text
stringlengths 11
401k
| label
int64 0
1
| split
stringclasses 3
values | name
stringlengths 10
16
|
|---|---|---|---|
Kamlesh Bansal and Mrs. Shobha Dikshit for the Petitioners. 941 A of 1976 K. Sen, M. C. Bhandare, Mrs. Urimila Kapoor, Miss . This review application seems quite unnecessary. Bashir Ahmed, K. L. Hathi and P. C. Kapoor for the Respondents. Application for review of this Courts Judgment dated 6th of De76. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Review Petition No. 36 of 1977. The Order of the Court was delivered by BEG, CJ. IN Civil Appeal No. | 0 | train | 1977_360.txt |
The respondent showed the light displacement tonnage LDT as 7009 metric tons. The Collector companyveyed this decision to the Assistant Collector by his letter dated 25.3.1992. It declared in the said Bill of Entry that the Light Displacement Tonnage of the vessel was 7009 metric tons. On 19.2.1992, the appellant was informed by the Superintendent of Customs and Central Excise Alang that the Light Displacement Tonnage of the ship is actually 8570 tons and that customs duty was to be levied on this tonnage. Olinda. Olinda imported by them for purposes of breaking. On 3.3.1992, the appellant cleared the vessel on payment of customs duty on the basis of 7009 metric tons and executed a bank guarantee for Rs.19,90,275/ being the difference in customs duty on 1561 metric tons. On 25.3.1992, the Collector of Customs, Rajkot, directed the Assistant Collector, Bhavnagar to encash the bank guarantee furnished by the appellant. It appears that between the Assistant Collector and the Collector there was some internal companyrespondence on this aspect. On 2.4.1992, the Superintendent of Customs and Central Excise sent a letter to the appellant companymunicating the decision of the Collector, as aforesaid. The Collector took a policy decision on how LDT was to be calculated. This declaration was number accepted by the Superintendent of Customs and Central Excise. However, the order remains that of the Superintendent of Customs and Central Excise. CEGAT held that the appeal was in fact against the Collectors order. The appellant is engaged in ship breaking activity at Alang Ship Breaking Yard. Olinda, for the purpose of breaking the same, and filed a Bill of Entry when the vessel was imported on 7.2.1992. After protesting against the said illegal action of the Department in encashing the bank guarantee, the appellant preferred an appeal against the Superintendents letter dated 2.4.1992 and the Collectors order dated 25.3.1992 before CEGAT. Pursuant thereto the Superintendent of Customs and Central Excise passed an order dated 2nd April, 1992 in respect of vessel M.V. On 23.6.1998, the Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal and set aside the order of the Collector dated 25.3.1992. The question was how LDT was to be calculated. CEGAT negatived a companytention that the appeal was number maintainable before them on the basis that the Superintendents order is numberhing more than a companymunication of the order passed by the Collector Appeals . The appellant imported a vessel, namely, M.V. After this judgment, on 23.5.2003, the appellant filed an appeal before the Commissioner Appeals against the order passed by the Superintendent, Customs dated 2.4.1992. The respondent, thus, approached the Assistant Collector. The bank guarantee was duly encashed on 3.4.1992. The respondent filed an appeal directly before CEGAT. CEGAT has disposed of this appeal by the impugned order. Of companyrse the order dated 2nd April, 1992 is based on the decision of the Collector. Facts briefly stated are that the respondent filed a Bill of Entry in respect of ship M.V. By virtue of Section 129 A, CEGAT has numberjurisdiction to entertain such an appeal. On 12.3.2003, this Court allowed the appeal holding This appeal is against a judgment dated 23.6.1998 passed by the Customs, Excise And Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, West Regional Bench at Mumbai. Also the order by which respondent is aggrieved is the order passed by the Superintendent. An appeal against that order has to be filed before the Commissioner Appeals under Section 128. F. Nariman, J. In the year 2000, the Department preferred an appeal before this Court. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows. | 1 | train | 2015_181.txt |
4 and 5 to work as Seafarers on tugboat Jupiter 6 carrying the flag of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. 4 and 5 have number disclosed the details of the insurance companyerage to the seafarers. On 05.09.2005, Jupiter 6 went missing in the high seas. In how many of such cases reports have been received by the Directorate from the manning agents of the ships in India who recruited the seafarers as required by clause 5 a and b of M.S. Ltd., Mumbai, have on behalf of the owners of Jupiter 6 offered to pay a companypensation at the rate of 40,000 US Dollars for the death of each of the officers on board Jupiter 6 and at the rate of 25,000 US Dollars for the death of each of the number officers on board Jupiter 6. Notice 26 of 2002 the manning agents who have recruited the seafarers on board the foreign flag vessel, in the present case respondent number.4 and 5, were required to inform the Government about the marine casualty within three days of the incident and as the Indian nationals were involved in the marine casualty, the Government of India was required to companyduct a marine casualty investigation forthwith. They submitted that under Rule 3 1 j of the Rules 2005, the Recruitment and Placement service providers also have the legal obligation to inform the seamens employment office companycerned and next of kin of the seafarer of each death or disability of the seafarer within forty eight hours of such death or disability as well as the details of the insurance companyerage of the seafarers but in spite of such legal requirements, respondent number. They submitted that though Jupiter 6 went missing in the high sea on 05.09.2005, the respondent number4 informed the Government about the loss of Jupiter 6 35 days after 05.09.2005, i.e. They submitted that under the Merchant Shipping Recruitment and Placement of Seafarers Rules, 2005 for short the Rules 2005 and in particular Rule 3 thereof, the Government was also required to companyduct an investigation when a companyplaint is received against the Recruitment and Placement service providers, but numbersuch enquiry has been companyducted by the Government on the companyplaint regarding missing of Jupiter 6 despite companyplaints having been made to the Government. on 10.10.2005, and the Government did number companyduct any investigation into the incident and issued death certificates on 17.08.2006 saying that the crew members of Jupiter 6 are presumed to be dead. Notice No.13 of 2005 dated 25.10.2005 of the Directorate which admits the receipt of several companyplaints about the failure of shipping companypanies and recruiting agents of Indian seafarers in reporting marine casualties involving them to the Government and the family members for number compliance with its direction? They submitted that it will be clear from the declaration to be filed by the Recruitment and Placement service providers in Form III along with the application for licence that they are required to ensure that all seafarers recruited and placed with the ship owners are adequately companyered by insurance companyer. Learned companynsel for the petitioners next submitted that under Rule 4 3 a of the Rules 2005 read with Form III prescribed by the Rules 2005, it is mandatory for the Recruitment and Placement service providers to provide insurance companyer to the seafarers they employ. Registrar Judicial is number in the process of verifying the claims and disbursing the amounts to the legal heirs of the deceased Indian seafarers. They also referred to the Flag State Report of the Maritime Investigation Branch, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Report No.5 of September 2005, which states that disappearance of Jupiter 6 along with her crew remains an enigma. How many reports of marine casualties have been received by the Indian Government after 10.10.2002 involving Indian citizens on board of foreign flag vessels and how many are received within 48 hours of the occurrence of the incident as required by the Directorate? They further informed this Court that out of the thirteen crew members of Jupiter 6, the three Ukrainian nationals have been paid companypensation by the owners of the vessel and the widow of one number officer Mr. Subhash Das has been paid companypensation of 25,000 US Dollars. 4 and 5 are companycerned, they are holding a recruitment and placement service licence issued under Rule 4 of the Rules 2005. In how many cases the Indian Government has made available to the public the final report in regard to marine casualty incidents and, if so, the period and the manner in which it has been so made public as required by clause 12.3 of the Code for the Investigation of Marine Casualties and Incidents ? Rule 3 1 j provides that the inspecting authority shall carry out an inspection of recruitment and placement service so as to ensure that the seamens employment office companycerned and next of kin of the seafarer is informed of each death or disability of the seafarer within 48 hours of such death or disability in Form V. Rule 6 of the Rules 2005 further provides that where there is an adverse report of the inspecting authority or companyplaint by a seafarer or otherwise, the Director General of Shipping can authorize the Director to issue a show cause numberice in Form VII to the recruitment and placement service licence provider requiring it to show cause within a period of thirty days from the date of issue of such numberice as to why the licence shall number be suspended or withdrawn and to suspend or withdraw the licence after companysidering the reply. After perusing the Merchant Shipping Notice No.26 of 2002 dated 10.10.2002 issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Shipping, Directorate of the Director General of Shipping, for short M.S. Relying on the companynter affidavit filed by respondent number4, he submitted that respondent number4 came to know about Jupiter 6 going missing on 08.10.2005 at about 2100 hrs. In how many cases Indian Government has taken action against the recruiting agents manning agents managers of the foreign flag ships which employed Indian crew and in what manner it has safeguarded the interest of the Indian crew particularly in view of its M.S. On 21.08.2005, Jupiter 6 along with its crew companyprising 10 Indians and 3 Ukrainians, left Walvis Bay in Namibia and was towing a dead ship Satsung on its way to Alang in Gujarat in India. On the quantum of companypensation, Rule 4 3 of the Rules 2005, provides that the application for recruitment and placement service licence shall be accompanied by a declaration in Form III and Form III requires the application to inter alia make the following declaration I We shall ensure that all ships on which seafarers are recruited and placed are companyered adequately by the P I Insurance. He referred to the additional affidavit filed on behalf of the Union of India in December 2009 in which the various measures taken by the Government of India for the safety of the seafarers have been detailed. 4 and 5 are neither the ship owners salvors number their insurers. Notice dated 10.10.2002? At the hearing of the writ petition, learned companynsel for the petitioners Mr. P. Soma Sundaram and Mr. Vipin Nair submitted that under Article 21 of the Constitution every person has been guaranteed the right to life and this right has been violated in the case of the seafarers on board Jupiter 6. 4 and 5 have deposited in this Court the companypensation amount made available by the insurers of Jupiter 6 and their companynsel has number made any submission before the Court that they are prepared to pay to the petitioners any enhanced companypensation as may be fixed by this Court. Pursuant to the aforesaid order passed on 24.09.2008, respondents 1, 2 and 3 filed affidavits from time to time referring to the steps taken by the Government of India to ensure the safety and security of seafarers including a chart showing the position of various welfare measures and safety measures relating to seafarers in 2006 and 2011. Accordingly, on 15.11.2010 the Court directed that a sum of 2,85,000 US Dollars for the remaining nine Indian seafarers four officers and five number officers be deposited in Court for payment to their family members without prejudice to their claims for higher companypensation. In this case, the licence of respondent number4 has already been withdrawn by the speaking order dated 16.06.2008 of the Director General, Seamens Employment Office, Department of Shipping, for default in paying companypensation to crew of vessel M.V. The petitioners have prayed for inter alia a writ of mandamus direction to the respondents to companyduct an investigation into the mysterious disappearance of their husbands sons who were on board Jupiter The petitioners have also prayed for an enquiry to find out what transpired between the Government of India and the Saint Vincent and the Grenadines on account of which the Government of India has certified that their husbands sons are presumed to be dead. Finally, the petitioners received the companymunication dated 17.08.2006 from the Government of India, Ministry of Shipping, Government Shipping Office, Mumbai, certifying that their husbands sons were presumed to be dead. Notice 26 of 2002. 4 and 5. They submitted that under M.S. Indian Standard Time Saturday and immediately thereafter, respondent number4 informed the Director General of Shipping on 10.10.2005 at about 1100 hrs. On the first issue, the Court called upon the Union of India to furnish the necessary and sufficient details with regard to implementation of the Conventions and Codes relating to marine casually incidents and on the second issue, the Court called upon respondents 4 and 5 to release interim companypensation to the family members of the missing crew and clarified that the companypensation paid by respondents 4 and 5 or the insurers will be without prejudice to the claim of the family members of the crew. They argued that the insurance amounts of 40,000 US Dollars for each of the officers and 25,000 US Dollars for each of the number officers deposited by respondent number. 4 and 5 in this Court are number adequate and the companypensation amounts should have been much higher as indicated in the Model Collective Bargaining Agreements for Indian seafarers filed along with the letter dated 02.11.2010 of the Government of India addressed to the Registrar of this Court annexed to the affidavit filed on behalf of respondent number.1, 2 and 3 on 19.07.2011. 4 and 5 are responsible for providing adequate insurance companyerage as they had assumed the responsibility for operation of the ship as Managers and were actually the ship owners and were thus liable for the companypensation payable to the petitioners. On 25.04.2006, however, the respondent number 4 sent a letter to the petitioners saying that all efforts to search the missing Jupiter 6 and her 13 crew members have proved unproductive and that the owners of the vessel are companyrdinating with the underwriters for numberination of local P I companyrespondent who will deal with them for requisite companypensation package and on getting further information from the local P I companyrespondent, the petitioners will be informed of the further follow up action to process the claims. Hence, even if respondent number4 has number reported the casualty to the Director General of Shipping, Mumbai, within a period of 48 hours as stipulated in the Rules 2005 as alleged by the petitioners in the writ petition, numberfurther direction can be given by this Court in this case because the licence of respondent number4 already stands withdrawn. 4 and 5 were recruited and placed through respondent number. Notice 26 of 2002 , this Court issued numberice on 10.11.2006 in the writ petition to the respondents companyfined to the question as to whether the Maritime Administration of the State India was invited to take part in the marine casualty investigation as provided in para 4 of S. Notice 26 of 2002. In how many cases the Indian Government has sent its companyments within 30 days from the date of receiving the draft of the final report from the lead investigating State as required by clause 12.1 of the Code for the Investigation of Marine Casualties and Incidents to enable the lead investigating State to incorporate amend modify the final report? 1, 2 and 3 stating therein that they became aware of the casualty for the first time when they received a companymunication dated 10.10.2005 about the incident from respondent number4 and that the administration of the State India was number invited to participate in the investigation as per para 4 of M.S. As a matter of fact, it appears from the provisions of the Shipping Act, 2004 of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines and, in particular, Sections 332, 333, 334 and 335 thereof that the liability for companypensation of any claim in respect of life or personal injuries is of the ship owners salvors or their insurers and respondent number. 4 and 5 had been indicted for the incident and yet numberaction has been taken by the Government against respondent number. The petitioners have lost their husbands sons in a marine casualty and have filed this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution companyplaining of the breach of the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution. Thereafter, a sum of Rs.1,29,29,386/ equivalent to 2,85,000 US Dollars was deposited by respondents 4 and 5 and by order dated 28.03.2011, the Court permitted the legal heirs representatives of the officers seamen to lodge their claims for disbursement of companypensation with the Registrar Judicial who was required to verify the claims and submit a report to this Court with regard to disbursement. The learned companynsel for respondents 4 and 5 stated that even number respondents 4 and 5 are willing and ready to make the interim payment without prejudice to the rights and companytentions of both the parties and the same will be despatched within 10 days from today and that they will get in touch with the insurers for release of the amounts to the missing crew family members expeditiously. Indian Standard Time Monday about the incident, i.e. within the stipulated time as per M.S. They submitted that respondent number. 4 and 5 also informed this Court that M s James Mckintosh Company Pvt. 1, 2 and 3 and the sons of petitioner number. The facts very briefly are that the husbands of petitioner number. They submitted that this report would go to show that respondent number. In response to the numberice, a companynter affidavit was filed on 03.01.2008 on behalf of respondent number. Pursuant to the order passed on 24.09.2008 of this Court, the respondent number. 2001 8 SCC 197 in which this Court, while exercising its powers under Article 32 of the Constitution, directed payment of higher companypensation for each of the claimants on account of deaths in a fire tragedy by Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited. On the aforesaid submission made by the companypany, the Court directed the Registry of the Court to determine the companypensation taking into account the enhancement made in the judgment. In the facts of the present case, respondent number. As far as respondent number. RAZZAK. v. State of Bihar Ors. They relied on the decision of this Court in Lata Wadhwa Ors. K. PATNAIK, J. | 0 | train | 2012_721.txt |
in return the subsidiary companypany transferred to the assessee companypany its shares of the value of rs.1 3881173/ . as against that order the income tax officer went up in appeal to the income tax appellate tribunal. the book value of the shares transferred by the assesses companypany to its subsidiary was rs. at that stage as seen from the records the income tax officer applied for amending his appeal memo but that prayer was rejected by the income tax appellate tribunal. the income tax officer sought to tax the assessee therein after companyputing the profits earned by that firm on the basis of the market price of the goods sold and number the actual price at which those goods were sold. thus the assessee companypany sustained a loss of rs. the material facts of the case as companyld be gathered from the case stated by the tribunal are as follows herein we are companycerned with the assessment of the assessee for the assessment year 1947 48 relevant accounting year being the financial year 1946 47 the assessee companypany floated a subsidiary companypany named messrs.
clive row investment hold l797sup.ci/73 ing company limited during the relevant previous year and transferred to that subsidiary companypany various shares held by it. it arises from the decision of the calcutta high companyrt in a reference under s. 66 1 of the indian income tax act 1922 to be hereafter referred to as the act . 16669391/ . the assessee challenged the said basis. those questions are whether in view of the fact that the tribunals order dated 22nd july 1964 was an interlocutory order the tribunal was companypetent to entertain an application purported to be under section 66 1 of the indian income tax act 1922 in respect of such order ? the high companyrt agreed with the conclusion reached by the tribunal. the high companyrt answered the first question in favour of the assessee and came to the companyclusion that it was unnecessary to answer the remaining two questions. it came to the companyclusion that the assesses had in reality made numberprofits at all. civil appellate jurisdiction c.a.number 495 of 1970.
appeal by certificate from the judgment and order dated july 25 1969 of the calcutta high companyrt in income tax reference number 61 of 1966.
c. manchanda s. p. nayar and r. n. sachthey for the appellant. if the answer to question number 1 above be in the affirmative whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the tribunal exercised its discretion judicially in number allowing the applicants petition for raising the additional grounds ? at the same time it was held that the goods were sold at a companycessional rate. sachin chaudhuri m. c. chagla t. a. ramachandran and d. n. gupta for the respondent. three questions of law were referred to the high companyrt for ascertaining its opinion. the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by hegde s. this is an appeal by certificate. | 0 | test | 1973_100.txt |
The retirement age of the employees of the VPT was rolled back from 60 years to 58 years. The scheme of voluntary retirement was introduced in the appellant VPT pursuant to the direction of the Ministry of Surface Transport companytained in its letter No. The VPT filed a detailed companynter affidavit denying the allegations of the respondents that cases of others similarly situate had been companysidered and they had been discriminated against by the VPT. and it has been decided that the Voluntary Retirement Scheme should be companysidered in the case of those employees who are below the age of 58 years. Class III to go on voluntary retirement. accepted by the Chairman, VPT to some of the employees of the VPT who have companypleted 58 years of age is only prior to 23.8.2000 by which time the retirement age limit of 60 years was in force and the same is number relevant to the case on hand as in the case of the respondent, he was holding important works under his companytrol and his companytinuance was companysidered necessary in VPT service and thereby VRS was number granted to him. The matter arises out of an insistence of two employees of the Visakhapatnam Port Trust in short the VPT to seek retirement under a voluntary retirement scheme, even though, according to the employer Port Trust they are number entitled to avail the benefit of the scheme because they have attained the cut off age of 58 years before their cases companyld be companysidered. Prasad Chairman, Vishakhapatnam Port Trust, Vishakhapatnam 530035 Subject Voluntary Retirement Scheme for Port Trusts and Dock Labour Boards Sir, I am directed to say that the matter regarding introduction of a uniform Voluntary Retirement Scheme for officers, employees and workers of Port Trusts and Dock Labour Board has been under companysideration of the Government. The Circular dated 29.8.2000 that the employee who was desirous to apply for retirement under voluntary retirement scheme may apply direct to Dy. SECRETARY VISHAKHAPATNAM PORT TRUST On 29.08.2000, respondent No.1 made a representation to the Chairman of the VPT to companysider his application dated 27.04.2000 which he had made before being promoted as Assistant Engineer. The learned Judges of the Division Bench, by their order dated 21.11.2005 dismissed the appeal filed by the VPT and directed the VPT to pass orders on the applications of the respondents for voluntary retirement within a period of one month from the date of judgment. On 29.8.2000, respondent No.1 made a representation to the Chairman of the VPT to companysider his application dated 27.4.2000 which he had made before being promoted as A.E. He again applied for VRS on 27.04.2000. In a meeting of the Heads of Department of the VPT, the companycern expressed by the Secretary, Department of Shipping, Ministry of Surface Transport about the VRS was discussed. Scheme to the employees M.O.S.T. It was decided by the Chairman that the VRS should be companysidered in the cases of those employees who are below the age of 58 years. Aggrieved by the above companymon judgment, the VPT has companye before us by filing the above civil appeals. The Board of Trustees, Visakhapatnam Port Trust and others are the appellants before us and the respondents are employees of the said Port Trust. of Shipping , M.O.S.T, Govt of India, a review has been made by the Chairman on the implementation of voluntary retirement under the scheme to the employees of V.P.T. According to the VPT, both the learned single Judge and the Judges of the Division Bench of the High Court have mis read the applicability of the Scheme and directed the VPT to companysider and accept the case of the respondents and that such a direction is unsustainable in law and is likely to have a cascading effect. The Ministry has decided that Port Trusts and Dock Labour Boards can introduce Voluntary Retirement Scheme for its officers, Employees and Workers with a view to reduce the surplus manpower subject to following terms and companyditions An employee who has companypleted 10 years of service or companypleted 40 years of age may seek Voluntary Retirement by a written request. In the companynter affidavit filed by the VPT, it was categorically stated that the Management had issued numberletter or circular to such effect. The learned single Judge passed a companymon judgment and allowed both the writ petitions and directed the VPT to companysider and accept the VRS of the respondents herein with certain other directions. Being aggrieved, the VPT preferred two separate Letter Patent Appeals being Writ Appeal Nos. This was made applicable to all the Ports. The learned single Judge allowed the writ petition filed by the respondents and directed the Port Trust to companysider and accept the voluntary retirement scheme hereinafter called VRS of the respondents as on their date of application and pass appropriate orders and pay all the benefits thereunder. Therefore, the VPT have companye before this Court through the above civil appeals arising out of Special Leave Petition Nos. DIRECTOR RP MANAGER OP ORDER Sub Grant of Voluntary Retirement under V.R. As already numbericed, Sri Rama Rao respondent No.2 was appointed as sub overseer on 2.1.1969 in the Civil Engineering Department of VPT and companypleted about 31 years of service as on date of his retirement on superannuation by 30.11.2000 A N. He has been promoted as Assistant Engineer initially on ad hoc basis and subsequently regularized as A.E. 23543 of 2000 before the High Court on 18.09.2000 with the following prayers declaring the action of the respondents in number accepting the offer of the writ petitioner to retire from the service of the Vishakhapatnam Port Trust on Voluntary retirement basis as unjust and illegal and companysequently direct the respondents to treat the writ petitioner to have retired from its service on voluntary retirement basis with immediate effect by extending all the terminal benefits that flow there from and pass such order or further order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. By the impugned companymon final judgment, both the appeals had been dismissed with a direction to the VPT to pass orders on the applications of the respondents within a period of one month. Respondent No.2 R. Rama Rao applied for VRS on 28.04.2000. He averred in his writ petition that the application was made on the basis that Port has informally alerted that Management is serious about companysidering the request of the employees seeking VRS. The said decision is annexed along with the appeal as Annexure P3 which reads as under VISHAKHAPATNAM PORT TRUST ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT No. Sri Rama Rao was posted as A.E. However, his case companyld number be companysidered for VRS because there were several applications pending and he was very junior in rank of A.E. However, his case companyld number be companysidered for VRS because several applications were pending and he was very junior in the rank of A.E. The short facts relevant to the issue in dispute are as follows With a view to reduce surplus manpower, the Union Ministry of Surface Transport number called the Ministry of Shipping, Road Transport and Highways Department of Shipping came out with a scheme of voluntary retirement. cases of only those employees who have number attained the age of 58 years. companysequently direct the respondents to treat the writ petitioner to have retired from its service on voluntary retirement basis with immediate effect by extending all the terminal benefits that flow there from and pass such order or further order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. On 26.07.2000, respondent No.1 was promoted as Assistant Engineer Civil on ad hoc basis but he did number renew his application. residential companyony companysisting maintenance repairs, drains etc.,
Further as per the above circular while accepting R.S., the Port Trust has to ensure to surrender the vacancy caused due to retirement of the incumbent on V.R.S. 30.11.2000. 17697 of 2000 before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh on 03.09.2000 with the following prayers For the reasons and in the circumstances stated in the accompanying affidavit, the petitioners herein pray that this Honble Court in the interest of justice be pleased to issue a writ or direction more particularly one in the nature of writ of Mandamus i. declaring the action of the respondents in number accepting the offer of the writ petitioner to retire from the service of the Vishakhapatnam Port Trust on Voluntary retirement basis as unjust and illegal and ii. LB 16016/7/88 L.II dated 29.08.1991. The said scheme is annexed as Annexure P1 which reads as under GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF SURFACE TRANSPORT LABOUR DIVISION No. This apart, the V.R.S. C .
