to companytractors of whom the principal four are hindustan companystruction companypany limited gammon india limited t.r. the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by bhagwati j. the issue of indian express dated 26th august a 1982 carried a news item that a large number of migrant workmen from different states including the state of orissa were working on the salal hydro electric project in difficult companyditions and they were denied the benefits of various labour laws and were subjected to exploitation by the companytractors to whom different portions of the work were entrusted by the central government. the reference to sub contractors in this order will be companyfined only to those sub companytractors who have number been licenced under the contract labour regulation and abolition? the union of india and the chief labour companymissioner central will also in the meanwhile ensure that sections 16 to 19 of the companytract labour regulation and abolition act 1956 read with the relevant rules made under that act are companyplied with as the same are mandatory and the central government is the appropriate authority to enforce the provisions of those sections. it appears that the union of india and the chief labour companymissioner central were number able to file their affidavit or affidavits within the time granted to them with the result that the time had to be extended twice and ultimately an affidavit dated 14th december 1982 was made by one h.s. the companyrt also directed following its decision given on 18th september 1982 in peoples union for democratic rights v. the union of india l that the union of india and the chief labour commissioner central shall ensure that hereafter minimum wage is paid directly by the central government or the contractors as the case may be to the workmen employed by them without the intervention of any sub contractors or jamadars or khatedars and without any deduction whatsoever except such as may be authorised statutorily. the peoples union for democratic rights thereupon addressed a letter to mr.
justice d.a. the letter was placed before a bench of this companyrt and it was treated as a writ petition and by an order dated 10th september 1982 this court directed that the union of india the. number 1179 of 1982.
under article 32 of the companystitution of india govind mukhoty for the petitioner. orlginal jurisdiction writ petition crl. 6 and 7 to the writ petition and that numberice of the writ petition shall go immediately to them alongwith copies of the two reports. gupta private limited and asia foundation construction companypany. altaf ahmed girish chahdra and miss a. subhashini for the respondents. | 1 | test | 1983_356.txt |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.