By the time the application of senior A.E.s were processed, the required number had already been arrived at and the case of respondent No.1 companyld number be companysidered. This issues with the approval of the Chairman. Being aggrieved by number consideration of his case, respondent No.2 Rama Rao filed Writ Petition No. 26322 26323 of 2005. 2 Born on 23.09.1941 were superannuated from service on 30.11.2000. By the time, the application of senior A.Es were processed, the required number had already been arrived at and the case of respondent No.1 companyld number be companysidered. Being aggrieved by number consideration of his case, respondent No.1 filed Writ Petition No. Rao, learned senior companynsel assisted by Mr. G.Ramakrishna Prasad, learned companynsel for the respondents. All the HODs are, therefore, requested to forward the V.R.S. ADMN VRS/2000 Date 23.08.2000 E. C.M.E. The learned single Judge ought to have companysidered his application dated 27.4.2000 by which he applied while he was in the cadre of T.O.W. LB 16016/7/88 L.II New Delhi, 29th August, 1991 To Shri P.V.R.K. LB 16016/7/94 L II, dt.29.08.1991 Reg. In the respondents case, numbersuch decision has been taken even on his application dated 13.9.2000 addressed by him direct to Deputy Chairman. 26322 26323/2005 Dr. AR. During the daily HODs Meeting held on 23.08.2000, keeping in view the companycern expressed by the Secretary Dept. We heard Mr. Kailash Vasudev, learned senior companynsel assisted by Mr. Gopal Singh, learned companynsel for the appellants and Mr. L.N. 1 Born on 01.08.1942 and Respondent No. F.A.C.A.O M.O C.M.M. Respondent No. 2105 and 1558 of 2005. D.C. T.M. Both these writ petitions were heard together. 17.1.2000. for the maintenance section of C.I.S.F. Lakshmanan, J. Letter No. Arising out of SLP C Nos. Leave granted. w.e.f. | 1 | train | 2006_997.txt |
The tenant is before us. The rent payable was Rs.750/ a month. The tenant did number tender the rent that fell due on 5.10.1988. He took on rent a room in the building belonging to the respondent landlord. He admitted the rent numbere. That amount was to be returned to the tenant when he vacated the room. The Commissioner visited the shop in the presence of the tenant. The monthly rent of Rs.750/ was to be paid by the 5th of the succeeding month. The tenant, in his evidence tried to justify the number payment of rent. He executed an unregistered, insufficiently stamped rent deed on 5.9.1988 which was accepted by the landlord. He also spoke of the alterations to the building brought about by the tenant. He pleaded that in spite of the statutory numberice, the tenant had number paid the rent. He is the tenant of a building governed by the Kerala Buildings Lease and Rent Control Act, 1965 hereinafter called the Act . He erected two pillars touching the walls and fixed a rolling shutter in front of the shop. He numbered the lowering of the floor, the erection of the pillars and the fixing of the rolling shutter. A sum of Rs.85,000/ was given to the landlord as security. The tenant was given the right to install electrical fittings and to take water and telephone companynections. He had the right to install all necessary instruments or equipments in the room for the purpose of gold and silver business. The lease was taken for the purpose of companyducting a gold and silver jewellery shop. He removed a door and three windows from the walls of the room and closed up those openings. The Commissioner numbered the relevant features and also recorded what the tenant told him in respect of the removal of the door and the windows. As per the rent deed, the term of the lease was 15 years. He admitted that he had received Rs.85,000/ as advance. He cut off the rafters in the front to a length of two feet. The landlord examined himself as PW 1. He lowered the level of the floor by one foot. These were done without the written permission of the landlord. ARISING OUT OF .S.L.P NO.4189 OF 2004 K. BALASUBRAMANYAN, J. Disputes seem to have arisen immediately thereafter. He entered into possession thereunder. A companymission was taken out. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2005_732.txt |
1283 of 1981 award dated 25.11.1972 in Reference No. N. Saikia, J. This appeal by special leave is from the judgment and order dated 7th October, 1980 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court against the 40 Judgment dated March 3, 1989 in Civil Appeal No. 1 of 1970. | 1 | train | 1989_565.txt |
The appellant Board issued a numberice to the railway companypany in 1960, assessing the properties to tax on buildings and also to water tax. As regards the water tax, the Magistrate companysidered that the Municipal Board was number entitled to levy water tax on the Railway Company. The tax on buildings was accordingly fixed at Rs. The appellant Municipal Board, duly companystituted under the Act, sought to levy house tax and water tax in companynection with the buildings and lands of respondent railway companypany during the relevant years. 3415 of 1965 was filed by the appellant Municipal Board urging that the Railway Company was liable to water tax. They were obviously old buildings. So far as the house tax was companycerned, it was submitted by Shri Garg in support of this appeal that all the buildings situated within the companymon companypound which belong to the same owner respondent should be treated as one unit for the purpose of assessing water tax and house tax. So far as levy of house tax was companycerned, it was felt that all the buildings situated in the companymon companypound companyld number be treated as one unit in a companymon companypound and had to be taxed separately by companyputing the annual letting value of such buildings and their appurtenants. A number of objections were raised by the respondent railway companypany but they were rejected by the Executive Officer of the Municipal Board. He, however, fairly stated that if it is held that all these buildings in the companymon companypound were liable to water tax by assessing water tax, sections 140 a and 140 b of the Act as applicable at relevant time had to be applied and assessment had to be made on that basis. Both these writ petitions were heard together by a learned Single Judge of the Allahabad High Court, who took the view that the lands of the railway companypany were within the radius of 600 feet from the nearest water stand point and hence they had to be companysidered for imposing water tax on the buildings of the respondent railway companypany situated in these lands. The appellant Board determined the annual value with reference to clause a of Section 140 of the Act and in doing so it treated all the buildings as one unit and all the land in the area as appurtenant to the buildings. It is number the case of the appellant or any of them that these buildings were new buildings recently companystructed when assessment proceedings were initiated. The railway companypany appealed against the order of the Executive Officer to the District Magistrate under Section 160 of the Act, The District Magistrate remanded the case back for proper calculation of the house tax and directed that the general rate should number be applied to all the buildings but the buildings should be divided in such a way as to arrive at a fair rate. Against the said order of the District Magistrate, the respondent railway companypany filed a Writ Petition being 3508 of 1965 in so far as it referred to house tax while Writ Petition No. The respondent railway company, functioning since 1905, had several properties in a vast companytiguous area within the limits of the Municipal Board. The respondent companypany, or remand, had again submitted to the Executive Officer that certain buildings and approach roads should be excluded in calculating the area. BACKGROUND FACTS The respondent railway companypany which has number become defunct, had various immovable properties situated in one companyplex within the Saharanpur town. While thee appellant Board also filed a cross special appeal being aggrieved by the decision of the learned Single Judge regarding water tax. On the facts governing the case, it is seen that the railway station belonging to the respondent, was as old as 1905, there may be other buildings within the companyplex which might have seen the light of the day years before the time of assessment. But leaving aside that agreement, which numberlonger remains operative, several objections on merits were raised by the respondent railway companypany but they were all negatived. They included the railway station, a childerns park, a canteen, a dispensary, administrative offices, rest houses, out houses, officers bungalows etc. In further appeal, the District Magistrate, companyfirmed the order of the Executive Officer, subject to the modification that the companyt of the buildings for the purpose of calculating annual value be reduced by 10 per cent by way of depreciation allowance. 1218 of 1976 moved by the very same appellant Municipal Board, Saharanpur against Imperial Tobacco of India Ltd. wherein the High Court has granted a similar certificate of fitness. That gave rise to two special appeals moved by the respondent railway companypany being aggrieved by the companymon order of the learned Single Judge, in so far as the same was party against the respondent on both the writ petitions. The said taxes were sought to be levied under Section 128 1 i . It was next companytended that in any case the 10 per cent depreciation granted by the District Magistrate and as companyfirmed by the learned Single Judge and the Division Bench on the total assessable value of such buildings for the purpose of house tax was ultra vires and beyond the scope of the Act and companyld number have been sustained by the Division Bench. Naturally, they would number be new buildings which companyld have said to have been put up only at the time of assessment proceedings. Municipal Board, Saharanpur having obtained the certificate of fitness to appel to this Court under Article 133 of the Constitution of India on 12th August, 1976, has filed this appeal. Against the said dicision, as numbered earlier, on the grant of certificate of fitness under Article 133 of the Constitution of India, the present appeal is filed by the Board. While grating the certificate, the High Court has observed that the companycept and meaning of the words companymon companypound used in the Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1916 hereinafter referred to as the Act is required to be decided in this appeal. Resultantly both the writ petitions were partly allowed by the companymon order dated 27.2.1970. 3,957.75 paise. It appears that there was some agreement between the parties regarding the total area to be companysidered for the purpose of taxation. 1218 of 1976 will govern the present companytroversy, we deem it fit to highlight the facts particular to the present respondent and the other questions which were canvassed by the learned companynsel for the respective parties before us in this appeal. Even though the certificates are granted by the High Court on the companymon question in both these appeals and even though our decision of even date in Civil Appeal No. All the three appeals were heard together and were disposed of by a companymon judgment by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 22nd July, 1974. This appeal raises the same companytentions which are raised in the Companion Appeal being Civil Appeal No. B. MAJMUDAR, J. | 1 | train | 1998_889.txt |
The plaintiff shall have 2/19th share in the same. There is numberdispute number that the share of original plaintiff in the joint family properties is 2/19th. On 11th July, 1940, the value of shares and bonds and other securities in possession of the plaintiff was more than 2/19th share in the joint movable and immovable properties. Few admitted established facts be first numbericed as under The share of the plaintiff in joint family properties is 2/19th. In the year 1948, Nagappa Setty filed against his brothers and mother a suit for partition of his share and the income of the joint family properties. The plaintiffs challenged the order since it denied to them any share in the companyfee estate on the ground that value of property with them as on 11th July, 1940 was more than 2/19th of their share. According to them, the properties were ancestral joint family properties which Lachiah Setty was incapable of disposing of by will. The High Court disagreeing with the District Court on the question of Nagappa Setty share being 1/19th held that he was entitled to 2/19th share in the properties and number 1/19th share as held by the Trial companyrt. Having numbericed the facts as aforesaid, the questions to be determined in these appeals are Is the plaintiff entitled to 2/19th share in the joint family properties? The defendants challenged the order to the extent it directed that out of the income derived from the properties of joint family from 11th July, 1940, the plaintiff should be paid 2/19th share from the said income. He claimed in that suit 1/4th share on the basis of will of Lachiah Setty. The Commissioner was directed to submit the report, determining the 2/19th share out of the said income which should be allotted to the share of the plaintiff. Since plaintiff was held to be in possession of the property of more value than his share, as aforesaid, he was directed to hand over to the defendants the property of the excess share. There is also numberdispute as to which are the joint family properties. The findings on issue No.6 are as under The plaintiffs were in possession of assets of a value of more than 2/19th share as on 11.7.1940 and they are entitled to other reliefs of partition and accounting. 7 to 10 directing that the properties in possession of plaintiff can be companyveniently allotted to the plaintiff and the properties held by the plaintiff in excess of their share can be ordered to be delivered to the defendants by the plaintiffs. The joint family properties shall companyprise all the movable and immovable properties, as mentioned in the suit, including stocks, shares and valuable securities in possession of the parties on 11th July, 1940. It held that since plaintiffs were in possession of the property of Rs.1,92,496/ as on 11th July, 1940 as against the properties of their share valued at Rs.1,68,390/ , the plaintiffs being in possession of property in excess of the value of Rs.24,085/ , he should hand over bond and securities worth that amount to the defendants. The plaintiffs shall be put in separate possession of the properties companying to their share on partition by metes and bounds. The original plaintiff Nagappa Setty had made a statement on 31st December, 1940 before the arbitrators that shares, bonds and other securities which were in his possession may be allotted to his share according to the valuation arrived at by both the parties on 10th July, 1940. What is the effect of the number availability of most of the shares, bonds and securities which were in possession of the plaintiff in the year 1940? Therefore, this Court substituted for the decree passed by the High Court, a decree as under It is declared that the original plaintiff Nagappa number his heirs brought on record was entitled to a 2/19th share in the joint family properties and liable for a similar share in the joint family liabilities. Lachiah Setty died in the year 1936. The members of the branch of Nagappa Setty are respondents in these appeals. The elder brother Nagappa Setty was disinclined to remain in the family house along with other brothers. Most of the share, bonds and securities which were in possession of the family are number number available. Securities of the value of Rs.1,49,833/ were found in the hands of Nagappa Setty and of the value about Rs.1,45,616/ in the hands of his other brothers. The joint family properties, as mentioned in the suit, shall companyprise all the movable and immovable properties including stocks, shares and valuable securities in the possession and companytrol of the plaintiff and defendants 1 to 9 as, on July 11, 1940. Nagappa Setty died on 20th February, 1949. Subbaraya Setty dead through LR. The value taken was as on 11th July, 1940. The liability of the parties to account for the rents, income, profits and dividends received by them would be from 11th July, 1940 till the date of final partition in respect of joint family properties in their respective possession on and after 11th July, 1940. Are the parties in possession of joint family properties liable to give account for the rents, income, profits, and dividends in respect of the joint family properties to the others and, if so, the period thereof? The parties are liable to account for the rents, income, profits and dividends received by them after July 11, 1940 till the date of final partition in respect of the joint family properties in their respective possession on and after July 11, 1940. Emphasis supplied by us The aforesaid judgment brought to an end the companytroversy regarding the share of the original plaintiff in the joint family properties. If the answer to the aforesaid question be in affirmative, what is the relevant date for determining the valuation of the assets so as to ascertain and separate 2/19th share of the plaintiff? The dispute in these appeals relates to the partition of the estate of the family of one Lachiah Setty one of the wealthiest families in the erstwhile Mysore State. The Deputy Commissioners will proceed to divide the revenue paying lands in the suit and separate the 2/19th share of the Petitioner. One of the issue relevant for our purpose is Issue No.6 which reads as under If the Plaintiffs were found to have been in possession of the assets of the value of more than 2/19th share as on 11.7.1940, are they number entitled to the other reliefs of partition and accounting as alleged by the Defendants. If, on taking accounts, the plaintiffs are found to have received less for their 2/19th share in such rents, income, profits and dividends, the deficiency shall be made good by the defendants. The other brothers, on the other hand, were directed to make over to Nagappa Setty stock in trade, worth Rs.24,840/ . The business carried on by the defendants in the name of Lachiah Setty and Sons and Giri Coffee Works is to be regarded, after July 11, 1940, as the separate business of the defendants. The Trial companyrt held that this Court had observed that the present possession of the parties shall be respected as far as possible and under these circumstances the properties that are in possession of the plaintiff shall remain with them and those in possession of defendants shall be retained by them. The family possessed companysiderable movable and immovable properties including Coffee estates. The disputes were referred to three arbitrators for division of the family properties. Differences arose with regard to the management of the family properties business. The effect of the aforesaid direction of the trial companyrt was that the Coffee estates in possession of the defendants were allowed to be retained by them on partition representing their share of 17/19th. There was numberpartition as such of the securities and stock in trade, but, on an ad hoc basis, the arbitrators directed that Nagappa Setty should retain with him securities of the value of Rs.55,337/ and hand over the rest to other brothers. Regarding the accounting, it was directed that the parties should appear before a Chartered Accountant who was appointed as a Commissioner and they shall submit the details of income derived from the properties of the joint family in their possession from 11th July, 1940 till the date of the judgment i.e., 15th July, 1999. The family had extensive business in Coffee and other companymodities. The present possession of the parties shall be respected as far as possible. The Commissioner was further directed to state as to what exact amount the plaintiff will be entitled to receive on account of the said profits income after deducting the profits and income that is received from the property in his possession. On 11th July, 1940, the arbitrators made a special provision, in agreement with the parties, with regard to the business. In respect of properties, partition of which is required under the law to be effected by the Deputy Commissioner, the partition shall be effected by the Deputy Commissioner or his Subordinate Gazetted Officer. The family liabilities as on that date shall be ascertained with a view to determine the net assets. It is, however, clarified that the parties are number accountable for the profits or acquisitions made in the companyrse of the separate business or business carried on by the parties after July 11, 1940. There was numberoccasion also for execution of a family arrangement and, hence, it was pleaded that will companyld number be regarded as a family arrangement. The partition shall be effected by a companymissioner appointed by the Court in respect of all properties number required under the law to be partitioned by the Deputy Commissioner. The parties agree and as direct that the Civil Court will proceed as far as possible from day to day to work out the particulars as to the assets of the family properties as directed by the Court to enable the Civil Court to pass a final decree. The arbitrators entered upon reference on 1st April, 1940. The appeals therefrom were decided by the High Court on 9th July, 1962 and finally by this Court on 20th September, 1971 holding the findings of the High Court to be quite unexceptional and dismissing the appeals preferred by Nagappa Setty branch. The parties agree that the trial companyrt will proceed with the final decree proceedings to enable them to effect a final decree in terms of the direction of this Court. There will be stay of delivery of possession. One of the companytroversy number is the companystruction and interpretation of the aforesaid underlined words The present possession of the parties shall be respected as far as possible in the decree substituted by this Court. In the proceedings that were taken up before the Trial companyrt for passing of the final decree, after companyclusion of preliminary decree proceedings on passing of decree as aforenoticed, the Trial companyrt framed 10 issues. 1198/79 , it will determine the remaining issues and further proceed with the final decree proceedings. During arbitration proceedings, one of the arbitrator died. By the impugned judgment both the appeals have been decided, the appeal of the plaintiff has been allowed whereas that of the defendants has been dismissed. The trial companyrt by order dated 15th July 1999 decided the remaining issue Nos. The present litigation arises out of the final decree proceedings. The Deputy Commissioners will forward a report to this Court through the High Court latest by the end of July according to the terms of the decree of this Court. Both the parties challenged the order of the Trial companyrt dated 15th July, 1999 by preferring first appeals before the High Court. Before the matter was finally decided by the Trial companyrt on 15th July, 1999, on various occasions, one or the other party approached the High Court or this Court challenging one or the other order. The Civil Court shall also send a report through the High Court with regard to the progress of the proceedings before it by the end of July, 1979. Despite the desire expressed by him that even after his death, his children should live in harmony, united and without any difference as he felt that the vast properties had been acquired on account of the family remaining united, the disputes started between brothers within about two years of his death, i.e., in 1938. The defendants are in appeal before us. The aforesaid questions are to be decided while bearing in mind that the parties are bound and governed by the earlier decision of this Court inter se parties as referred to above while finally deciding the partition suit up to the stage of the preliminary decree as substituted by this Court. The arbitration proceedings were, however, number very smooth. The stock in trade was valued at Rs.1,32,495/ . Despite this as also the aforesaid directions which were issued with a view to obviate misinterpretation and misconstruction of the decree as passed by the High Court, the litigation has companytinued for more than three decades after the aforenoticed reported decision between the parties. The parties, however, failed to carry out those directions although, in the first instance, they had agreed to the arrangement. Allegations were made about the partiality against one or the other of the arbitrator and since the arbitration was number companypleted by certain date, all attempts at arbitration aborted. Defendants to the suit filed in 1948 are also represented by their heirs and legal representatives on account of deaths from time to time. It was represented to this Court that the wording of the decree as passed by the High Court is likely to be misinterpreted and misconstrued at the time of execution, and, hence the same should be properly clarified. 2 on 3.10.1979 which has number been challenged by any of the parties so far, be read as part and parcel of this order. The judgment of the High Court is suspended so far as the direction relating to the Deputy Commissioners of Hassan and Chickmagalur is companycerned. The aforesaid findings are recorded in the order dated 3rd October, 1979 passed by the Trial companyrt. The suit was decided in the year 1956. The other companyarbitrators were requested to companytinue with the arbitration, but they companyld number make much progress. He was on one side and other brothers and mother on the other. Commenced in the year 1948, the end does number appear to be near as yet. His heirs and legal representatives have been prosecuting the suits and the appeals. The Trial companyrt directed in view of the findings on issues 1 to 6 and also in view of the directions given by this Court in Special Leave Petition C No.3554/78 Civil Appeal No. With CA Nos.2893 2895/2002 SLP C Nos.7762 7764/2000 J U D G M E N T K. Sabharwal, J. Aryamurthy Anr. The order of the Trial companyrt also records that The orders passed by my learned predecessor on I.A. The order of companyts made by the High Court is companyfirmed and the appellants shall pay the companyts of the respondents in these appeals. The order passed in CA No.1198/79 reads as under L.P. granted. Litigation in companyrts is already more than half a century old. The judgment is reported in M.N. V. M.D. Leave granted. 1972 4 SCC 1. They are appellants in these appeals. | 0 | train | 2002_1231.txt |
As the appellant was removable from service by the State Government, the Vigilance Department sought its sanction for prosecution of the appellant. It seems that even after the retirement of the appellant, the Vigilance Department wrote on 25th of March, 1998 for reconsideration of the earlier order refusing the sanction for prosecution of the appellant. The State Government by its letter dated 31st July, 1998 wrote back to the Vigilance Department and declined to grant sanction for prosecution, as in its opinion there was numberprima facie case against the appellant and the assets held by him were number disproportionate to the known sources of his income. During the investigation, it was found that the appellant possessed disproportionate assets of Rs.5,58,752.40. The officers of the Vigilance Department searched his house after obtaining a search warrant from the Court, on 17th March, 1992. The State Government by its letter dated 13th May, 1997, declined to grant sanction and advised that the proposal for prosecuting the appellant be dropped. Notwithstanding the aforesaid refusal of the Government, the Vigilance Department on 10th September, 1998 filed charge sheet against the appellant under Section 5 2 read with Section 5 1 e of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 alleging acquisition of disproportionate assets of Rs.1.44.234.78 between 1st January, 1980 and 31st December, 1985. The charge sheet was laid before the Special Judge Vig. The appellant superannuated from service on 30th June, 1997. ,
Bhubneshwar who by its order dated 2nd August, 1999 took companynizance of the aforesaid offence and issued number bailable warrant against the appellant. Appellant, aggrieved by the above order taking Cognizance of offence and issuance of the number bailable warrant of arrest, filed petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of the aforesaid order inter alia on the ground that his prosecution without sanction of the State Government is bad in law but the High Court by its Order dated 22nd September, 2003 disposed of the application with liberty to the appellant to raise this companytention before Special Judge Vig. CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD, J. Bereft of unnecessary details the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the appellant, a member of the Orissa Administrative Service, at the relevant time was serving as a Deputy Secretary to the Government of Orissa in the Irrigation Department. Appellant challenged the aforesaid order before the High Court which by the impugned order rejected the challenge and while doing so observed as follows On a companyspectus of the facts and circumstances involved in the case and the position of law in the matter of sanction vis vis the impugned order, this Court does number find any illegality in that order so as to invoke the inherent power with a view to quash the impugned order. Appellant, thereafter filed an application for discharge before the trial companyrt which dismissed the same by order dated 9th June, 2004 inter alia on the ground that the appellant having retired from service, prior sanction is number necessary. at the time of the framing of the charge. It led to registration of a first information report against the appellant. | 1 | train | 2011_520.txt |
Shri Mahabir Singh, learned companynsel for the petitioners, companytends that the 2nd petitioner is eligible to apply for allotment in substitution of his father. 132/96. Before his retirement, the first petitioner, his son had applied for allotment of the house in substitution of the father. As a result, the first petitioner remained unauthorisedly in occupation for which he was directed to pay penal rentals. Since the issue of allotment to which he is eligible was number determined for long and the delay was on the part of the respondent Government, the penal rentals cannot be imposed upon them. The petitioners have questioned the companyrectness of the orders in the Tribunal. Undoubtedly, the allotment companyld number be made within the time asked for. The second petitioner, admittedly, has retired from service. 1997 1 SCR 854 ORDER The following Order of the Court was delivered Delay companydoned. Consequently, the order of extension was withdrawn. Initially, the Department extended time, as sought for four months but on expiry thereof, he did number vacate the premises. The Tribunal in the impugned order dated August 28, 1996 dismissed the O.A. | 0 | train | 1997_1334.txt |
on march 26 1960 sub inspector.b. on the basis of this report a first information report was drawn up and the police started investigation. on april 4 1960 the respondent surrendered in the companyrt of the judicial magistrate at ranaghat and was released on bail for a sum of rs. l. gbose of police inforcement branch filed a written report before the officer in charge chakdha p. s. alleging that the respondent in companyspiracy with three others had cheated the government of west bengal of a sum of rs. 439 and 561a of the criminal procedure companye and prayed for a rule against the district magistrate nadia to show cause why the judicial case pending in the companyrt of the senior magistrate ranagaghat arising out of the chakdah police station case number 33 dated march 26 1960 be number quashed. 134 1 c at the time the respondent filed the petition in the high court only a written report was made to the police by the sub inspector of police enforcement branch and on the basis of that report a first information report was recorded by the officer in charge of the police station and investigation had started. april 12.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by kapur j. this is an appeal against the judgment and order of the high companyrt of calcutta quashing the investigation started against the respondent in regard to offences under s. 420 indian penal companye and s. 120b read with s. 420 of the indian penal companye. revision number 647 of 1960.
sen p. k. chatterjee and p. k. bose for the appellant. 20000.
the respondent at the time was an assistant cum executive engineer kancbrapara development area kalyani division. c. roy and p. k. mukherjee for the respondent. the respondent then on may 9 1960 filed a petition under ss. criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 30 of 1961.
appeal from the judgment and order dated september 6 1960 of the calcutta high companyrt in cr. 1000/ . it is against this judgment and order that the state has companye in appeal to this court on a certificate granted by the high companyrt under art. | 1 | test | 1962_125.txt |
District as a Wild life Sanctuary. The total area of the sanctuary was 765.79 Sq. K.M. to 444.2.3 Sq. and make the area of 321,56 Sq. The State Legislature, thereafter on 27.7.1995, passed a resolution to reduce the sanctuary limit to 444.23 Sq. The petitioner had filedi the writ petition chllenging the government numberification dated 9.8.1995 and the resolution dated 27.7.1995 passed by the State Legislature reducing the area of Narayan Sarovar ChinKara Sanctuary from 765.79 Sq. The High Court heid that for about 12QO Chinkaras the area of 444.23 Sq. M. On 27.7.1993 it cancelled that numberification and issued another whereby only a part of the said reserved forest was deciared as the Chinkara Wild Life Sanctuary, The area so declared was 94.87 Sq. The High Court, after scrutinising the resolution was of the view that the State Legislature was quite aware about the wild life as without in any way diluting the companymitment to protect wild Life and to Improve the habitat. The resolution was passed in exercise of the powers companyferred by Section 26A 3 of the Wild Life Protection Act. Thereafter the State Government made certain inquires and decided to delimit the area of that sanctuary as it was found to be more than required and the delimitation was likeiy to be helpful in systematically developing that area economically by making use of its mineral wealth. On 14.4.1981 the Government of Gujarat in exercise of the powers companyferred by Section 18 1 of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972, declared a part of the forest area in Lakhphat Taluka of Kutch. Pursue to that resolution the Government issued a numberification Lo that effect en 9.8.1995. that the earlier numberification dated 14.4.1981 was revived. available for the development of the said backward area of Kutchh District. The petitioner again chalienged those numberification by filing the writ a petition. rich with minerals like limestone, lignite, bauxite, and bentonite. The said two numberifications were chalirnged by the petitioner by filing writ petition? positive steps are taken so neither wiidUfe is affected number the improvement is affected. M. The High Court dismissea that petition. in the Gujarat High companyrt The High Court quashed both those numberifications The result was. | 0 | train | 2000_1388.txt |
The identification parade was closed. Their photographs were shown and the identification parade itself has been companyducted after such a long time. Thus, there is numberdelay in companyducting the identification parade. Despite the above Test Identification Parade having been companyducted in accordance with law, the appellants have raised objections to the identification parade and have stated that they were in illegal companyfinement of the police. This identification parade was performed in the jailors office room and the witnesses were examined by the Magistrate. When they were about to reach the house of the deceased that the accused intercepted and demanded the deceased to handover the bag. The identification parade was companyducted on 29th July, 2000 at 3.30 M. vide Ext. About the availability of the light, he had stated that there was one tube light glowing at the house of the owner and there was also light from the illumination of Surya Nursing Home and even during the identification parade, he had identified both the companyaccused. On 17th June, 2000, he submitted a requisition before the JFCM for holding Test Identification Parade for identification of both the appellants and he was the main investigating officer who companyducted the investigation and arrested the main accused. Cash of Rs.40,000/ approximately was in the bag, which the deceased was carrying. Test Identification Parade for both the accused was held on 6th July, 2000 and 29th July, 2000 by PW17 and PW20 and relevant proceedings were marked as Ext. PW.1 told me that there was a cash of Rs.40,000/ in the bag. His demand for the cash bag companytaining the cash was resisted by the deceased, where after, he shot the deceased, snatched the bag and then waited for the vehicle motorcycle to companye, on which both A1 and A2 fled away from the site. The accused himself was arrested after one year and it was only thereafter that the investigating officers had been able to companylect substantial evidence and then after arresting all the companycerned accused, the identification parade was companyducted on 27th July, 2000. This witness had sufficient time to recognize the assailant inasmuch as first the assailant had an altercation with the deceased. While relying upon the case of Musheer Khan supra , it is companytended that they were retained in police custody and that discrepancies discernable in his identification by the witness renders the identification unbelievable and improper. When the deceased fell down PW1 one Prasad, PW2, the wife of the deceased and his elder daughter took the deceased to the Government Hospital, Bodhan in an auto and as numberdoctor available at the Hospital they took the deceased to Santhan Nursing Home where he was declared dead by the doctors. Somewhat similar plea was taken in regard to identification, according to the accused they were shown to the witnesses while in custody and their photographs have been taken from their residence which in turn were also shown to the witnesses. He stated that PW2 had number stated before him that there was sufficient illumination because of tube light and Nursing Home and from the public street light. One motor cycle came to the spot and took away the assailant who shot my husband. The Magistrate had required and the jailor then had provided number suspect persons who were asked to participate in the parade after the accused had expressed his satisfaction, he even was asked to stand in any place in the row with the known suspects and thereafter Y. Krishna Mohan PW 1 was brought to the Test Identification Parade and then the accused was identified in accordance with law. It may be numbericed here that as per the evidence on record, the wife and daughter of the deceased were sitting on the first floor of the house and they came to have seen the deceased, PW1 companying to the house as well as his alteration with the accused. After the arrest of Mirza Qasim Baig, A.4 and his companyfessional statement, the systematic investigation was companyducted by him and he arrested accused Kameel as well as accused Feroz somewhere on 2nd June, 2000. The other person came on a motorcycle to the spot and these persons fled away on the motorcycle. The tube light was at the third shutter which pertains to the house of my owner. He had taken the deceased along with others to the Government Hospital and then to the Nursing Home. In order to prove this plea, they have produced four witnesses D1 to D4 but they companyld number bring any records or any other companyent or substantial evidence to prove the alleged case of illegal companyfinement and or for that matter that they were shown to the witnesses before the identification parade was companyducted by the investigating officer. I can identify the person who had altercation with my husband. Similarly, PW2, the wife of deceased clearly stated that on the date of the occurrence, she had switched on the tube lights and the light would fall on the main road. In pursuance of the said companyspiracy on 2nd August, 1999 accused chalked out plan at Sarbathi Canal Mosque, Bodhan that A1 should snatch the bag of the deceased and A2 Feroz Khan should drive the vehicle to escape from the scene after companymission of the offence and remaining of them i.e. The investigating officer was examined as PW18, who took up the investigation, examined the witnesses and recorded the statement after preparing the sketch of the case of occurrence Ext. The facts from the record shows that somewhere in July 1999, Azam Ghori who died during the Trial organized a Tanjeem along with his associates accused A1 to A8, hatched a companyspiracy to snatch away the cash bag from one Ramakrishna Rao, the owner of a cycle shop called Krishna Cycle Stores, New Bus Stand, Bodhan. The body of the deceased was sent for postmortem. PW1 was working as a salesman. As far as PW1 is companycerned, he is a witness to the entire incident. When I questioned PW.1 he told me that the said bag was taken away. The deceased had second show companylection from the theatre which is estimated to be of Rs.40,000/ . Feroz Khan Feroz referred to as appellants herein. There is numberhing on record to show or prove that these accused were in illegal custody or companyfinement of the police. All the accused were subjected to trial. The incident took place at the distance of 300 feet from the house of the owner. P.C., the accused also examined four witnesses. The accused are brought near to the witness chair and the witness pointed out A.1 who is standing in the fifth position from the left side and said that A.1 had altercation with her husband. The appellant had shown a revolver and had stated that the bag should be given to him and when the deceased questioned the said person and PW1 wanted to interfere, he threatened him saying that if he took a step forward he would be shot. Again, on being questioned by the owner, he shot the owner thrice with the revolver and he fell down. On the night of 2nd August, 1999, a lorry loaded with spare parts of Hero Cycle came to the shop of the deceased and the goods were unloaded into the shop by 10.30 P.M. In his cross examination, he clearly stated as follows The distance between the place where my owner fall down and the house of my owner is about 35 feet. P1 to Ext. They had companye down with the key to open the door for the deceased to enter the house however, when they opened the door the firing had taken place and the deceased was lying on the ground. As already numbericed, there was resistance and arguments, resultantly the accused had fired three shots from his pistol, snatched the bag and ran away. One person was riding the motor cycle. Ramakrishna Rao was in his cycle shop called Krishna Cycle Stores and also had second show companylections of the theatre in the evening. At about 10.45 p.m. my husband PW.1 and another person came upto my house. PW1 was walking with him, while PW3 was following from behind. A3 to A9 should watch the movements by taking shelter near the shop and house of the deceased for successful implementation of their plan. She also companyfirmed that there was illumination from the Nursing Home which is opposite to the house and about the date of incident she made the following statement On 2.8.1999 at 10.45 p.m. This witness has stated that when he went to the place of occurrence, number of people had assembled there. He clearly stated that he companyld easily identify both the persons. After closing the shop, he was proceeding to his house which was about 500 to 600 feet away and his salesman was accompanying him. In other words, there was sufficient time and opportunity for this witness and others to see and recognize both the assailants. P11 and scene of offence panchanama Ext. The Inspector was examined as PW23 and a companyplaint submitted was Ext. I came to know about their apprehension when the police came to me to enquire whether I can identify the assailant. Police examined me. PW3, Nasir Khan fully companyroborated the statement of PW1 and that they stayed at Swathi Hotel for taking tea. By the time I got down from the house and went to the spot my husband was lying on the road. PW14, Dr. B. Santosh companyducted the autopsy over the dead body of the deceased and issued postmortem report certificate expressing the opinion as Ext. During investigation a diary writing was also recovered relating to the activity of the accused particularly, the occurrence in question. Thereafter, PW1 went to the police station at about 11.50 P.M. and gave companyplaint to the Sub Inspector of Police Station. Out of these, one Azam Ghori is stated to have been killed in an encounter on 6th April, 2000 and companysequently proceedings against him came to an end. A1 was found guilty for offence under Section 302, whereas A2 to A8 for the offence under Section 302/109 IPC. In the cross examination, she specifically denied the suggestion that she companyld number see the persons who are companying from right side on the road and she stated that the out house is adjacent to the main road. The writing was sent for companyparison to the Forensic Science Laboratory at Hyderabad and which had expressed an opinion that the persons who wrote the red enclosed writings marked as S1 to S29 also wrote the red enclosed writing marked Q1 to Q378, Q131/1 and Q.122/1. No doubt, the investigating officer had appeared as PW18 and according to him after he had taken up the investigation, he was working as inspector in the police station at the relevant time. He specifically denied that any photographs were showed to him by the police on the companytrary, he received a letter to go to Chanchalguda Jail at Hyderabad to identify the assailant. While other eight accused faced the trial and were finally found guilty and were punished for different offences. The prosecution had brought before the Court of Session nine accused to face the trial. His statement clearly shows that he was fully aware about the facts of the business and had stated that a lorry of spare parts had companye on 2nd August, 1999 at about 10.30 M. where PW3 and Hamid were also present. Abdul Mateen Muzaffar had provided his motorcycle while A9 gave his pistol to A1 for the purposes of companymitting the crime. This was companyducted and companypleted by 8th Metropolitan Magistrate, Hyderabad. He used to companye back to his place with cash. After one year of the incident I came to know that the persons who are responsible for the murder of my owner were apprehended. The investigation of the case was so faulty that even important piece of evidence like blood stained earth, empties were admittedly number companylected from the place of occurrence and numberseizure memos were prepared, as stated by the Investigating Officer. He had prepared rough sketch of the place of occurrence which was Ext.11 and according to him it was a rainy day. One Nazar and Hamid were following him and all of them were going on foot. The prosecution examined as many as 26 witnesses and relied on documentary evidence Ex. I am seeing A.1 today in the Court after the incident. I was waiting for my husband. 1214/C12/CID/2000 of the Additional DGP, CID this case was given to him for investigation. The following extracts of examination in chief of this witness, has been relied upon by the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant. and Section 25 27 of Indian Arms Act being Ext. In his detailed cross examination, numberhing material companyld companye out. He even recorded the statement of PW4. Both the learned Trial Court as well as the High Court had disbelieved the witnesses of the defence in that regard. The blood stains were found on the edge of the road. It was numberodys case that these two persons were wearing helmets or that their faces were companyered. However, they all were acquitted for the charge of an offence under Section 396 IPC but were also punished for 120 B IPC. After companypletion of the investigation, charge sheet was filed in the Court. P17 and P28 respectively. They were prepared in presence of PW9. Ultimately, they were found guilty and awarded sentence by learned Sessions Court as afore noticed. I was sitting by the side of the window. Their statements appear to be truthful description of the events that occurred in their presence or of what they have the knowledge. After making their statements under Section 313 Cr. On this basis, an F.I.R. Hearing my cries, my family members and others gathered there. The cause of death was identified to be internal hemorrhage and shock caused by a fire arm injuries. A6 Mohd. was registered under Section 302 and 379 r w 34 I.P.C. The judgment of the Sessions Court was partially set aside by the High Court. Dissatisfied from the judgment of the High Court, the present appeal has been filed by the two appellants challenging the legality and companyrectness of the judgment of the High Court. | 0 | train | 2010_463.txt |
Petitioner through its Advocate addressed a letter dated 29th November, 2006, inter alia, requesting them to make payments towards three Purchase Orders PUR PN CI/621977 dated 28.07.2004, PUR PN CN/621973 dated 28.07.2004 and PUR PN CI/622029 dated 11.12.2004. The Respondent in the year 2004, placed certain purchase orders with Denel Eloptro for supply of various electronic equipments which are listed as under PUR PN C1/621977 dated 28th July 2004 PUR PN CN/621973 dated 28th July 2004 PUR PN C1/622029 dated 11th December 2004 The General Terms and Conditions of the Purchase Order Foreign companytains an Arbitration Clause. The Petitioner companypany had several internal divisions, one of them being Denel Eloptro at the time when the companytracts between Petitioner and Respondent were entered into. The Petitioner is a companypany wholly owned by the Government of the Republic of South Africa, duly incorporated as per the laws of the Republic of South Africa, with its main business address at Denel Head Office, Nelmapius Drive, Irene, Pretoria, Republic of South Africa. The name of the said division was changed from Delnel Eloptro to Denel Ptonics with effect from 1st April, 2004. In the said numberice, the petitioner cited Clause 10 of the General Terms and Conditions of the Purchase Orders which provides for reference of disputes to arbitration and accordingly requested the respondent, to refer the disputes for adjudication in accordance with Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The respondent by its reply letter dated 8th June 2006 addressed to the Corporation insurer, inter alia companytended, that, as per the guide lines issued by the Ministry of Defence, Government of India, to discontinue dealings with M s DENEL PYT LTD.,
and withhold payment due if any, it is unable to satisfy its liability to the petitioner. It is a Government of India Enterprise, Ministry of Defence, Government of India. It was also stated, that, since the arbitration clause provides only for the appointment of Managing Director or his numberinee, instead of mutually agreed independent arbitrator, the said clause is invalid and accordingly requested the respondent for appointment of mutually agreed independent arbitrator to adjudicate the disputes which have arisen between the petitioner and respondent. In response to the numberice issued by the petitioner, the respondent by its letter dated 24th June 2009 for the first time disputed its liability for the payment of the amount demanded by the petitioner. The petitioner raised a demand with respondent for the aforesaid amount. The Petitioner before the delivery of the goods to the Respondent as per the orders placed by them entered into a credit insurance policy with one Credit Guarantee Insurance Corporation of Africa Ltd. hereinafter referred to as Corporation in respect of the said Purchase Orders. However, the respondent vide letter dated 4th May 2005, refused to pay the said amount, only on the ground that it is a Government Company under the Ministry of Defence, Government of India and in view of the direction issued by the Ministry to withhold payment of the said invoices, it is unable to settle the amounts due to the petitioner. The petitioner states, that, it duly performed its obligations in terms of the purchase orders and delivered the goods as ordered and the invoices were issued. The respondent through its Advocates and Solicitors, vide their letter dated 18th December, 2006, though admitted their liability towards the aforesaid Purchase Orders, refuse to settle the amounts due only on the ground, that, they are prohibited from making any payments to the petitioner by the Ministry of Defence, Government of India vide its letter companymunication dated 21st April, 2005. The petitioner was companystrained to issue numberice dated 30th May, 2009 to the respondent which was served on the respondent and its Managing Director through fax on 30th May 2009 and through speed post and companyrier on 2nd June 2009 and 6th June 2009, respectively. The Insurance Corporation also requested, vide its letter dated 29th May 2006, to pay the amount raised against them. The Petitioner has filed the present Arbitration Petition under sub section 6 of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 hereinafter referred to as the Act . It was also stated, that the names proposed by the petitioner for the appointment of the arbitrator was number acceptable, as Clause 10 of the General Terms and Conditions of the Purchase Order does number permit the same and, further they are number willing to refer the dispute to the arbitrator, since the direction issued by the Ministry of defence is in full force and effect, and they are protected under Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872. In the light of the aforesaid factual background, the petitioner has invoked the jurisdiction of this Court by filing the petition under Section 11 6 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996, to appoint an arbitrator to resolve the dispute between the parties. It is prayed in the petition to appoint a sole arbitrator to adjudicate the dispute between the parties. The Optronics division was number a separate legal entity, but was only a business unit of the Petitioner. The Respondent is a Corporation duly registered under the Companies Act, 1956, having its registered office at Pune, Maharashtra. It is further stated, that, as the goods were accepted and utilized, the respondent was liable to pay the value of the goods in a sum of GBP 34,894.75 Thirty Four Thousand Eight Hundred and Ninety Four and 75 Pence Pound Sterling . The said delivery of goods was also accepted by the respondent without raising any objection. After service of the numberice, the parties have exchanged their pleadings. L. Dattu, J. | 1 | train | 2010_358.txt |
Therefore, the goats and sheep were taken to Deesa from Palanpur in the trucks and other vehicles. The truck, which had overturned, was left at the place where it had overturned and other trucks were taken with goats and sheep to Kanth Panjarapole, Deesa. in any of the trucks and that the drivers had meted out cruelty to the animals. He received a message that certain trucks with goats and animals had left from Badmer to go to Ahmedabad via Deesa and Palanpur. It was further found that in all there were 1974 animals out of which 99 animals had died and that 1875 goats and sheep worth Rs.400/ each were kept in the Panjarapole, Deesa. 1 in his companyplaint that carrying of more than 200 animals in a truck is cruelty by itself. 1 and his associates are headstrong persons who had grabbed the companysignment of sheep and goats illegally by stopping the trucks near Palanpur and forcing the trucks to be taken to Deesa. It was further learnt that the goats and sheep were filled in the trucks in an unauthorized and cruel manner. GJ 9 Y 5143, companyveying the goats and sheep from Palanpur to Deesa, had overturned on the side of the road as a result of which some animals had died. On search being made, it was found that in all there were eight trucks and in each truck, goats and sheep were being companyveyed in a companygested manner. 1 and others with police personnel had companymitted loot of trucks with goats and sheep and also cash amount of Rs.1,11,000. They waived their hands and search light to stop the trucks but the drivers of the trucks did number stop the vehicles and were found driving trucks speedily towards Palanpur. It was also learnt from Ramjanbhai Ibrahimbhai Sindhi that the goats and sheep loaded in the trucks were brought from Badmer to be taken to Ranip Slaughter House, Ahmedabad. The trucks, which were being driven from Badmer, were also taken to the said Panjarapole. 1 is an Animal Right Activist. 1 to shift 1325 sheep and goats in proper manner to Panjarapole at Patan under the supervision and in presence of the Investigating Officer of Deesa City Police Station before October 31, 2008. 1 had his mobile phone with him and, therefore, informed the Police Control, Palanpur that trucks loaded with goats and sheep were companying speedily towards Palanpur, whereas he and others were following those trucks and, therefore, necessary action should be taken to halt the trucks at Aroma Circle Check Post. 1 to 6, number a single sheep or goat had died in any of the trucks, but large number of them were shown to have died in the FIR with a view of appropriating them. On June 16, 2008 he with others was present at Deesa. 8, which is entrusted care and custody of the animals under interim order, to hand over the surviving animals to the respondent Nos. 1 had planned the entire operation of looting the trucks with the active help and companynivance of local police at Deesa. 1, had, with the help of police, taken over the trucks, beaten the drivers, looted cash of Rs.1,11,000/ and taken away sheep and goats worth Rs.45,48,000/ . 1 with Superintendent of Police at Palanpur on June 17, 2008 itself about the forcible and violent taking over of the trucks with cattle and Rs.500/ in cash. 1 has averred in his companyplaint that close to 2000 goats and sheep were being transported in eight trucks, in a cramped manner, denying them even food and water in the process. They were arrested and on being questioned, it was informed by Ramjanbhai Ibrahimbhai Sindhi that the others were cleaners of the trucks. 1 herein and companyfined in the Panjarapole at Kanth, near Deesa, the learned Single Judge has i held that each of the respondent Nos. 1 to 6 the companyt of maintenance and treatment of the animals in question to the respondent No. One of such vehicle, i.e., mini truck No. When the trucks reached near Aroma Circle, the drivers spotted the police. He was called upon to produce permit for loading the goats and sheep, but he companyld number produce the same. In the companyplaint filed with Superintendent of Police, Palanpur, numberhing was done. 1387 of 2008. 1 to 6, claiming to be the owners of goats and sheep, filed an application under Sections 451 and 457 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for custody of the cattle. 1 to 6 are further directed number to companymit any offence under the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 in respect of the surviving animals and submit an undertaking to that effect to the police officer in charge of the Police Station at Patan. He is also Secretary of Rajpur Deesa Panjarapole, which is a public trust and involved in preservation of old, infirm and stray cattle. 3131 of 2008, registered with Deesa City Police Station for the alleged companymission of offences punishable under Section 279 of Indian Penal Code, Section 11 1 d of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and Sections 5, 6 and 8 of Bombay Animal Preservation Act, 1954, at the instance of the appellant No. On making the inquiry as to who were driving the trucks, it was found that 1 Ramjanbhai Ibrahimbhai Sindhi, resident of Nilana, Taluka Shiv, District Badmer, Rojakhan Dosukhan Sindhi, resident of Lilasa, Taluka Shiv, District Badmer and 3 Jamalkhan Dinakhan Sindhi, resident of Nimlatada, Taluka Shiv, District Badmer, Rajasthan, were drivers of some of the trucks. The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deesa, by order dated July 5, 2008, rejected the said application and further directed the Investigating Officer Mr. Lakhubhai Amubhai to take possession of all goats and sheep from Rajpur Deesa Panjarapole and to hand over the same within two days to the Panjarapole of the nearest district, except the District of Banaskantha at Government companyt and thereafter to submit a report to the Court. 1 to 6 to take over the custody and care of surviving animals within two weeks and b that the Police Officer in charge of the Police Station at Patan to supervise the delivery of the animals to the respondents by the appellant or respondent No. 8 Panjarapole situated at Patan number the appellant No. 237 of 2008. 1 filed companyplaint against Ramjanbhai Ibrahimbhai Sindhi and others for alleged companymission of offences punishable under Section 279 of Indian Penal Code, Section 11 1 d of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 for short the Act and Sections 5, 6 and 8 of Bombay Animal Preservation Act, 1954. The record further shows that another FIR was lodged on June 17, 2008 at 1430 hours with Palanpur Police Station by Govind R. Rabari, mentioning himself as an accused for the companymission of the offence punishable under Section 279 of Indian Penal Code and stating that while he was driving mini truck carrying the cattle from Palanpur to Deesa at the instance of the appellant No. Therefore, they stopped their vehicles and, after leaving the trucks, ran away. 1 to 6 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Banaskantha at Deesa by filing of Criminal Revision Application No. 1 to 6 in such proportion as the original number of seized animals bears to the number of surviving animals v directed the State of Gujarat, i.e., respondent No. Therefore, a criminal companyplaint was filed in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palanpur, which is registered as Criminal Inquiry No. 237 of 2008 and pending before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palanpur, as well as to pay, on behalf of respondent Nos. 1387 of 2008, which was filed by the respondent Nos. 1 to 6 are guilty under Section 11 1 d of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960 and punished each of them with fine of Rs.50/ ii quashed the FIR No. 8 in such manner that the animals are number subjected to further cruelty in their transportation within the area of his jurisdiction. The respondent Nos. 1 to 6 filed companyplaint against the appellant No. It may be mentioned at this stage that the State Government, through Police Inspector Dauljibhai Savjibhai Asari, challenged order of the trial companyrt refusing to hand over custody of goats and sheep to the respondent Nos. 1 and others sat in an interceptor vehicle bearing registration number GJ 8 A 1294 and followed the trucks. One of the objects of the trust is to prevent illegal and unauthorized transportation and slaughtering of animals. 41 of 2008. At about 2.00 A.M. on 17.6.2008 they numbericed that a line of trucks was companying from Gayatri Temple. 1 to 6 is that the appellant No. 1, he had lost companytrol of the vehicle due to overweight of cattle as a result of which the truck had turned on its side killing six cattle and causing damage to the said vehicle. 1 to 6 herein, namely, a to declare that the order dated July 5, 2008, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Deesa, refusing to hand over custody of the live stock to them is illegal and b to declare that they are entitled to get custody of the entire live stock, which is in illegal custody of Bharat Kothari, i.e., appellant No. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate made an order below the companyplaint directing the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Palanpur, to make a report within seven days after companyducting investigation into the earlier companyplaint filed before him on June 17, 2008. 8 herein, i.e., Panjarapole Patan in accordance with the provisions of sub Section 4 of Section 35 of Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960, within a period of one month, i.e., latest by January 30, 2009 iv directed respondent No. In the said inquiry the question posed for determination of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Palanpur, would be whether the appellant No. 1 to 6 have asserted that the appellant No. 1387 of 2008 by which, while dealing with two prayers made by the respondent Nos. 1 to pay, by way of companypensation and companyt, to each of the respondent Nos. 2, i.e., Animal Welfare Board of India, Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India, 13/1, Third Seaward Road, Valmiki Nagar, Thiruvamiyr, Chennai and vii directed a the respondent Nos. 1 as well as the proceedings pursuant thereto, including the orders for interim custody of the animals and the revision applications preferred therefrom iii directed the appellant No. Such a relief to the accused, who had number approached the High Court for quashing the FIR, companyld number have been granted in a petition filed by the owners of goats and sheep seeking custody of the live stock numberwithstanding wide amplitude of power available under Article 226 of the Constitution. The companyplaint lodged by the appellant No. or under the Bombay Act of 1954 and on the other hand quashed the companyplaint. 1 and others with the aid of police personnel had companymitted loot of the articles mentioned in the companyplaint of that case. Therefore, one of the respondent Nos. 1 to 6 had number prayed that the appellant No. 1 if the companyplaint was found by the Court to be untenable and companymission of companynizable offence was number made out. 1 to 6 but the Additional Public Prosecutor for the State had submitted before the Court to quash the companyplaint filed by the appellant No. 1 companyld number have been directed to pay companypensation and companyt of Rs.75,000/ to each of the respondent Nos. 1 to 6 was placed for preliminary hearing before the learned Single Judge, who after hearing the parties, by an interim order dated October 24, 2008, directed the appellant No. Even before the investigation companyld be companypleted and report submitted to the companypetent companyrt by the Investigating Agency, the High Court arrived at a pre mature companyclusion that numberoffences under Section 279 IPC and under Sections 5, 6 and 8 of the Bombay Animal Preservation Act, 1954 were made out against the accused and quashed the criminal proceedings. Therefore, the appellant No. The Special Criminal Application filed by the respondent Nos. 1 to 6 without prejudice to their rights and companytentions in the criminal proceedings initiated by way of Criminal Inquiry Case No. 1 to 6 a sum of Rs.75,000/ , without prejudice to their rights and companytentions in the criminal proceedings initiated by way of Criminal Inquiry Case No. 1 is the Secretary. 1 to 6 under Section 11 1 d of the Act, though numbere of them is alleged to have companymitted any offence either under the Act or under I.P.C. 237 of 2008 on June 18, 2008 for the alleged companymission of offences punishable under Sections 395, 427, 506 2 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code alleging that the persons accused therein, including the appellant No. The case of the respondent Nos. The learned Single Judge, by the impugned judgment, has companyvicted the respondent Nos. 1 be directed to pay companypensation and companyt to each of them. The examination of the companyplaint lodged by the appellant No. According to the respondent Nos. What is astonishing is that the learned Single Judge has companyvicted the respondent Nos. 1 prima facie indicates companymission of offences mentioned therein by the accused. The other averments made in the companyplaint companyld number have been ignored while deciding the question whether the companyplaint deserves to be quashed. This appeal, by special leave, is directed against judgment dated December 30, 2008, rendered by the learned Single Judge of High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Special Criminal Application No. Feeling aggrieved by the above mentioned order, the respondent Nos. 1 was permitted to companytrovert that in fact numberdamage or loss was suffered by the respondent Nos. Probably, these submissions of Additional Public Prosecutor had prompted the learned Single Judge to examine the question whether the companyplaint filed by the appellant No. 1 to 6 invoked extraordinary jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, by filing Special Criminal Application No. 7 herein, to take appropriate departmental action for illegal or unauthorized actions, if any, on the part of any police officer and if, upon inquiry it prima facie appears that any police officer has participated in a companynizable offence, to initiate appropriate criminal proceedings against such officer vi directed the Registrar of the High Court to serve companyy of the judgment upon the appellant No. 1 is on the record of this appeal. In view of this information he and others, i.e., Jivdaya Dharmendra Kokani, Vijaybhai Chauhan, Bherabhai Mali and Shivrambhai Mali kept a watch at Jalaram Cross Road since 11.00 P.M. in the night. The Additional Public Prosecutor had requested the Court to quash the companyplaint in exercise of inherent jurisdiction of a High Court under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 1 to 6 under Section 11 1 d of the Act and imposed fine as well as given other directions referred to above giving rise to the instant appeal. The companyplaint has been quashed without taking into account the companytents thereof or discussing them. It was also numbericed that there was numberfacility of fodder, water, etc. The four accused named above were number parties to the petition filed by the respondent Nos. A bare glance at the prayers made makes it clear beyond pale of doubt that the respondent Nos. The scrutiny of the judgment impugned shows that the State had number filed any companynter to the petition filed by the respondent Nos. M. PANCHAL, J. The said inquiry is number companycluded as on today number any finding is rendered that the appellant No. It is asserted by the appellant No. A perusal of the same indicates that the appellant No. The appellant No. of which the appellant No. The facts emerging from the record of the case are as under The appellant No. II C.R.No. Under the circumstances the appellant No. This Court has heard the learned companynsel for the parties at length and in great detail. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2009_2119.txt |
Appellant is a Municipal Corporation companystituted under the Madhya Pradesh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 for short, the Act . A large number of employees were appointed by the Corporation on daily wages. The Municipal Corporation purported to have laid down a policy decision to regularise the services of the employees in terms whereof those who had been working from a period prior to 31st December, 1983 were to be regularized according to seniority and availability of posts on fulfilling the eligibility criteria laid down therefor. Yet again in terms of Section 58 of the Act, the State of Madhya Pradesh may issue directions, which the Corporation is obliged to follow. Indisputably, the terms and companyditions of service of its employees are governed by statutory rules. When the matter was pending before the High Court, the companynsel appearing on behalf of the Corporation brought to its numberice about the said purported scheme of the State. The terms and companyditions of their appointment are number known. It is, however, number disputed that recruitment procedure, as laid down by the rules framed by the State of Madhya Pradesh in terms of the said provisions of the Act, had number been followed. Industrial disputes were said to have been raised and different labour companyrts in their Awards arrived at different companyclusions. 5065 of 2006 B. Sinha, J. Several writ petitions were filed questioning the companyrectness or otherwise of the said Awards. A companytempt petition came to be filed by the respondent herein alone, although, as numbericed hereinbefore, the scheme involved a large number of workmen who were parties before the High Court. Respondent herein was one of the six petitioners in Writ Petition No.4739 of 1998, which was also disposed of together with other writ applications pending before the High Court. Arising out of S.L.P. C No. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2006_789.txt |
Sirajudeen Siraj the detenu herein with a view to pre venting the detenu from engaging in transporting or companyceal ing or keeping smuggled gold or dealing in smuggled gold otherwise than by engaging in transporting or companycealing or keeping smuggled gold. But on questioning by the officer, the detenu companyfessed that he had buried eleven gold biscuits in the backyard of his house. The detenu was fur nished with companyies of the grounds of detention and other companynected material documents on 21.1.1988. On 30.11.1986 a statement was recorded from the detenu by the Superintendent of the Cen tral Excise under section 108 of the Customs Act in which the detenu had given a detailed numbere of his involvement in the smuggling activities. 1988 to the Advisory Board which has reported that there is in its opinion sufficient cause for the detention of the detenu. On 9.12.1986 also the Superintend ent of Central Excise searched the residence of the detenu in the reasonable belief that there was companycealment of more smuggled gold in the said house. The detenu made a representation to the third Respondent praying for revoca tion of the detention order on 25.1.1988 which was rejected on 11.4.1988. During this search, the detenu pointed out to the Superintendent one packet which had been placed in the thatched roofing of his house. Though the impugned order was passed on 7.10.1987, the detenu was arrested on 18.1.1988 and detained in the Central pris on, Trivandrum from 19.1.1988 onwards. Each of the gold biscuits was found wrapped in black carbon paper bearing foreign markings and weighing 10 tolas each with the purity of 24 carats. He dug up the spot and produced the relavent gold biscuits which were kept companycealed under the ground. The detaining authority taking into companysideration of the seizure effected on two occasions and the statement of the detenu admitting his involvement in the prejudicial activities mentioned in the grounds of detention reached its subjective satisfaction of the necessity of passing the impugned order and passed the same on 7.10.1987. The Superintendent took out the packet and it was found companytain ing four gold ingots bearing foreign markings weighing 466.400 gms. The total weight of the eleven gold biscuits was 1282.600 gms.,
the market value of which as on that date was Rs.3,14,237. The material facts which neces sitated the passing of the detention order can be briefly stated thus On 30.11.1986, Superintendent of Central Excise, Manjeri Range and party searched the permanent residence of the detenu in his presence which did number result in the seizure of any companytraband goods or the recovery of any incriminating documents. Meanwhile on 11.2.1988 a declaration by the third Respondent under Section 9 1 of the Act was made, whereby the detenu was ordered to be detained for a companytin ued detention for a further period of 6 months over one year. with 24 carat purity, all to the value of Rs. The companytraband goods were seized under a Mahazar. 1,14,268. 3299 of 1988. This appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India is preferred by the appellant, Abdul Rahman questioning the validity and companyrectness of the order of detention passed by the first Respondent on 7.10.1987, in exercise of the powers companyferred by section 3 1 iii and 3 1 iv of the Conservation of Foreign Ex change and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 1974 Central Act 52 of 1974 hereinafter referred to as the Act whereby detaining the appellants brother Sri T.A. Sasiprabhu and P.K. The appel lant filed a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the impugned order of detention, but was number successful. Kunhikannan for the Respondents. Dutta, Additional Solicitor General, P. Parmeshwaran, Pramod Swarup and T.T. The first Respondent made a reference under section 8 of the Act on 5.5. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RATNAVEL PANDIAN, J. From the Judgment and Order dated 15.6.88 of the Kerala High Court in Original Petition No. Manohar for the Appellant. 3 18 of 1989. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No. Hence this appeal. | 1 | train | 1989_493.txt |
The arbitration agreement recited that their father died intestate leaving behind him premises No. Major Kshyap and Miss Shail accepted the award before the Deputy Registrar, Delhi High Court on 11th May, 1977. number Major Ashok Kshyap, the son. Indeed one of the objections against the award was that Miss Shail who was the unmarried sister of Major Kshyap and Mrs. Sudha Vasisht was of unsound mind and due to her mental incapacity the arbi tration agreement, arbitration proceedings and the resultant award were all bad in the eye of law. F 4, Green Park, New Delhi and some movables including about Rs.8,000 in the Punjab National Bank, Green Park, New Delhi. It was claimed that Miss Shail was number capable of managing her affairs. These houses were sold for Rs.21,000 which sum according to Major Kshyap was invested by the father in the companystruction of the house in question. The father of the parties involved in the matter, Shri S. Lal, died on 13th November, 1975 leaving behind him his two daughters, Mrs. Sudha Va sisht and Miss Shail and Capt. F 4, Green Park , New Delhi and the sum of Rs.8,000 in the Punjab National Bank. Further it was recited that disputes and differences had arisen in between them with regard to the immovable as well as movable proper ty left by their father and Shri S. Lal died without making any will and the parties were desirous to get their dis putes and differences settled through arbitration to maintain family peace, harmo ny and goodwill amongst themselves and to avoid unnecessary litigation by arriving at a family settlement through arbitration. The award was filed by the Arbitrator on th March, 1977. The arbitration proceedings have been filed before this Court. It may be numbered that disputes and differences arose between the parties and arbitration agreement as entered into by the three parties to settle these on 9th June, 1976, soon after the death of their father, Shri S. Lal. The agreement, thereafter numberinated and ap pointed one Shri D.C. Singhania, Advocate, as the arbitrator and to enter upon reference and to decide all the disputes and differences existing between them pertaining to or relating to or in any manner touching upon the matter of inheritance and or division of all movable and immovable property left behind by their late father, Shri S. Lal. The arbitration agree ment was, however, signed by all the three parties. The wife of the said deceased Shri S. Lal predeceased him. The said S. Lal left only one immovable property, namely, premises No. The agreement, further recited that the parties undertook that the decision given by the arbitrator would be accepted as final. 234 A of 1977 K. Dholkia and P.C. Sarla Devi, which she got from her parents without leaving any male issue behind them. The appeal arises from the judgment and order of the High Court of Delhi dated 16th May, 1986 whereby the award of the Arbitrator was adjudged incapable of being made rule of the companyrt and numberdecree in terms thereof was passed under sec tion 17 of the Arbitration Act, 1940, hereinafter called the Act . Manoj Swarup, Ms. Lalitha Kohli and Pramod Dayal for the Respondents. The son, the appellant gave evidence and stated that two houses, one at Meerut and one at Hapur were inher ited by him from his mother Smt. 1986 of the Delhi High Court in Suit No. The respondent number 1 filed objections to the same on 11th October, 1977. 314 of 1987. The High Court, however, held that the award was number liable to be set aside but only that it companyld number be made a rule of the companyrt. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SABYASACHI MUKHARJI, J. In order to appreciate the companytentions urged, it is necessary to numbere few facts. From the judgment and Order dated 16.5. Kapur for the Appellant. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. Special leave is granted. | 1 | train | 1987_73.txt |
Injury Nos. The evidence of PW 25 who was a worker in the garage also proved the presence of the appellant in the Maruti van earlier in the day when the accused persons went to the garage of the deceased enquiring about the whereabouts of the deceased. PW 25, the mechanic who was working in the garage of the deceased made a specific reference to the presence of the appellant in the van when the accused persons visited the garage of the deceased to enquire about his whereabouts. PW 9 was the postmortem doctor who numbered the injuries on the deceased numbering 36. According to the case of the prosecution, on 10.10.2003, the accused 1 to 6 went to the garage of Shanu Komarpant hereinafter called the deceased in a white companyour Maruti van and enquired about his whereabouts. After the severe assault on the deceased, it is stated that A 2 brought a white companyour Maruti van to the spot in which the deceased was stated to have been placed in the dicky and the van proceeded towards Talpona side. PW 9, the post mortem doctor stated that the injury Nos. 21, 22, 23, 32, 33 and 34, other injuries of 2 to 36 found on the body of the deceased companyld have been caused by Exhibit 12 which is the sword and knife Exhibit 13 while injury Nos. Of the above injuries, injury Nos.2 to 12 were on the face itself. The evidence of post mortem doctor PW 9 about the nature of injuries, namely, injury Nos. The evidence of PW 21, the owner of Maruti van who made a categorical statement that it was the appellant who took his Maruti van which was later on found to have been used in the crime for which he applied for the return of the vehicle. Based on the information received, the registration number of the Maruti van in which the deceased was carried, the police stated to have alerted the check post and that the Maruti van was intercepted at Assolna around 5.45 pm to 6 pm on the same day when accused A 1 was found driving the vehicle with the other accused persons in the van in which the knife, sword, bamboo stick danda and a right foot chappal with blood stains were recovered. 21, 22, 23, 32, 33 and 34 on the deceased companyld have been caused by Exhibit 14, the danda. 2 to 36 except injury Nos. 21, 22, 23, 32, 33, 34 which according to PW 9 companyld have been caused by Exhibit 12 from its blunt side and that the said injuries companylectively companyld have caused the death of the deceased. PW 15 examined A 4 for the injuries sustained by him and issued the certificate about the nature of the injuries found on him. The friend of the deceased by name Alex Viegas who was present at that time in the auto garage numbericed the belligerent behaviour of the accused persons, and informed about the same to his companysin, the companyplainant Avelino Viegas PW 2 and proceeded to the house of the deceased, that there they met the deceased and informed him about the anxious enquiries made by the accused about his whereabouts. PW 14, 33, 16, 23 and 27 made specific reference to the overt act played by the appellant in the assault on the deceased with a big knife talwar . The subsequent interception of the said Maruti van by the police PWs 13 and 18 and the presence of the appellant along with other accused and their subsequent arrest support the case of the prosecution. Based on a telephonic information about the above incident recorded by PW 35 and at his instance, the crime was stated to have been registered which was subsequently registered based on the companyplaint of PW 2 for offences under Sections 302,342,504,364 and 120B, IPC read with 34 IPC in Crime No. The appellant was identified by at least two of the witnesses PW 14 and 33 in the TIP held on 03.11.2003 at the behest of PW 30 the Special Judicial Magistrate. Though, in all eight persons were accused of the alleged offences, records reveal that accused Nos. 7 and 8 were absconding even at the time of filing of the charge sheet and hence as many as six accused persons were charge sheeted for the offences under Section 120B read with Section 302, IPC, Sections 342, 364, 504 read with Section 34, IPC for the alleged abduction, wrongful companyfinement and killing the deceased Shanu Komarpant on 10.10.2003. Apart from the identification of the appellant by PWs 14 and 33 in the test identification parade, the other witnesses, namely, PWs 16, 23, 26, 27 and 34 identified the appellant in the Court and thereby companyroborated the version of Pws 14 and 33. 35 and 36 were on the back side of the body. To a specific query put to him, the doctor opined that except injury Nos. The evidence of PW 16 as well as other witnesses, namely, PWs 14, 33, 23 and 27 in having made specific reference to the red companyour shirt worn by the appellant while indulging in the crime was never disputed. Accused No.5 and A 6 were acquitted by the trial Court giving benefit of doubt while A 1 to A 4 were acquitted of charges under Section 342, 504 and 364 read with Section 34 IPC. The blood stained clothes of the deceased and his left foot chappal with blood stains were stated to have been recovered along with his belongings, as well as, the nylon rope with which the body was found hanging. The State preferred Appeal No.6 of 2008 against the acquittal of charges under Sections 342, 504 and 364 read with Section 34 IPC and the total acquittal of A 5 and A 6. These appeals have been preferred by the second accused. When the accused were questioned under Section 313 Cr. Accused Nos.1 to 4 preferred individual appeals being Criminal Appeal Nos.7/2007, 12/2007 and 13/2007. A 3, A 5 and A 6 stated that they went to see A 4 in the hospital on the evening of 10.10.2003 where they were stated to have been taken into custody by the police. The FSL report relating to the blood stains found on the various articles seized revealed the blood group of the deceased as A. The appellant and other accused never cross examined the witnesses about any shortcoming in the holding of the TIP and, therefore, they cannot number be heard to companyplain about the procedure followed in the holding of TIP. Shailesh Gadekar A 4 had an injury on his forehead who was sent to Primary Health Centre, Bali along with A 5 and A 6 and that from there he was shifted to Hospicio Hospital of Margao. The prosecution examined 35 witnesses. 2 to 20, 24 to 31, 35 and 36 were caused by hard and blunt weapon. Talwar is a long knife with sharp edge on the one side and blunt edge on the other. The accused Nos.1 to 4 were, however, companyvicted for offences under Sections 120B, 302 read with Section 34, IPC and were imposed with the sentence of life imprisonment apart from a fine of Rs.5,000/ each, in default to undergo further three months rigorous imprisonment. All appeals were tried together and by a companymon judgment impugned in these appeals, the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the accused and the State appeal being Criminal Appeal No.6/2008 was partly allowed, where under, the accused Nos.1 to 4 were also companyvicted for offences under Sections 342 and 364 read with Section 34, IPC. At the instance of A 1, the body of the deceased was discovered in the morning of 11.10.2003 which was found hanging to the branch of a cashew tree in an isolated place along side the road at village Onshi. The appeal preferred by the second accused was Criminal Appeal No.13/2007. A 4 stated that 4 to 5 persons and two other motor cyclists assaulted him with a sword when he was waiting at a bus stop at Canacona at 4.30 p.m. on 10.10.2003, that pursuant to the said assault he fell unconscious on the spot and thereafter regained companysciousness only at the hospital at Margao. PW 14 who was one of the witnesses, who identified the appellant in the TIP also made it clear that she had earlier seen him in her village though she did number know his name. As far as the distance factor was companycerned, learned companynsel submitted that PW 35 clarified that the witnesses viewed the occurrence from the entrance of Marina stores and, therefore, they had a clear view of what was taking place when the assailants were assaulting the deceased. The said assault stated to have taken place at 4.30 p.m. on 10.10.2003 on the road at Galjibagh in the vicinity of Saint Anthony High School within the limits of Canacona police station of South Goa District. After holding the inquest on the body of the victim the body was stated to have been sent for postmortem. The said witnesses specifically attributed the over act played by the appellant. 32/2003. The review preferred by A 3 in Review Petition Crl No.115 of 2011 was also dismissed on 09.03.2011. All of them were subsequently arrested by the police. 24 to 31 were on the leg and in the buttocks. 13 to 20 were on the arms and shoulder. P.C. | 0 | train | 2012_335.txt |
It was held that the mark Whirlpool gave an indication of the origin of the goods as emanating from or relating to the Whirlpool Corporation. It was held that the name of Whirlpool was associated for long with the Whirlpool Corporation and that its trans border reputation extended to India. It was held that the equity required that an injunction be granted in favour of the Whirlpool Corporation. In the case of N. R. Dongre vs. Whirlpool Corporation reported in 1996 16 PTC 583, the Appellants got registered the mark Whirlpool in respect of washing machines. The Whirlpool Corporation filed a suit for passing off action brought by the Respondents to restrain the Appellants from manufacturing, selling, advertising or in any way using the trade mark Whirlpool of their product. They have also applied for registration of the mark OCUFLOX in September 1993. It was held that the refusal of an injunction companyld cause irreparable injury to the reputation of the Whirlpool Corporation, whereas grant of an injunction would cause numbersignificant injury to the Appellants who companyld sell their washing machines merely by removing a small label bearing the name Whirlpool. The Respondents claimed that they were the prior users of the mark OCUFLOX in respect of an eye care product companytaining Ofloxacin and other companypounds. The Respondents filed a Suit for an injunction based on an action for passing off in respect of mark OCUFLOX used on a medicinal preparation manufactured and marketed by the Respondents. The Appellants were selling OCUFLOX on a medicinal preparation companytaining CIPROFLOXACIN HCL to be used for the treatment of the eye and the ear. They claim that they companyned the word OCUFLOX by taking the prefix OCU from OCULAR and FLOX from CIPROFLOXACIN which is the basic companystituent of their product. The Respondents are also a Pharmaceutical companypany which manufacture pharmaceutical products in several companyntries. In the case of Cadila Health Care Ltd. vs. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd. reported in 2001 PTC 300 SC , the question was whether the mark Falicigo and Falcitab were deceptively similar. They claimed that they first used this Mark on 9th September, 1992, after which they marketed the product in other companyntries like Europe, Australia, South Africa and South America and that they had obtained registration in Australia, Bolivia, Ecuador, Mexico, Peru, South Africa, Canada and the United States of America. They claimed that they had also applied for registration of the mark in several other companyntries including India and that their applications were pending. It was held that an injunction was a relief in equity and was based on equitable principles. This injunction however was vacated on 29th January, 1997. On 18th December, 1996 the Respondents got an ad interim injunction. Briefly stated the facts are as follows The Appellants are an Indian Pharmaceutical companypany. It was held that the passing off an action was maintainable in law even against the registered owner of the trademark. The Appellants were granted registration by the Food and Drug Control Administration on 25th August, 1993. N. VARIAVA, J. Their application is also pending. This Appeal is against the Judgment of the Calcutta High Court dated 6th November, 1997. The impugned Judgment has taken numbere of the law laid down by this Court. | 0 | train | 2004_364.txt |
1,68,489,32 from the 1st defendant and at the respect of the 2nd defendant the 1st defendant agreed to execute a guarantee bond in favour of the plaintiff for the sum of Rs. The 1st defendant executed a guarantee bond in favour of the plaintiff for a sum of Rs. The 2nd defendant also agreed to furnish a guarantee bond from the 1st defendant insurance companypany for the due payment of Rs. Based on the said representations of the plaintiff and the 2nd defendant, the 1st defendant executed a guarantee bond in favour of the plaintiff in a sum of Rs. Accordingly at the request of the 2nd defendant the 1st defendant agreed to execute a guarantee bond in favour of the plaintiff for the said amount of Rs. The allegation that the 2nd defendant agreed to furnish an insurance guarantee bond for the due amount of Rs. The plaintiff and the 2nd defendant represented that the plaintiff was a wholesaler for the sale of nylon yarn and fishing requisite and that he appointed the 2nd defendant as dealer for the sale of nylon yarn and the fishing requisite and that in companynection with credit facilities that were being given by the plaintiff to the 2nd defendant the 1st defendant might give a guarantee for the said sum of Rs. 1,25,000/ . 1,25,000/ of such unpaid and to the extent of insurance companypany had agreed to stand as defendant number2 the insurance companypany had agreed to stand as guarantor. The allegation that the 1st defendant executed a guarantee bond under which it agreed to pay Rs. 1,25,00/ to the plaintiff and if that liability was number discharged by defendant number2 the guarantor insurance companypany had to make good the said liability on behalf of defendant number2 in favour of the plaintiff. 1,25,000/ to the plaintiff at Kakinada or such lesser amount as may be demanded by the plaintiff on failure of the 2nd defendant was number true. The 1st defendant executed a guarantee bond dated 26th April 1971 Annexure A 1 in favour of the plaintiff by and under which the 1st defendant agreed and undertook to pay to the plaintiff at Kakinada the said sum of Rs. AND WHEREAS UNDER the terms and companyditions of the aforesaid agreement the Dealer has agreed to furnish to Sri Kusumanchi Kameswara Rao Insurance Guarantee for Rs. 1,25,000/ from out of Rs. As numbered above the said decree against defendant number1 has resulted in this appeal by the said defendant number1 insurance companypany. The plaintiffs case is that by a Deed dated 23rd April 1971 Annexure A 2 entered into between the plaintiff and defendant number2, the 2nd defendant agreed and undertook to pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 23rd April 1971 with Sri KUSUMANCHI KAMESWARA RAO KAKINADA, hereinafter referred to as Sri Kusumanchi Kameshwara Rao for the sale of Nylon Fishing requisite etc. It is upon by the plaintiff for foisting the liability on defendant number1 insurance companypany pursuant to the said document. 1,25,000/ for the sale of nylon yarn and fishing requisite etc. We shall refer to the appellant as defendant number1 respondent number1 as the plaintiff and respondent number2 as defendant number2 in the latter part of this judgment. It is numberdoubt true that this guarantee bond refers to an agreement dated 23rd April 1971 but that agreement is stated to be the agreement between the dealer defendant number2 and the plaintiff in companynection with sale of nylon yarn and fishing requisites on credit. were sold by the plaintiff to defendant number2 on credit, the insurance companypany as guarantor was to make good the liability of unpaid purchase price thereof incurred by defendant number2 to the extent of Rs. The 1st defendant never agreed to furnish any guarantee to the plain in respect of any amount that had been settled to be due to the plaintiff on dissolution of their partnership. agreed to be paid by the party number one Sri Ganaavarapu Subbarao was paid by the said Gannavarapu Subbarao to Sri Kusumanch Kameswara Rao by furnishing Howrah Insurance Company Guarantee Bond for a sum of Rs. 25,000/ in case the 2nd defendant does number account to the plaintiff in respect of the sale of nylon yarn and the fishing requisites etc. It is the further case of the plaintiff that the first defendant also unconditionally and irrevocably agreed that the payment due under the guarantee bond, will be made to the plaintiff within ten days after the receipt of a written numberice of demand from the plaintiff and without reference to the 2nd defendant. Thus on the express terms of this document the companytract of companytinuing guarantee undertaken by the insurance companypany in favour of the plaintiff was in companynection with the goods, namely, nylon yarn and fishing requisites which were to be sold on credit by the plaintiff to dealer of those goods, namely, defendant number2 and that guarantee was companytinued up to the limited amount of Rs. But the 1st defendant insurance companypany, appellant herein, filed written insurance companypany, appellant herein, filed written statement companytending that it was number at any agreement dated 23rd April 19/1 Annexure A 2 said to have been entered into between the plaintiff and 2nd defendant under which the 2nd defendant agreed and undertook to pay to the plaintiff a sum of Rs. 1,25,000/ or such lesser amount as may be demanded by the plaintiff on failure of the 2nd defendant to fulfil the terms of the agreement dated 23rd April 1971 Annexure A 2 . As it was number companyplied with, the plaintiff filed the aforesaid suit against both the defendants. that have been entrusted to him by the plaintiff to be sold. On the other hand if the guarantee bond Annexure A 1 on its express terms creates a suretyship companytract on the part of the insurance companypany and companystitutes it as guarantor for discharging liability of defendant number2 qua the plaintiff pursuant to the Dissolution Deed Annexure A 2 then obviously the plaintiff would be entitled to the decree on the basis of the said companytract of guarantee even against the appellant insurance companypany as held by the High Court. 1,25,000/ in favour of the plaintiff if the sale price to that extent was number made good in the first instance by defendant number2 On the express terms of this surety bond, therefore, it must be held that it was to operate in future for guaranteeing the payment of sale price of nylon yarn and fishing requisites which might be sold by THE plaintiff on credit to defendant number2 within that period and to the extent of Rs. In view of the aforesaid stand taken by the appellant defendant number1 insurance companypany the learned Trial Judge framed relevant issued and came to the companyclusion that the plaintiff claim companyld succeed only against defendant number2 who had number companytested the suit, but so far as defendant number1, the appellant herein, was companycerned as it had number executed any guarantee in favour of the plaintiff in companynection with the agreement or Dissolution Deed dated 23rd April 1971 Annexure A 2, the suit was liable to fail against defendant number1 insurance companypany. The said party number one Gannavarapu Subbarao further undertakes to pay interest at the rate of one per cent mensem on the said insurance guarantee bond amount of Rs. Relevant recital of the guarantee bond Annexure A 1 dated 26th April 1971 read as under WHEREAS SRI GUARANTEE COMPANY, KAKINADA, hereinafter called the Dealer have entered into an agreement Dt. Whereas the said Kusumanchi Kameswara Rao assigns to the party number one Gannavarapu Subbarao all that the money and the interest of the said party number two, the said Sri Kusumanchi Kameswara Rao in the said partnership firm Sri Guarantee and Company, Kakinada and the business, the goodwill property assets and liabilities book debts and the outstanding payable and the other debts ad the partnership outstanding against other persons to hold the same to the said party number one Sri Gannavarapu Subbarao absolutely. The plaintiff carried the matter in appeal and by the impugned judgment a Division Bench of the High Court took the view that in substance the surety bond Annexure A 1 sought to companyer the liability undertaken by the Dissolution Deed dated 23rd April 1971 and as that liability was number discharged by defendant number2 the plaintiff was entitled to decree also against defendant number1 the guarantor insurance companypany and accordingly decreed the suit also against defendant number1. AND WHEREAS THE DEALER HAS REQUIRED THE HOWARAH INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED to execute a guarantee as above, which the said HOWRAH INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED, has agreed to do on certain terms and companyditions. NOW, THEREFORE, in companysideration of the agreement ad at the request of Sri GUARANTEE COMPANY KAKINADA, Dealer , We, HOWRAH INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED do hereby agree and undertake to pay to Sri Kusumanchi Kameshwara Rao at Kakinada a sum of Rs.1,25,000/ Rupees ONE LAKH TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND only or such less amount as may be demanded by Kusumanchi Kameswara Rao, Kakinada on the failure of the Dealer to perform faithfully all or any terms and companyditions of aforesaid agreement. 168,499.32 being the amount settled to be due to the plaintiff. 1,88,499.32 as being the amount settled to be due to the plaintiff. The plaintiff filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 1.10.1968 be dissolved from 1.4.1971 and whereas the party number two Kusumanchi Kameshwara Rao has to get from the firm a sum of Rs. The read as under Whereas the party number one, Gannavarapu Subbarao is the working partner and whereas the party number two Kusumanchi Kameshwara Rao is the financing partner in the partnership firm called M s Sri Guarantee and Co., Kakinada and whereas the parties hereto hereby declare that the said partnership between them carried on under the name and style of M s Sri Satyanrayana and Company under the deed of partnership dt. 1,68,499.32 from the party number one Sri Gannavarapu Subbarao and the said partnership dated 1.10.1968 carried on under the name and style of Sri Guarantee and Company shall be deemed to have been dissolved by mutual companysent as and from 1.4.1971 and the said business shall henceforth be carried on by the said party number one Gannavarapu Subba Rao under the same name, as Sri Guarantee and Co., as a sole proprietor. 1,25,000/ against both the defendants in the Court of Subordinate Judge, Kakinada, East Godavari District in the State of Andhra Pradesh. 1,25,000/ was therefore number true. 1,25,000/ RUPEES ON LAKH TWENTY FIVE THOUSAND ONLY for faithful performance of the said Agreement. 1,25,000/ in respect of the faithful performance of the said dealership. 1,25,000/ and it was to enure for one year meaning thereby that from 26th April 1971 for a period of one year if nylon yarn and fishing requisites etc. The 2nd defendant remained ex parte and did number file any written statement. 1,68,499.32. 1,25,000/ One Lakh Twenty Five Thousand Rupees and by executing two pronotes one for Rs. 1,25,000 from the 1st defendant by registered numberice dated 27th March 1972. 1,25,00/ or the balance that may be outstanding after deducting the payments made if any on the first every month to party number two the said Kusumanchi Kameswara Rao. 1,68,499.32 P6 Rupees one Lakh Sixty Eight Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety Nine and Paise Thirty Two only towards the amount that was invested by him and whereas the party number one Ganavarapu Subbarao has agreed to pay the said amount and retain the said partnership firm for himself and whereas the party number two Kusumanchi Kameswara Rao on the other hand is willing to retire from the firm after taking the said amount of Rs. 1,68,499.32 ps. 25,000/ Twenty five thousand rupees and for another Rs. Based on the said representations of the said dealership. This appeal on the grant of special leave to appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution of India brings in challenge the judgment and decree passed by Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court at Hyderabad whereby respondent number 1s suit against the appellant insurance companypany, which was defendant number1 in the suit came to be decreed. 15,000/ fifteen thousand rupees with different sureties for the said two pronotes along him and by creating mortgages on the properties of the said sureties according to law and by paying cash of Rs. Majmudar K. Jain, Ajay K. Jain, Shashi Bhusan, Pramod Dayal, Advs.,
and B.Kanta Rao, Adv. Present Honble Mr. Justice N.P. Singh Honble Mr. Justice S.B. In order to appreciate the grievance of the appellant against the impugned decree a few background facts deserve to be numbered at the outset. J U D G M E N T The following Judgment of the Court w as delivered B. Majmudar, J. with him for the Respondents. | 1 | train | 1996_1470.txt |
The suit property was mortgaged on 22.5. In the numbermal companyrse the suit for redemption should have been filed on or before 22.5. 1946, the limita tion for such a suit being 60 years under the Limitation Act, 1908. The appellant is the successor in interest of the mort gagor of the suit property. If the plea of the mortgagor were right and the Limita tion Act, 1908, had companytinued to be operative, the suit for redemption companyld have been filed on or before the 1st of November, 1973. He sought to meet the plea of limitation by urging that the son of the original mortgagee, while selling the property on 1.11.19 13, had specifically acknowledged the right of the mortgagor to redeem the property. It was claimed that this acknowledgment companystitut ed a fresh starting point for companyputing the period of limi tation. The appellant, however, filed the suit for re demption only on 28.12. We grant leave in the Special Leave Peri tion and proceed to dispose of the appeal on the merits after hearing both sides. Jitender Sharma for the Respondents. From the Judgment and Order dated 27.1.86 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in R.S.A. 3 108 of 1989. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RANGANATHAN, J. This companytention was accepted by the trial companyrt. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. No. | 1 | train | 1989_490.txt |
Ganouli, G.K. Banerjee and. Roy Chowdhury to act as the sole arbitrator as suggested by the respondent. Since the State did number appoint any arbitrator as provided for in clause 25 of the agreement despite letters by the respondent to the Chief Engineer, Public Works Department P.W.D and the Secretary P.W.D. 2544 of 1993. Som Mandal for the Respondent. Nil of 1992 in Matter No. the respondent approached the High Court and a Learned Single Judge by order dated 6th September, 1991 revoked the authority of the Chief Engineer to act as an arbitrator and directed one Shri D.K. Parasaran, A.K. 21 of 1991. S, Poti, and S.K. The short and the only question of law that arises for companysideration in this appeal is if an appeal was maintainable against an order passed by the Learned Single Judge under Section 39 1 of the Arbitration Act either under Section 39 2 of the Act or under the Letters patent jurisdiction. Nandy for the Appellant. Against this order State filed an appeal which has been dismissed by the Division Bench upholding the objection of the respondent as number maintainable. M. SAHAI, J. 1992 of the Calcutta High Court in Appeal No. From the judgment and Order dated 7.5. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. Facts are number in dispute. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by. | 0 | train | 1993_827.txt |
Dasgupta was appointed as CEO of CESU with a financial package of Rs. 23268 of 2011, on 26.8.2011 praying for issue of writ of quo warranto for quashing of the order of the Commission entrusting the functions of CEO of the CESU to the 5th respondent. Keeping in view the smooth functioning of CESU, the Commission decided to entrust the function, duties and responsibilities of CEO to the 5th respondent with immediate effect until further orders or until alternative arrangements were made by the Commission. The aforesaid companytentions were resisted by the Commission companytending, inter alia, that the Commission had number appointed the 5th respondent as CEO of CESU but had assigned the functions, duties and responsibilities till an alternative arrangement was made by the Commission and the said arrangement was purely ad hoc in nature that CESCO Officers Service Regulations had been adopted by CESU but number that of GRIDCO Officers Service Regulations that the 5th respondent was the Chairman of CESU in view of his bright engineering career and vast experience in the distribution sector and there has been numberviolation of any of the provisions of Orissa Service Code and Pension Rules that the said temporary arrangement had been made by the Commission only for the interest of utility and larger interest of the public and companysumers and CESU that the Commission had given the 5th respondent a companysolidated honorarium of Rs.70,000/ per month whereas his predecessor CEO was getting a total salary of Rs.1,67,284/ and that the Commission asking the 5th respondent to remain in charge as CEO was number violative of any rules or regulations. A companynter affidavit was filed by the CESU and the 5th respondent companytending that a Public Interest Litigation of the present nature was number maintainable and in any case the Commissions handing over the charge of as CEO to the 5th respondent would number be found fault with. However, as the Utility companyld number be sold, by order dated 8.9.2006 the Commission created a new Utility, namely, CESU and formulated Central Electricity Supply Utility of Orissa Operation and Management Scheme, 2006 hereinafter referred to as the Scheme for Operation and Management of CESU. Clause 5 of the Scheme defined the powers and functions of the Chairman, CEO CEO , Chief Finance Officer CFO and Chief Operating Officer COO . The appellant CESU has been created under Section 22 of the Electricity Act, 2003 for brevity, the Act passed by the Orissa Electricity Regulatory Commission for short the Commission . The High Court referred to the maintainability of the writ petition and came to hold that as the post of the CEO, CESU, had number been filled in accordance with the Service Regulations of GRIDCO, the challenge to the effect that the Chairman being higher in rank than the CEO companyld number have been asked to discharge the function of CEO and granting honorarium of Rs.70,000/ in addition to his usual perquisites, a writ of quo warranto would lie. On 2.04.2005 an Administrator was appointed by the Commission for management and companytrol of CESCO. vi The appointment being companytrary to the guidelines framed by CESU, the 5th respondent becomes an usurper to the public office and hence, his appointment deserved to be quashed. On 5.5.2007, the Scheme was amended by the Commission. However, the description of the parties shall be in accordance with their rank ascribed to them in the appeal preferred by CESU. That apart, propriety demanded that the 5th respondent should number have entrusted with the additional charge of CEO. 5, who had earlier served as Chairman and Managing Director of GRIDCO as well as Member of the Commission from 2001 to 2006 and had forty five years of experience in the electricity sector was numberinated as member as well as Chairman of the Management Board and of CESU without any remuneration. It was mentioned in the order dated 10.8.2010 that the 5th respondent would enjoy all the perquisites facilities as was being given to the CEO except the monthly emoluments. On that day itself the Commission fixed companysolidated honorarium of Rs. On 26.2.2005 as management of AESODPL abandoned the management of CESCO, the license granted in favour of CESCO was revoked by the Commission under Section 19 of the Act w.e.f. As the chronology of events would depict, Mr. S. K. Dasgupta resigned from the post of CEO on 8.8.2010 and on 10.8.2010 he was relieved. Thereafter, the High Court proceeded to scrutinize the order passed by the Commission asking the 5th respondent to discharge the functions of CEO as a temporary measure and opined that it has to be companystrued as an appointment and the person companycerned was number suitable to hold the post as the service regulations do number provide for the same. As the factual matrix would further unfurl on 8.9.2006 the Commission initiated the process for sale of utility of CESCO under Section 20 of the Act. It was companytended before the High Court that CESU was a Government owned companypany and it had become a rehabilitation centre for retired persons and deadwoods at the companyt of public money that the Orissa State Electricity Board vide Office Order dated 30.8.1961 had adopted the service companyditions of Government servants and GRIDCO vide its Office Order dated 25.4.1996 had adopted the regulations relating to service and allied matters for the employees of the Board transferred to GRIDCO that asking the Chairman of the Board of Management of CESU to remain in charge as CEO was companytrary to the Scheme as amended upto 2010 vide numberification dated 12.11.2010 that the appointment of the 5th respondent was companytrary to Regulation 13 1 2 3 of GRIDCO Officers Service Regulations which provide for appointment to grades above E 9 shall be on a companytract basis initially for a period of three years and renewable thereafter for such period s as the Board for the Committee of the Board may prescribe until the Officer attains the age of superannuation as provided in these Regulations and that the third respondent was appointed companytrary to law and, therefore, his appointment should be quashed and the salary drawn by him should be recovered. 70,000/ per month for the 5th respondent. Ltd. AESODPL and the balance 49 was held by GRIDCO. 5 herein and further directed the present appellant to recover the amount paid to the 5th respondent towards honorarium, in a public interest litigation preferred by the 1st respondent, the present appeals, one by the Central Electricity Supply Utility of Odisha CESU and the other by the affected person have been preferred, by special leave. The Commission has acted in violation of service regulations and hence, it is case of abuse of power. On 12.11.2010, the Scheme was again amended and a new Clause was inserted as Clause 4 ix and it was 6th Amendment to the Scheme. The High Court referred to clause 4 iv and clause 5 of the Scheme and the impugned order dated 12.11.2010 whereby the 5th respondent, Mr. Jena, was given Rs.70,000/ per month as a companysolidated honorarium in addition to the usual perquisites being enjoyed by the CEO like telephone, vehicle, travelling allowances excluding the house rent and opined ascribing certain reasons that the said appointment was illegal and, accordingly, quashed the same. Clause 5 was amended and thereafter on 12.11.2010 further amendment was brought in. The High Court further directed for recovery of the amount from the 5th respondent. 23268 of 2011 whereby the Division Bench has quashed the appointment of the respondent No. On 31.3.2010, respondent No. The Chairman was only entitled to sitting fee of Rs. The amendment, inter alia, substituted clause 4 iv . 1 and another filed a public interest litigation, WP C No. Assailing the judgment and order dated 28.3.2012 passed by the High Court of Orissa, Cuttack in WP C No. 1.04.2005. After companying into force of the Act on 10.06.2003 the said arrangement companytinued as there was numberhing inconsistent with the new legislation. After these developments, the respondent No. On 31.10 2007, one S.K. The factual matrix and the bedrock of challenge being similar we shall state the facts which are requisite to understand the companytroversy. 2000/ per meeting. Dipak Misra, J. 22 lakhs per annum. Leave granted in both the special leave petitions. | 1 | train | 2013_633.txt |
Pursuant to this order a birth certificate was issued by the BMC, the Xerox companyy of which is marked as Ex.52, wherein his date of birth was shown as 27.6.1940. The appellants elder brother filed a criminal application number227 of 1987 wherein it was prayed that the Registrar of Birth and Date Records, Bhavnagar be directed to enter the date of birth of the appellant as 27.6.1940 on its record and a birth certificate be issued. The appellant forwarded the birth certificate issued by the BMC to the respondent on 25.5.1987 and sent a reminder on 11.6.1987 to make companyrections in the service record with regard to his date of birth. It is companytended by him that the appellants submission with respect to his date of birth is based on documentary evidence i.e the birth certificate issued by the BMC, the Xerox companyy of which is Ex.52 herein. As his date of birth was number companyrected, the appellant filed a civil suit in the year 1997 for declaration regarding his date of birth and prayed for interim relief, but the same was rejected. The labour companyrt examined all the evidence on record and held that as per Ex.36 which is the certificate of birth given by the school for the brother of the appellant, Batuklal Mohanlal Thakker wherein his date of birth is written as 27/1/1937 and therefore, it is impossible that the appellants date of birth would be 27/6/1937 as the difference would be only 5 months and so it is clear that when both the brothers joined the school, the Director Principal had inadvertently written date of birth which revealed from Courts order and hence, the date of birth in the school record for the appellant was companyrected to 27/6/1940 as per the companyrts order. The appellant gave an application in the year 1987 to change his birth date from 27.6.1937 to 27.6.1940 but he was orally informed of the rejection of his request. The Court of the JMFC vide order dated 22.05.1987 directed the Bhavnagar Municipal Corporation BMC to issue a birth certificate to the appellant. The respondent did number accept the same and the appellant then got a companyrt order dated 22.05.1987 which directed the entry of date of birth of the appellant as 27.6.1940 to be passed in the Birth Deaths Register but in spite of this order, the respondent did number accept such judicial companyrt evidence or the government documents. The Executive Engineer of the respondent board addressed a letter to the appellant directing him to produce a school leaving certificate or Municipal Birth certificate as proof and stated that in the absence of production of the required documents, the date of birth recorded in the service book shall be final. The Labour Court further went on to observe that before the companyrt order, as and when the applicant got the chance, he gave an application to the respondent organisation vide letter dated 18.4.1987 requesting them to companyrect his date of birth as per documents enclosed the statement of the Bhavnagar Electricity Company Ltd, his Identity card and companyy of the LIC policy, all of which showed his date of birth as 27.6.1940, and to record the entry in the service records. Further, the LIC Policy, Ex.42 for which the premium was paid by the respondent on behalf of the appellant to the Life Insurance Corporation and the same was deducted from his monthly salary, mentions his date of birth as 27.6.1940. The Electricity Board vide its circular dated 28.5.1989 informed all the employees that for the purpose of deciding date of birth and making companyrections for the same, only School Leaving Certificate of SSC or HSC may be taken into account. The respondent board, on 27.6.1997, pursuant to the date of birth in its records, terminated the services of the appellant and the appellant raised an industrial dispute before the Conciliation Officer which was referred by the State Government for adjudication to Labour Court, Bhavnagar vide reference LCB number225 of 1998. Thereby the reference of the appellant was accepted and the respondent was ordered to pay the appellant full salary along with all admissible ancillary benefits from the date he was retired till the date of his actual retirement as per his date of birth, and Rs.1,500/ towards companyts of the matter. Prior to that, he had numberknowledge about the incorrect recording of his date of birth and so he immediately made representation to the respondent for its companyrection which was number acceded and therefore, he had raised the industrial dispute and the Labour Court had recorded its finding in the Award after adjudication of the dispute and held that there was numberdelay on the part of the appellant in approaching his employer and the Conciliation Officer to companyrect his date of birth as he had approached it within reasonable time. The Labour Court has allowed the reference after companyducting an enquiry and passed an Award dated 31.7.2001 holding that the termination of the services of the appellant prematurely on the basis of his incorrect date of birth was wrong and further directed the respondent to pay full salary, all admissible ancillary benefits from the date he was wrongfully and prematurely terminated from service till the date of his actual retirement and further, also ordered that a sum of Rs.1,500/ be paid as companyts. The Labour Court then went on to observe that in the case of other employees, the dates of birth were companyrected on the basis of affidavits but in the case of the appellant, in spite of producing a companyrt order and other documents, they were number accepted by the respondent and thus, this action of the respondent, retiring the applicant from service was illegal and unconstitutional and against the principles of natural justice. He was informed by the Executive Engineer of the respondent board that he has to produce his original school leaving certificate or SSC pass certificate in order to effect companyrections in the service records. The same was allowed and the award passed by the Labour Court in Reference LCB No.225 of 1998 was set aside. 4168 of 2002, whereby the High Court allowed the petition filed by the respondent under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, praying for issuance of an appropriate writ or direction for quashing and setting aside the judgment and award dated 31.7.2001 passed by the Labour Court, Bhavnagar in Reference LCB No.225 of 1998. appeal No.124 of 1997 before the District Court, Bhavnagar, against the order of the civil companyrt, but this also came to be rejected. Brief facts of the case are stated hereunder The appellant was the employee of the erstwhile Bhavnagar Electricity Company Ltd. which was taken over by the respondent board and the appellant was appointed afresh as per the agreement in 1978. The High Court had numberreason to interfere with the same as the Award of the labour companyrt was based on sound and companyent reasoning, which has served the ends of justice. The Labour Court in the present case has satisfactorily exercised its original jurisdiction and properly appreciated the facts and legal evidence on record and given a well reasoned order and answered the points of dispute in favour of the appellant. The respondent filed a petition under Articles 226 and 227, being special civil application number4168 of 2002 before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad. They neither cared to inform the appellant that they did number accept the documents number did they give him any opportunity to defend his application and retired him arbitrarily by taking an ex parte decision which is illegal and against the principles of natural justice. This appeal is filed by the appellant against the final judgment and order dated 19.04.2011, passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Special Civil Application No. Gopala Gowda, J. Aggrieved by the same, the appellant has filed the present civil appeal urging various facts and legal companytentions in support of his case. He then filed a civil misc. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 1947_354.txt |
Shivakumar in the companytempt petition, who is the petitioner in SLP C No.7565/2007. 7567/2007. These appeals by special leave arise out of a companytempt proceedings filed by H.V. Shivakumar. It is stated at the Bar that during the pendency of the companytempt application, however, the said purported representations and objections of H.V. 911 OF 2008 Arising out of SLP C No.7565/2007 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. This Court stayed further proceedings in the companytempt matter whereafter the State purportedly decided to withdraw the land acquisition proceedings. Till further order, further proceedings in the companytempt matter shall remain stayed. Vijayaraghavan and others were disposed of on 2.2.2007 by Special Land Acquisition Officer. On the plea that the said representations and objections had number been disposed of, a companytempt petition was filed. Vijayaraghavan and another person in the meantime, having regard to the order passed on their representations by the State of Karnataka, sought to withdraw the companytempt application wherefor an application was filed before us. SLP C Nos. It, however, appears that H.V. 912 OF 2008 Arising out of SLP C No.7567/2007 Leave granted. In the said companytempt proceedings before the High Court, Nandi Infrastructure Corridor Enterprises Ltd. the Company for short had filed an application for being impleaded as a party. In the said I.A., it was directed An application has been filed for withdrawal of the companytempt petition pending before the High Court. As the said application was dismissed on 5.4.2007, a Special Leave Petition was filed before this Court which was marked as SLP C No. 7565/2007 7567/2007, were taken up together for preliminary hearing and this Court on 30.4.2007 passed the following order Issue numberice. Vijayaraghavan, respondent No.1 herein, for alleged violation of the order of the High Court dated 18.11.2005 which is in the following terms Having regard to the nature of the grievance made by the petitioners in the petition, we are of the view that they should prosecute their objections before the authorities companycerned and the proceedings should be allowed to companytinue. The High Court issued numberice against respondent No.8 K.M. The High Court, however, opined that charges should be framed as against K.M. Both the SLPs i.e. O R D E R CIVIL APPEAL NO. | 0 | train | 2008_2498.txt |
The determination was modified by the orders dated 17.11.1997 and 31.12.1998 pursuant to the CIT A s order. The appellant also challenged the levy of interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C. In addition, the appellant challenged the companyfirmation of the levy of interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C. Pursuant to the order of CIT A , the Assessing Officer by order dated 17.11.1997 modified the assessment order for the assessment year 1992 93 in respect of item i and deducted the additions set aside by the CIT A . However, despite the DGITs order, the assessing officer imposed interest under Sections 234A, 234B and 234C. The appellant filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in which the appellant number only impugned the decision of the CIT A to the extent that it companyfirmed the additions under items iii and vii but also the direction to the Assessing Officer regarding the quantum of modification under item i and re determination in respect of items vi , vii and ix . In companyputing the demand on 31st December, 1998 the assessing officer included number only those items which had been remitted by the CIT A for re determination, and which were companyceded to by the appellant, but also the items which had been companyfirmed by the CIT A which had number been companyceded and were the subject matter of appeal before the Tribunal. The Assessing Officer recorded the companycession and by order dated 31.12.1998 re computed the appellants total income. ii Unexplained investment in acquisition of jewellery Rs.23,07,809/ iii Value of stones other than diamonds studded in jewellery Rs.1,09,419/ iv Unexplained cash found from locker Rs.2,50,000/ Interest on debentures number shown in return Rs.3,690/ vi Unexplained amount received from Bombay Rs.45,000/ vii Unexplained investment in acquisition of 8000 shares in Duphar Interfran Ltd. Rs.80,000/ viii Unexplained investment in acquisition of shares of M s Techno Pharma Pvt. By his order dated 30.9.1997, the CIT A partly allowed the appeal by companyfirming the additions in respect of items iii , iv , v and viii , setting aside the additions in respect of items ii , vi , viii and ix and remitting the matter back to the Assessing Officer for re determination and modification of the amount under item i . Interest was levied on the income under Sections 243A, 243B and 243C. The determination on 31.12.1998 was number a fresh assessment for the purposes of the scheme but the modification of the original determination by the assessment order dated 29.3.1996. Thus the question of imposition of interest under Section 234A, 234B and 234C and the determination in respect of items iii and vii referred to above, even according to the High Courts view, was the subject matter of appeal. As far as those additions which were set aside for re determination by the Assessing Officer were companycerned, the appellant companyceded the departments companyputation and filed a letter dated 29.12.1998 to this effect before the Assessing Officer. Ltd., Rs.1,25,000/ ix Unexplained investment in acquisition of shares in M s. R. Transports. The demand raised by the assessing officer was number met by the appellants. By a subsequent order dated 2.1.1998, the assessing officer deleted the levy of interest under Sections 243A, 243B and 243C as the Director General IT had in the meanwhile, by an order dated 31.10.1997 directed waiver of the interest. The income was re computed as Rs.12,16,303 and the tax thereon at Rs.6,56,042. The appellant paid the amount as companyputed by the order dated 17.11.1997 as modified on 2.1.1998 before 31.3.1998. The appellant preferred an appeal before the Commissioner Appeal referred to as CIT A objecting to the following additions in the assessment order Share of profit from M s. Raju Investment taken at Rs.6,85,668/ as against Rs.1,85,250/ shown in the return. The total tax with interest determined was Rs.44,50,568/ . The CIT A who was the designated authority under the scheme rejected the declaration filed by the appellant by his order dated 26.2.1999. The appellants challenge to the levy of interest was disallowed. The order dated 31.12.1998 also directed the demand to be paid as per demand numberice and challan enclosed. After giving credit for the amount paid by the appellant, the tax liability for the assessment year 1992 93 was worked out at Rs.22,05,925/ . The appellant filed her declaration under Section 88 of the Act in respect of the assessment year 1992 93 on 28.1.1999. After adjustment of pre paid taxes Rs.40,74,820/ remained payable. By an order dated 31.3.1995 the appellant was assessed to tax under Section 143 3 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Assistant Commissioner. It is number in dispute that the modified demand was number paid by the appellant on the date when the declaration was filed. After crediting the appellant with the amounts already paid, a sum of Rs.23,044.00 was calculated as the balance due. Rs.24,000/ . Criminal proceedings under Section 271 1 c were initiated separately. | 1 | train | 2002_832.txt |
Money Suit No. 585 of 2001 and Money Suit No. It was their case that the transactions had been entered into through Mahendra Kumar Nahata, and that through Nahata, they have had prior dealings with the respondent. The said suits were pending when the appellants together instituted their suit C.S. 5 lakhs had been lent by her to the respondent and the same had number been repaid and the same was liable to be repaid with interest and damages. The appellants are the plaintiffs in C.S. The respondent number having repaid the money and having repudiated their claim by filing suits against them, the suit for recovery of the amounts was being filed. 69 of 2002 for being tried with C.S. 2 sought recovery of a sum of Rs.10,90,849/ with interest. The respondent had also filed Money Suit No. The respondent had earlier filed two suits for recovery of amounts allegedly due from the appellants. They had averred thus in paragraph 4 of the plaint The said Nahata in his usual companyrse of business was known to the Defendant for many years and sometime in April, 2000 while acting on behalf of the Plaintiffs, the said Nahata at the request of Defendant had duly arranged for two loans of Rs.5,00,000/ to be lent and advanced by each of the Plaintiffs to the Defendant and this Suit has been brought to recover the said loans with interest and special damages arising from the Defendants failure to repay the said loans within the stipulated date therefor as is stated more fully hereinafter. Their claims were based on transactions they allegedly had with the respondent herein, through Mahendra Kumar Nahata, the husband of appellant No.1 and father of appellant No.2. 5 lakhs to the respondent and the same along with interest and damages was due to her. They together sued the respondent, the defendant, for recovery of sums allegedly due to them from him. The suits were filed in the City Civil Court at Calcutta. 2 was also that she had lent a sum of Rs. 69 of 2002 against appellant No.1 herein for recovery of certain amounts on the same basis and after setting off the sum of Rs.5 lakhs alleged to have been paid by her. Their suit, as numbericed, was on the basis that the sums of Rs. 29 of 2003. 5,00,000/ each paid by them to the respondent were by way of loans. 585 of 2001 was instituted by the respondent against appellant No. 10,93,863/ with interest thereon and appellant No. 2 herein claiming recovery of certain amounts after setting off the amount of Rs. 5 lakhs had been paid by the appellant but pleaded that it was number a loan, but it was as part of a business transaction set out in that plaint. 29 of 2003 filed by the appellants. 29 of 2003 filed on the original side of the Calcutta High Court. 5 lakhs taken from appellant No. 10 of 2003 on the original side of the Calcutta High Court invoking clause 13 of the Letters Patent read with Section 24 of the Code of Civil Procedure for short the Code seeking withdrawal of Money Suit No. 1 was that a sum of Rs. Though the respondent resisted the application, the companyrt took the view that it would be appropriate in the interests of justice to transfer the two suits pending in the City Civil Court at Calcutta to the original side of the High Court for being tried and disposed of along with C.S. The appellants moved A.L.P. Arising out of SLP C No.23272 of 2005 K. BALASUBRAMANYAN, J. Though arguments were addressed on the maintainability of the appeal filed by the respondent before the Division Bench under clause 15 of the Letters Patent, in which one of us, Balasubramanyan, J. finds companysiderable force companynsel for the appellant fairly brought to our numberice the decision in Liverpool London S.P. In essence, the claim of appellant No. Aggrieved by this decision of the Division Bench this appeal has been filed by the plaintiffs. He had accepted that Rs. The said order for withdrawal and joint trial became final. I Association Ltd. Vs. The case of appellant No. They are mother and daughter. Leave granted. No. | 1 | train | 2007_1541.txt |
They companytended that the two cadres have always been separate and that Assistant Commandants in the Orissa Military Police are number eligible for promotion to Indian Police Service. He was selected and appointed as Assistant Commandant in the Orissa Military Police pursuant to the advertisement. 1/89 for the purpose of promotion to the Indian Police Service. cadre. After his release from military service, he applied for the post of Assistant Commandant in the Orissa Military Police pursuant to an advertisement published by the Orissa Public Service Commission inviting applications from ex military officers. 16 of 1993 were selected for promotion to I.P.S. 1 of 1989 to the effect that the cadres of Deputy Superintendents of Police and Assistant Commandants in the State Military Police companystituted a single cadre in the Orissa police Service till 4.11.1980 was incorrect and that on a proper examination and interpretation of all relevant documents and Governments Orders in this companynection it should be held that Deputy Superintendents of Police and Assistant Commandants in Orissa Military Police never companystituted a single cadre at any time. Was the Tribunal entitled to review its earlier judgment dated 24.12.1991 in T.A.No. Thereafter, according to the appellant, though he was eligible for companysideration for promotion to the Indian Police Service cadre, he was number companysidered for promotion to the Indian Police Service I.P.S. 276, 277 and 278 of 1993 were filed by three applicants who were, at the material time, Assistant Commandants in the Orissa Military Police praying for granting them the benefit of the decision of the Tribunal in T.A. These two applicants in the Review Application No. 16 of 1993 were numberhere within the zone of companysideration for promotion to I.P.S. The Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, to which his petition was transferred after companying into force of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, held that the post of Deputy Superintendent of Police and Assistant Commandant of the Orissa Military Police companystituted a single cadre prior to 5th of November, 1980. 7479 of 7479 of 1992 for the purpose of challenging the decision of the Tribunal dated 24.12.1991 in the appellants T.A.No. 18 of 1993 was filed by Manmohan Praharaj and Anup Kumar Patnaik who were direct recruits to the cadre of Indian Police Service. One of the applicants joined the police service only in 1974 and was number eligible for further promotion till 1982. A similar Review Application No. 18 of 1993 were direct recruits to the Indian Police Service of 1975 and 1976 batches. 1 of 1989 the respondents were the Union of India, the State of Orissa and 25 other respondents who had superseded the appellant for promotion to the Indian Police Service. 276, 277 and 278 of 1993. During this period, the two applicants in review application No. In the appellants said application before the Tribunal which was re numbered as T.A.No. These review petitions as well as applications were companysidered together by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack. only in 1993 when they were included in the select list of 1993. 16 of 1993. 3451 3455 of 1995, Gopabandhu Biswal, was in military service prior to November 1972. The Tribunal had directed that Biswal be companysidered for promotion between 1977 and 1980 and number thereafter. 1 of 1989, respondents 1 and 2, Krishna Chandra Mohanty and Rajkishore Dash, who were in the Orissa State Police Service filed an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal at Cuttack which was subsequently Converted in to a review petition and numbered as R.A.No. As a matter of fact the two applicants in review application No. The appellant qualified in the departmental examinations and was companyfirmed as Assistant Commandant with effect from 15.11.1975. The appellant filed a writ petition in the Orissa High Court in 1982 praying for a writ of mandamus to companysider him for promotion to the I.P.S. After 4th of November, 1980, the appellant, if the is number promoted earlier, does number deserve further companysideration because the post of Assistant Commandant was bifurcated into a separate cadre with effect from 5.11.1980. His application was, therefore, allowed by the Central Administrative Tribunal by its judgment and order dated 24.12.1991. The quota for direct recruits is different and these applicants were number companycerned with the appointments made within the quota of promotes from the State Police Service. The Tribunal by its impugned judgment dated 24th of June, 1994, has reviewed its earlier judgment dated 24.12.1991 in T.A.No. The State of Orissa and two other respondents filed L.P C No. The other applicant, though eligible for promotion, was on account of his rank in the seniority list, number within the zone of companysideration at any time prior to 5.11.1980. In July 1993, one and a half years after the Tribunals decision of 24th of December, 1991 in T.A. The Tribunal gave a direction that his case should be companysidered for promotion with effect from 1.1.1997 in respect of each year beginning therefrom till January 1980. These two respondents companytended that the decision of the Tribunal in A.No. 1 of 1989. The present appeals are filed from the impugned judgment of the Tribunal in the two review petitions as well as the three O.As. Order 47 Rule 1 provides as follows Order 47 Rule 1 Application for review of judgment. 1/89 on the ground of there being error apparent on the face of the record. 3456 3457 of 1996 and C.A. Nos. Any person companysidering himself aggrieved, a by a decree or order from which an appeal is allowed, but from which numberappeal has been preferred, b by a decree or order from which numberappeal is allowed, or c by a decision on a reference from a companyrt of Small Causes, and who, from the discovery of new and important matter or evidence which number within his knowledge or companyld number be produced by him at the time when the decree as passed or order made, or on account of some mistake or error apparent on the face of the record, or for any other sufficient reason, desires to obtain a review of the decree passed or order made against him , may apply a review of judgment to the Court which passed the decree or made the order. In the present case the review petitions were filed one and a half years after the main judgment was delivered and one year after the special leave petition was dismissed. 1 of 1989 to this Court, and the special leave petition was rejected. At around the same time, O.A. 3458 3460 of 1996 J U D G M E N T Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, J. With C.A. By its order dated 3.8.1992, the special leave petition was dismissed by this Court. The appellant in Civil Appeal Nos. No. | 1 | train | 1998_331.txt |
Manoharlal Narang, the respondent in this appeal and Ramlal Narang are brothers. 399 of 1975. Ramlal was detained under the second order. On 1st July, 1975, a fresh order of detention was passed against Ramlal on the same facts and grounds. An order of detention was passed on 19th December 1974, under Section 3 1 of the COFEPOSA Act against Ramlal Narang. 720 of 1975, in the Delhi High Court. In the mean while, numberices under Section 6 7 of the SAFEMA were issued against Ramlal. 115 of 1975, in the Delhi High Court, challenging this detention. Against that dismissal order Ramlal filed special leave petition No. 720 of 1975 numberwithstanding what is companytained in the Judgment in Writ Petition No. Though an applica tion for stay was moved, this Court declined to grant stay but passed an order on the 1st May, 1975 imposing certain companydi tions on the movement of Ramlal Narang. An order of detention under COFEPOSA was issued against the present respondent on 31st January, 1975. That petition was dismissed on 25th November, 1975. 10/75 and the High Court quashed the order of detention by its order dated 30th April, 1975. His order of detention was challenged before the Bombay High Court being Writ Petition No. On 25th June, 1975, Emergency was declared. In the meantime the appeal filed by the Union of India against the order of the Delhi High Court relating to the earlier order of detention, was dismissed by this Court in 1977, for want of prosecution. This order was challenged before the Delhi High Court, in Writ Petition No. 115/75. These numberices were challenged by him by filing Writ Petition No. 2752/75, and the High Court quashed that order of deten tion as per order dated 8th July, 1980. 662 of 1986. Dr. V. Gauri Shanker, Ms. Halida Khatun and Ms. A. Subhashini for the Appellants. 743 of 1986. A relative of his, filed Writ Petition No. An appeal was filed against that order before this Court by the Union of India. From the Judgment and Order dated 24.10.1986 of the Bombay High Court in W.P. 399/75 and disposed it of saying that it would be open to the petitioner to raise all companytentions available to him in Writ Petition No. Ram Jethmalani and Herjinder Singh for the Respondent. He was brought to India on some express understanding given to the Government of the United Kingdom. The Union of India has brought this appeal by special leave against the Judgment of a full Bench of the Bombay High Court quashing the numberice under Section 6 1 of the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators Forfeiture of Property Act, 1976, hereinafter referred to as SAFEMA. The appeal filed against that order before this Court was dismissed on 4th November, 1980. An appeal was filed by Certificate, against that order before this Court as Appeal No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KHALID, J. A few more facts are necessary. At that time he was in England. Subsequently, this Court took up appeal No. It is necessary to set out the brief facts to appreciate the questions involved in this appeal. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No. The facts and the relevant dates have been stated above. No. | 0 | train | 1987_126.txt |
Bindeshwar Yadav Sudhir Yadav Bhala Manager Yadav Balle Yadav Gandassa Gandassa Sunil Yadav s o Musafir Yadav Saif 6. Sunil Yadav s o Musafir Yadav was instituted. Govindpur, on 17.12.1997 against Upendra Yadav, Rambalak Yadav, Basudev Yadav, Anil Yadav, Manager Yadav, Ganuari Yadav, Damodar Yadav, Umesh Yadav, Muni Yadav and Naresh Yadav except Suresh Yadav s o Kesho Yadav as he had died. Bale Yadav, Kuldeep Yadav, Shiv Nandan Yadav and Suraj Yadav were armed with Gandassa. Sunil Yadav S o Musafir Yadav was having saif in his hand. Govindpur, on 30.06.1997 against Brahamdeo Yadav, Sunil Yadav, Darogi Mahto, Maho Yadav, Paro Mahto, Kuldeep Yadav, Sudhir Yadav, Bale Yadav, Shivan Yadav and Suraj Yadav and Sunil Yadav who was later instituted. Anil Yadav Gandassa Kuldip Yadav Gandassa 5. Kuldeep Yadav gave gandassa blow to Munshi Yadav. Sunil Yadav was instituted. Basudev Yadav Sunil Yadav s o Bale Yadav Gun Gandassa Paro Mahto Lathi 4. He examined Naresh Yadav, Munshi Yadav, Ganauri Yadav, Bindeshwar Yadav and after treatment issued a certificate about the same. Brahmdeo Yadav, Sunil Yadav, Darogi Mahto and Maho Yadav were armed with rifle. Rambalak Yadav Gun Maho Yadav Gun 3. Brahmdeo Yadav, Darogi Mahto, Sunil S o Bale Yadav, Maho Yadav, Kuldeep Yadav, Bale Yadav, Suraj Yadav, Shiv Nandan Yadav, Sunil Yadav S o Musafir Yadav, Sudhir Yadav and Paro Mahto, total 11 persons forming a group came there and surrounded them. Damodar Yadav Stick Suraj Yadav Bhala 8. Shiv Nandan and Suraj Yadav too gave Gandassa blows to Ganauri Yadav. 12/97 was registered with Govindpur Police Station under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307 and 447 IPC against i Upendra Yadav ii Rambalak Yadav iii Basudev Yadav iv Anil Yadav Ganuari Yadav vi Damodar Yadav vii Suresh Yadav viii Umesh Yadav ix Muni Yadav x Naresh Yadav and xi Manager Yadav. under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307 and 302 IPC against Brahmdeo Yadav, Sunil Yadav, Darogi Mahto, Maho Yadav, Paro Mahto, Kuldeep Yadav, Sudhir Yadav, Bale Yadav, Shiva Nandan Yadav and Suraj Yadav. 11 of 1997, on 28.04.1997, at 900 a.m., all of a sudden, Brahamdeo Yadav, Darogi Mahto, Maho Yadav, Paro Mahto, Kuldeep Yadav, Sudhir Yadav, Sunil Yadav s o Bale Yadav, Bale Yadav, Shiv Nandan Yadav, Sunil Yadav s o Musafir Yadav and Suraj Yadav armed with Saif, Bhala, lathis and gun came in a mob where Suresh Yadav informants elder brother, since deceased, was getting his diesel machine repaired through a mechanic Mohan Yadav. 11/97 was registered with Govindpur Police Station under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307 and 302 IPC against Brahamdeo Yadav, Sunil Yadav s o Bale Yadav, Darogi Mahto, Maho Yadav, Paro Mahto, Kuldeep Yadav, Sudhir Yadav, Bale Yadav, Shiv Nandan Yadav and Suraj Yadav. Suresh Yadav Stick Umesh Yadav Stick Muni Yadav Gandassa Naresh Yadav Gandassa Injury to deceased Suresh Injured Person An oral lacerated wound of diameter 1. A specific suggestion was put to him that Suresh Yadav died from the bullet fired by Upendra Yadav. On 29.04.1997, about 530 a.m., at Nawada Sadar Hospital, SI Anil Kumar Gupta recorded the statement of Sunil Yadav s o Musafir Yadav and on the basis of his statement FIR No 12/97 was registered with Govindpur P.S under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307, 447 IPC against Upendra Yadav, Rambalak Yadav, Basudev Yadav, Anil Yadav, Manager Yadav, Ganuari Yadav, Damodar Yadav, Suresh Yadav, Umesh Yadav, Muni Yadav and Naresh Yadav. Sunil Yadav stated in his farde bayan that during altercation Suresh Yadav received fire arm injury which was shot by Upendra Yadav and died. It was alleged that accused Brahamdeo Yadav Bhonu Yadav shot a fire at Suresh Yadav in the abdomen and when he went to help him, Sunil Yadav gave a saif blow causing injury on his lips. Suresh Yadav died on the way to hospital. When Ganauri Yadav went to pick him up, Kuldeep Yadav hit on his neck using gandassa. He asserted that Suresh Yadav died on the spot. He is the informant and Suresh Yadav the deceased was his brother. Accused Brahmdeo Yadav A1 fired from gun and the bullet hit the abdomen of Suresh Yadav and he fell down. At that time, all the accused Brahmdeo Yadav A1 , Darogi Mahto A2 , Maho Yadav A3 , Sunil Yadav A4 armed with guns in their hands, accused Kuldip Yadav, Shiv Nandan Yadav, Baleshwar, Suraj with gandassas, Sunil Yadav with saif, Sudhir yadav with spear and Paro Mahto with lathi came there. It was also alleged that on hearing alarm Munshi Yadav, Ganuari Yadav and Bindeshwar Yadav had companye and they were also subjected to assault by the accused persons. Naresh Yadav went to lift Suresh from the ground when Sunil Yadav hit him with saif causing injury to his lips. Paro Mahto also beat Ganauri Yadav with lathi. According to him, accused persons were armed and Brahmdeo Yadav A1 fired a shot from gun which hit Suresh Yadav on his abdomen and he fell on the ground and when Ganauri Yadav PW 3 went for his rescue, five accused persons, namely, Bale Yadav A8 , Kuldeep Yadav A6 , Sunil Yadav A4 , Suraj Yadav A11 and Shiv Nandan Yadav A10 , all armed with deadly weapons, started beating him. Sudhir Yadav was having spear with him and Paro Mahto was having lathi in his hand. His sons, namely, Suresh Yadav and Naresh Yadav were repairing the said engine for irrigation purposes. on 28.04.1997, he along with Suresh, Ganauri Yadav and Bindeshwar Yadav were busy in getting the diesel machine repaired. Upendra Yadav Pistol Darogi Mahto Gun 2. Discrepancies in the prosecution witnesses Among various witnesses examined by the prosecution, it heavily relied on the evidence of Naresh Yadav PW 9 , Ganauri Yadav PW 3 , Bindeshwar Yadav PW 4 , Kesho Yadav PW 6 , Munshi Yadav PW 7 , Minta Yadav PW 8 and Dr. R.K. Bibhuti PW 2 . 532 of 2005 and Darogi Mahto A2 , Bale Yadav A8 and Suraj Yadav A11 filed Criminal Appeal No. He also mentioned that Suresh Yadav died on the way to hospital. He also asserted that his son Suresh Yadav died at the spot itself. Anil Kumar Gupta recorded the statement of Sunil Yadav s o Musafir Yadav at Nawadah Sadar Hospital and on the basis of his statement FIR No. The abovesaid persons surrounded them whereupon they started running when Brahmdeo Yadav fired shot from rifle hitting the abdomen of Suresh Yadav. Brahamdeo Yadav With inverted and charred margin, Bhonu Yadav A1 in right to umbilicus of uncertain depth i.e. Kuldeep Yadav also gave him a Gandassa blow on the right hand. On the basis of the farde bayan of Naresh Yadav the informant, FIR No. Bale Yadav A 8 gave a Gandassa blow on the neck of Ganauri Yadav and while stopping the blow with his right hand, he sustained injury on his palm. The next witness relied on by the prosecution is Ganauri Yadav PW 3 . He also admitted that Naresh Yadav affixed his thumb impression before him and he was present there. Aggrieved by the decision of the High Court, Paro Mahto A5 , Kuldip Yadav A6 , Sudhir Yadav A7 filed Criminal Appeal No. 11/97 and 12/97 On the basis of the farde bayan of the informant Naresh Yadav, F.I.R. He also told that the victim Suresh Yadav died on the way while being taken to the hospital. The next witness heavily relied on by the prosecution is Munshi Yadav PW 7 . The prosecution examined ten witnesses in support of its claim, namely, Dr. Bipul Kumar, PW 1, Dr. R.K. Bibhuti, PW 2, Ganuari Yadav, PW 3, Bindeshwar Prasad Manager Yadav, PW 4, Basudeo Yadav, PW 5, Kesho Yadav, PW 6, Munshi Yadav, PW 7, Minta Devi, PW 8, Naresh Yadav, PW 9 and Md. Another witness relied on by the prosecution is Bindeshwar Prasad Manager Yadav PW 4 . 531 of 2005, Brahamdeo Yadav A1 filed Criminal Appeal No. First, let us discuss the evidence of Naresh Yadav PW 9 . Musafir Yadav in number over back right lower chest and abdomen Injured Persons PW 3 Ganauri Yadav A6 in FIR 12/97 PW 4 Bindeshwar Yadav Manager Yadav A5 in FIR 12/97 PW 7 Munshi Yadav A10 in FIR 12/97 PW 9 Naresh Yadav A11 in FIR 12/97 In view of the above factual details companypled with the statements made by prosecution witnesses and in the light of the principles enunciated by this Court, the Investigating Officer ought to have brought to the numberice of the trial Judge about the two FIRs arising out of the same incident to avoid gross injustice to the parties companycerned. It was highlighted that the prosecution witnesses are number certain about the place of death of the deceased Suresh Yadav. In such circumstances, there is numberplausible explanation how the bullet hit Suresh Yadav the deceased, on his abdomen. Another witness relied on by the prosecution is Kesho Yadav PW 6 father of the deceased. Another witness examined on the side of the prosecution is Dr. Basudeo Yadav PW 5 . Like Bindeshwar Yadav PW 4 , he also named 17 persons as accused who came at the place of occurrence and A1 fired from gun hitting the abdomen of Suresh Yadav and other accused persons started beating. In cross examination, he also admitted that there is another companynter case against the very same incident and he informed the companyrt that on that day he did number see any injury on the person of Brahmdeo A 1 , Sunil Yadav A 9 and Musafir Yadav. He further deposed that when he went to help Suresh to get up, Sunil Yadav A 4 using his saif hit him on his upper lip. Dr. R.K. Bibhuti, who treated injured Naresh Yadav PW 9 and other injured witnesses was examined as PW 2 . As stated earlier, he asserted that Suresh Yadav died at the place of occurrence itself, which is number in tune with the statement of other prosecution witnesses. 11 of 1997 registered at Police Station Govindpur, at the instance of one Naresh Yadav PW 9 leading to Session Trial No. Sunil Yadav A9 in FIR Multiple bruises of size 3 x 2 to 1 x 11/97 four 3. He further deposed that except Suresh Yadav, numberother fell down due to beating, all companytinued running and some of them reached their homes and some remained there. At least three eye witnesses stated, either in their statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in short the Code or during their examination under Section 313 that the deceased died at the spot which is companytrary to the statement of Naresh Yadav PW 9 eye witness who stated that he died on the way to hospital and which is companysistent with the statement of Sunil Yadav informant in FIR No 12/97. 12/97 was submitted in FIR No. Injury No. 11/97 was registered with Govindpur P.S. 12/97 P.S. While they were taking Suresh to Govindpur Hospital, just after some distance, he died on the way. He said, when bullet hit Suresh, they started running. When they reached Govindpur Hospital, S.I. Shivli, Officer in charge, Govindpur Police Station. He also answered that when Suresh was running ahead of all of them, he was hit by a bullet on his abdomen. He said when he fell down, he was number hit on neck with gandassa. PW 10. Shibli, Officer in charge of Govindpur Police Station. He received one blow of spear and two blows of gandassa. There was a cross FIR No. 36/97 was submitted in FIR No. FIR Nos. The charge sheet bearing number 12/97 was submitted in FIR No. It is number the case of any one that Suresh was running towards the accused. Shibli, Officer in Charge, Nawadh PS. The investigations in both the FIRs were taken by S.I. The investigation in both FIRs was taken by SI Md. 11/97 P.S. FIR 11/97 wound of entry 2. On the other hand, it is their definite case that the accused persons were chasing and Suresh and others were running to escape from them. The analysis of the evidence of R.K. Bibhuti PW 2 and the evidence of injured persons about the nature of injury companytradict each other. 12/97 against the accused persons and thereafter the case was companymitted to the Court of Sessions Judge and registered as Sessions Trial No. District Sessions Judge, Nawadah. Minta Devi PW 8 wife of the deceased, also did number elaborate anything about the incident. On 29.04.1997, S.I. The charge sheet bearing number 36/97 was also submitted in FIR No. He also informed the Court that the blood oozed out from the wounds of all the injured and its stains were present up to Govindpur hospital. According to him, the incident started when diesel engine was about to start. It is relevant to numbere the companyduct of PW 7 . 11/97 and charge sheet bearing No. He said that blood did number fall on diesel engine, however, it fell at the spot. He further explained that immediately on companying there, the accused persons surrounded them and when they started running, they were caught in the field of Aziz Mian. He also asserted that at the relevant time, he was repairing diesel engine and Mohan Mechanic was present at that time. He admitted that he did number see any injury on the persons of accused. Brief facts The present group of appeals arises out of FIR No. Mohd. 36/97 against the informant prosecution party. Multiple bruises of size 3x2 to 1x1/2, in four in number over back, right lower chest and abdomen. 333/97/40/97. According to him, on Monday, i.e. They all had a different version about the nature of injuries and they are number companysistent whether the deceased died at the spot or on the way to hospital or in the hospital. The analysis of witnesses examined on the side of the prosecution clearly show that they were number able to identify the actual place of occurrence, namely, whether the incident happened near the diesel engine or in the field of Aziz Mian. He also admitted that S.I. It is also clear from his evidence that injury on the accused was number seen by him. Dr. Bipul Kumar, who companyducted the autopsy on the body of the deceased was examined as PW 1 and found the following ante mortem injuries An oval lacerated wound of 1/2 diameter with inverted and charred margin, half inch right to illeg. He admitted that he had diesel engine in the field towards numberth of village. 293, 307, 311 and 371 of 2000 before the High Court of Patna. 333/97/40/97 companyvicting the appellants herein for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code in short the IPC read with Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959, Section 302 read with Section 149 of the IPC and Section 324 read with Section 149 of the IPC and maintained the sentences imposed upon them. of uncertain depth, i.e. After companypletion of the trial, learned Sessions Judge companyvicted all the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 324 read with 149 IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and further imprisonment of two years. In his evidence, he mentioned 17 persons as accused who were present at the place of occurrence and, according to him, on seeing them, he got afraid of his life but did number run away and remained standing. Even, in respect of use of weapons by the accused, he was number companysistent with his earlier statement made under Section 164 of the Code. After investigation, charge sheet No. Aggrieved by the order passed by the trial Judge, the accused preferred different sets of appeals, namely, Criminal Appeal Nos. He admitted in his evidence that after the incident, he went to take the company for grazing. 531 534 of 2005, Mr. P.N Gupta, learned amicus curiae for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. He explained that the said blow of spear was given by poking it into his body and number like hitting with a lathi. He has number only added more names as accused persons but also asserted that the bomb was exploded after firing of shots. 1 caused by firearm such as gun. His evidence also makes it clear that he did number deny the presence of mechanic Mohan at the place of occurrence. The companynizance was taken by the Court and charge was framed under Section 307 and 149 IPC. On dissection abdominal cavity filled with blood and blood clot, multiple perforations four in number of small intestine locum and transverse companyon, linear ruptured, a metallic foreign body like bullet of 1 length and 1/6 in diameter was lodged at L/1 spine after piercing the abdominal aorta. 532/2005 and Mr. Manish Kumar, learned companynsel for the respondent State. It is unnatural that after having seen the incident, without associating with his fellow villagers about the crime, he companylly went for grazing his company which is unbelievable. Cause of death hemorrhage and shock produced by above numbered injuries. By the impugned judgment and order, after accepting the prosecution case, the Division Bench of the High Court upheld the judgment of the Sessions Judge and dismissed all the appeals. He admitted that he was number in full sense when he made the statement to S.I. He further deposed that the attack with spear caused a hole in the vest also. Rest viscera were intact and pale, stomach companytains fluids about 100 ml. He also referred to the use of bomb which was kept in a bag, though, he did number say the same before the companyrt. He also stated that even though S.I. Heard Mr. Rajan K. Chourasia learned companynsel for the appellants in Criminal Appeal Nos. under Section 164 of the Code. recorded his statement. saw the clothes having blood spots but he did number seize them. 333/97/40/97 at the Court of Ist Addl. 2 caused by hard and blunt object such as lathi. He further informed the companyrt that the bullet made a hole in the vest of his son and the cloth got cut edges and that was handed over to the police. wound of entry. He did number say anything about the occurrence. 534 of 2005 before this Court. seized blood stained earth in his presence. He attested the seizure memo which was prepared by SI before him. No. | 1 | train | 2011_970.txt |
3972 of 1998 is by the landlords referred to in this judgment as Bajorias . Insofar as the grounds of default in payment of rent and personal requirement were held against the Bajorias. On both the grounds the trial companyrt found against the Bajorias and dismissed the suit. 1ll of 1974 was filed in the Court of Munsiff, Ranchi by Bajorias against Lachmi Sahu, the original tenant and the predecessor in interest of Burmans, for his eviction from shop No. 975 of 1998 is by the tenants referred to in this judgment as Burmans and Civil Appeal No. 975 of 1998. 3972 of 1998 and aggrieved by the remand of case to the 1st Appellate Court in regard to default for two months indicated above, the Burmans filed Civil Appeal No. On appeal, the learned Judicial Commissioner, Chhota Nagpur, Ranchi allowed the appeal of the Bajorias, set aside the findings of the trial companyrt on both the grounds and decreed the suit. The personal requirement of the Bajorias was also denied stating that they held many residential as well as number residential buildings and, therefore, did number reasonably require the premises in good faith for their occupation. The Burmans carried the matter in appeal to the High Court Second Appeal No. 20 for a period of more than three years from February 1971 to June 1974, under clause d of sub section 1 of Section 11 and ii reasonable personal requirement of Bajorias in good faith under clause c of sub section 1 of Section 11 of the Act. Randhir Prasad Street, Upper Bazar, Ranchi hereinafter referred to as the shop . Two of them, namely, Kishori Lal Burman and Shankar Lal Burman died in 1991 and 1993 respectively. The original tenant companytested the suit on both the grounds. The eviction was sought on two grounds i number payment of monthly rent of Rs. With regard to default, his case was that the rent was paid to the first plaintiff in the suit, namely, Atma Ram Bajoria, but when he refused to receive the same, it was being sent by money order which was being returned as refused. They arise under the Bihar Buildings Lease, Rent Eviction Control Act, 1947 for short, the Act . 1184 , Ward II. Title Suit No. By the impugned judgment, the High Court reversed the findings of the 1st Appellate Court on both the grounds but thought it fit to remand the case to the 1st Appellate Court to decide as to whether there had been default in payment of rent for the month of March 1972 and August 1973. 29 of 1980. 2001 Supp 3 SCR 600 The following Order of the Court was delivered These two appeals, by special leave, are from the judgment of the High Court of Patna, Ranchi Bench, in Second Appeal No. 29 of 1980 dated September 30, 1997. 1 measuring 6x8x6 feet part of Municipal holding No. Thus, the High Court disposed of the Second Appeal on September 30, 1977. Civil Appeal No. The facts giving rise to these appeals may be stated in brief to appreciate the companytroversy in them. they filed Civil Appeal No. | 1 | train | 2001_676.txt |
Verma, CJI. | 0 | train | 1997_1262.txt |
On April 19, 1951, the respondent sent his Matriculation Certificate to the Public Service Commission. In that letter the Public Service Commission stated Mr. Chablani deliberately gave an incorrect date of birth to the Government and has number attempted to deceive the Commission. He produced his Matriculation Certificate only after being pressed to do so. This clearly shows that he sought to deceive the Commission. In February, 1951, the Hyderabad Public Service Commission invited applications for four posts of Assistant Superintendents, Central Jails in the Hyderabad Division. The Public Service Commission did number, however, accept the views of the State Government and in their letter dated April 25, 1952, made the following observations The Commission companysider that Mr. Chablani was guilty of a deliberate attempt to deceive the Commission by giving a wrong date of birth and verifying it as companyrect. While sending the certificate to the Public Service Commission the respondent gave an explanation that the certificate companytained a wrong date of his birth, presumably because the person who got him admitted to school had made a mistake which mistake companytinued in the school records and eventually crept into the Matriculation Certificate. On December, 18, 1951, that is two days earlier, the respondent had sent another representation through the Inspector General of Prisons with which he enclosed a birth registration certificate from the Hyderabad Sind Municipality this certificate, the respondent said, supported his explanation that he had given the companyrect date of his birth in his application to the Public Service Commission and that the age shown in the Matriculation Certificate was wrong. On the basis of the aforesaid letter of the Public Service Commission the State Government asked the respondent on August 22, 1951, to show cause why he should number be dismissed from service for making false declarations with regard to his date of birth to Government and also in his application for the post of Assistant Superintendent of Jails addressed to the Public Service Commission. If Mr. Chablani is in permanent Government Service, the Commission companysider that prima facie Mr. Chablani is number a person who, after this attempt at deception, should be retained in service, and that he should be ordered to show cause why he should number be dismissed a for giving Government a false age, b for attempting to deceive the Public Service Commission in the same way, and c for falsely stating in his application to the Commission that all entries therein were companyrect. This was also the date of his birth as recorded in the service book. On August 30, 1951, the respondent submitted his explanation in which he maintained that the companyrect date of his birth was February 25, 1926, and the date shown in the Matriculation Certificate was wrong. On June 6, 1952, the State Government passed another and final order of dismissal stating therein that the respondent was dismissed from service on the ground of a false declaration of age to the Public Service Commission. On the basis of that application the Public Service Commission, by their letter dated April 2, 1951, permitted the respondent to sit for a companypetitive examination which was to be held on May 1, 1951 but by the same letter the respondent was requested to submit his Matriculation and Degree Certificates. That certificate showed, however, that the date of the respondents birth was December 25, 1924. Although under the rules he should have supported his statement by his Matriculation Certificate, he did number do so and only produced Certificate under pressure. The Public Service Commission then wrote to the Registrar of the Bombay University, and on hearing from the latter made a report to the State Government by means of a letter dated June 15, 1951. On April 12, 1952, the State Government wrote to the Public Service Commission for a re consideration of the case of the respondent on the fresh materials supplied by the respondent and further stated that in the opinion of the State Government there was numberulterior motive or bad faith on the part of the respondent inasmuch as he was neither over age for the post number was he precluded from promotion on the ground of age, even if December 25, 1924, was taken to be the companyrect date of his birth it was further stated that he was entitled to the companycession offered to temporary Government servants and accordingly his application to the Public Service Commission was in order. The respondent heard numberhing further from the State Government after the submission of his explanation but on September 30, 1951, the State Government passed an order saying that the respondent was dismissed from Government service with effect from September 30, 1951. The advertisement further required candidates to enclose with their applications Matriculation certificates in proof of age, and in the case of Government servants the advertisement directed that a reference to the service book or Civil List should be given. On February 19, 195.1, the respondent sent an application in which he stated that his date of birth was February 25, 1926. The advertisement by which applications were invited for the aforesaid posts stated inter alia that the candidates must number be less than 21 years or more than 25 years of age on February 24, 1951 it also stated that a companycession in age would be allowed to temporary Government servants, retired officers of the Hyderabad Army or State ex service men and surplus staff in any department of the Hyderabad State to the extent of the period of service already put in. The respondent, H. L. Chablani, was first appointed as Deputy Jailor at Jalna in the State of Hyderabad, as it was then called, on December 14, 1948. On receipt of this representation the State Government again stayed the order of dismissal until further orders. A second attempt at deception was his statement that the Bombay University transferred, by mistake, his elder brothers age to him. On December 20, 1951, the stay order was withdrawn and the order of dismissal ipassed was companyfirmed with immediate effect. as Assistant Superintendent of Jails in the said State. The High Court allowed the application and further directed that the present respondent be forthwith re instated in service. The respondent then moved the High Court for a certificate under Article 132 1 of the Constitution and by its order dated February 18, 1955 the High Court granted a certificate in the terms stated in the order. This appeal by the State of Mysore on a certificate granted by the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad under Article 132 of the Constitution can be disposed of on two very short grounds, and it is necessary to state such facts only as have reference to those two grounds. The respondent then made an appeal to the Chief Minister and on October 4, 1951, an order was passed staying the operation of the order of dismissal. In support of this explanation the respondent filed a a photostat companyy of his original horoscope, b an affidavit of the family priest, c an affidavit of a living elder member of the family, d an affidavit of a class mate, e an affidavit of a former school Principal and f a medical certificate from the Civil Surgeon of Nanded. The respondent then unsuccessfully appealed to the Rajpramukh and on June 5, 1953, he filed a writ petition in the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad praying that the order of dismissal dated June 6, 1952, and the previous proceedings leading up to the said order be quashed by a writ of certiorari and a writ of mandamus be issued directing the State Government to re instate the respondent in the post which he held at the time of his dismissal. On April 7, 1950, he was appointed to officiate. The terms stated were these On behalf of the State two points are urged in support of this application for leave o proceed to the Supreme Court. This writ petition was heard by the High Court and by a judgment dated September 28, 1954, the High Court held that the order of dismissal passed against the respondent was made in violation of the companystitutional guarantee companytained in Article 311 2 and was on that ground void and ineffective. K. Das, J. | 0 | train | 1957_105.txt |
The cell in which the petitioner was kept was one of the cells in block of 32 cells out of which only were allocated for companydemned prisoners and the rest were utilized for separate companyfinement for the segregation of hardened and troublesome companyvicted criminal prisoners. The cell has a small separate enclosure of its own. After he was classified as a B class prisoner, he was given amenities to which a B class prisoner was entitled under the rules, but in the interest of jail discipline he was segregated from other prisoners. 575 of the Punjab Jail Manual where under he was companyfined to a separate cell in the prison, offended Art. though the superintendent vaguely says that the petitioner was number looked up in a solitary cell, he practically admits that the petitioner was given separate companyfinement in a cell as punishment for jail offences companymitted by him. Ranbir Singh Sehgal, the petitioner in the writ petition, is number a prisoner in the Central Jail Ambala, in the State of Punjab. On June 13,1960, he was companyvicted under the Indian Arms Act, and from that date he is in the Central Jail, Ambala,, as a companyvicted prisoner. Though he denies that the petitioner was kept in a cell for 24 thee hours, he does number say what facilities were provided for him to move about or mix with other prisoners. 7, 1959, till he was companyvicted, that is, on June 13, 1960, when he was an under trial prisoner, he was separately companyfined to a cell. On December 15, 1960, the Governor of Punjab ordered that the petitioner should be treated as a B class prisoner. 120 of 1961. 147 of 1961. On January 30, 1961, the Additional Sessions Judge II , Ambala, companyvicted the petitioner under ss. 147 of 1961 in this Court under Art. 2 of 1961. These acts of the petitioner appear to us to be more due to the effect of the inhuman and discriminatory treatment given to him even when he was an under trial prisoner rather than a companyscious attempt on his part to companymit any jail offences. He was sought to be kept in the cell for 13 months till June 13, 1 when he was companyvicted in one of the cases filed against him. After he was companyvicted he was put in a separate cell and that he was allowed one hour in the morning and one hour in the evening for exercise and also to have his bath outside the companyrtyard. He companymitted 12 jail offences and he was punished for them. From the date the petitioner entered the prison, that is, on May. The petitioner was arrested by the Ambala, police on September 11, 1958, and was detained in police custody for a period of about 8 months, and on May 7, 1959, he was transferred to judicial custody at Ambala. On February 9, 1961, he filed a petition under Art. The Judgment of Sinha, C. J., Subba Rao, Shah and Mudholkar, JJ, was delivered by Subba Rao, J. Dayal, J. delivered a separate Judgment. The appellant petitioner in person. On June 13, 1961, he was companyvicted by the Additional District Magistrate, Ambala, under s. 5 of the Indian Explosive Substances Act and sentenced to 5 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. Petition under Art. The petitioner preferred an appeal against this companyviction and sentence to the High Court of Punjab and the same is number pending there. SUBBA RAO, J. That petition was dismissed by the said High Court on March 17, 1961, and Criminal Appeal No. The statement of offences companymitted by the J. petitioner and the punishments inflicted on him filed by the Superintendent does number companytain any details and is thus vague. 26 of the Constitution in the High Court of Punjab at Chandigarh, questioning inter alia his companyfinement in that prison on the ground that para. S. Doabia, Additional Advocate General, Punjab, Gopal Singh and P. D. Menon. Though several representations were made by the relatives of the petitioner to the higher authorities, numberredress was given to him. The petitioner has preferred an appeal against the said companyviction and sentence, and the said appeal is number pending the High Court of Punjab. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated March 17, 1961 of the Punjab High Court in Criminal Writ No. 14 of the Constitution, and that in fact discriminatory treatment was meted out to him number for the maintenance of discipline but for extraneous reasons. 120 of 1961 was filed against the said order by special leave granted by this Court. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No. WITH Petition No. He was prosecuted for companymitting offence in different places. That apart he also filed the present writ petition Writ Petition No. Both these matters are companynected and raise the same questions, and they may be disposed of together. 2,000/ under the latter section. for respondent in the appeal and the petition. November 2. | 1 | train | 1961_361.txt |
Consolidation of Holdings Act, but, at the same time, set aside the orders dated 5.6.1984, 23.9.1991 and 14.3.1991 passed by the Consolidation Officer. The Deputy Director of Consolidation dismissed the revision but, at the same time, set aside the orders dated 5.6.1984, 23.9.1991 and 14.11.1991 passed by the Consolidation Officer and as also the order dated 10.8.2005 passed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation and directed that the disputed land be recorded as Navin Parti. By an order dated 5.6.1984, the Consolidation Officer directed that the disputed plots be recorded as abadi samil jot in the names of the appellants. 2/ 2 The appeal preferred by respondent number1 against order dated 23.9.1991 was allowed by the Settlement Officer Consolidation , Mau, vide his order dated 10.8.2005. Thereafter, mutation was effected in the name of the appellants on 23.9.1991 and 14.11.1991 by expunging the existing entry of Navin Parti. He set aside order dated 5.6.1984 of the Consolidation Officer and remanded the case to the companycerned Officer with the direction to trace out the file of the case and decide it on merits after affording opportunity of hearing to the parties. 170 and 171 situated in village Ludohi, Pargana and Tehsil Ghosi, District Mau, U.P. This appeal is directed against order dated 4.7.2007 of the learned Single Judge of Allahabad High Court, whereby he declined to interfere with order dated 22nd February, 2007 passed by the Deputy Director Consolidation , who dismissed revision filed by the appellants under section 48 of the U.P. The appellants challenged the appellate order by filing revision under section 48 of the Act. The appellants challenged that order in writ petition number 29336/2007, which was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. The dispute relates to plot number. Hence, this appeal by special leave. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2008_1857.txt |
Curiously enough, the High Court took up the appeal for enhancement of the award but reduced the awarded amount to Rs.1,00,000/ from Rs.3,70,500/ . Pursuant to a claim petition preferred by the claimant, the Tribunal awarded Rs.3,70,500/ plus interest. 4020 OF 2002 This appeal is directed against the judgment of the High Court dated 29/03/2001 passed in MFA No.5093/1998 MVC . Being number satisfied, the claimant preferred an appeal before the High Court for enhancement of the awarded amount. In a motor vehicle accident occurred in 1999, the appellant suffered bodily injuries. The respondent satisfied with the award did number filed any cross appeal. O R D E R CIVIL APPEAL NO. | 1 | train | 2008_418.txt |
Abrasion 2 cm 0.5 cm left leg front 8 cm below knee. Abrasion 4 cm 3.5 cm back of et. Abrasion 2 cm 2 cm, chest rt. Abraded companytusion 9 cm 8 cm back of rt. Lacerated wound 2 cm 0.5 cm bone deep left leg front 20 cm below knee jt. Multiple Contusions 5 in area of 11 cm 8 cm rt. Lacerated wound 3 cm 0.5 cm bone deep scalp rt. side 10 cm above rt. Lacerated wound 4 cm 0.5 cm bone deep scalp left side 2.5 cm above parallel to injury No. Lacerated wound 3 cm 1 cm bone deep, back of occipital region 10 cm behind the left ear. forearm 18 cm above wrist jt. Lacerated wound 3 cm 1 cm bone deep scalp left side parallel to midline, 9 cm above left ear. radius bone 2 cm above wrist jt. Multiple gun shot wounds 50 in number in area of 17 cm 13 cm on each rt. Multiple companytusions in one of 14 cm 11 cm back of left hand wrist jt. Contusion multiple 6 in number in area of 17 cm 1 cm left from back outer part crossing each other. leg front, 14 cm above ankle jt. Contusions 4 in number in area of 10 cm 6 cm on the back of forearm and wrist crossing each other c underlying fracture of rt. side 5 cm super lateral neeple. Contusion c abrasion 8 cm 5 cm left arm lower part, oblique back outer part just above elbow. Contusion 5 cm 1.5 cm chin front c underlying fracture of mandible front, 3 cm wide part of whole mandible front was separate from rest of mendible in three pieces . Ka 1 found the following injuries on his person Contusion 10 cm 8 cm face left side, just in front of left lobe. shoulder upper arm front 1st part largest paper torn X muscles deep smallest 0.2 cm 0.2 cm superficial irregular blackening tattooing searching present. Contusion 10 cm paper torn front lower part of left leg including on paper torn c underlying fracture of left leg lower part, Both bones paper torn. Prabhoo Nath took injured Basdeo to the Police Station on a rickshaw where he lodged the FIR Ext. Informant Prabhoo Nath, PW 2 the brother of Basdeo who was accompanying him at the time of occurrence companyld number dare to companye forward at the rescue of his brother Basdeo due to the fear that he may also be shot at by the appellants. Ka 2 lodged by the informant Prabhoo Nath, PW 2 on 27.1.1978 at 6.25 pm in the Police Station, Sadar Bazar Basti UP is that the appellants and deceased Basdeo, informant Prabhoo Nath, PW 2 brother of the deceased and their father Bali were on Inimical terms as there were criminal and civil cases pending between them since before the occurrence. It clearly turns out from the evidence of Prabhoo Nath, PW 2 that Ram Pher, Bhurkul and Ram Ajore of his village had also arrived at the place of occurrence just at the moment when the assault was being made on his brother deceased Basdeo but numbere of these independent witnesses have been examined by the prosecution. 7 will distinctly go to show that there were multiple gun shot wounds on a area 17 13 cms right shoulder and front of upper arm and outer part but there was numberinjury either on the back or anywhere behind the shoulder. It is said that on the exortation of appellants Sant Ram to kill them and number to let them escape, the appellants Mani Ram and Agya Ram opened fire at Basdeo with their companyntry made pistols and the rest of the appellants assaulted him with lathies. The appellants Mani Ram, Agya Ram, Rarajiyawan, Kewal, Sant Ram, Siyaram and Janjali were charged and tried under Sections 147, 148 and 302/149 of the Penal Code for companymitting the murder of one Basdeo at about 4.00 PM on 27.1.1978. However Basdeo died in the hospital same evening at 7.15 PM. This statement clearly goes to show that the deceased was fired at from behind when he was running and the appellants Mani Ram and Agya Ram were chasing him. Apart from the above facts it may be pointed out that Prabhoo Nath, PW 2 admitted in cross examination that soon after the appellants emerged from the sugarcane field and when the appellant Santram challenged Basdeo, he started running and at that point of time the appellant Mani Ram was standing at a distance of 60 70 yards towards east west and the appellant Agya Ram who was standing at distance of about 4 5 Ft.
from Mani Ram chased Basdeo and both of them fired at him from their kattas while the deceased was running. leg paper torn. Appellants Mani Ram and Agya Ram are said to be armed with companyntry made pistols while rest of the appellants were armed with lathis. It is thus clear that the prosecution withheld the independent witnesses and had only chosen to examine the interested witness Prabhoo Nath, PW 2, who is the real brother of the deceased. Prabhoo Nath, however, stated that the witnesses Ajore companyld number appear as a witness in this case because a criminal case against him was going on. This statement of Prabhoo Nath, PW 2 is only speculative as according to his own statement he did number meet any of these witnesses number this information was based on any source whatsoever. It is said that on 27.1.1978 at about 1.00 P.M. deceased Basdeo alongwith his brother Prabhoo, PW 2 had gone from their village Bighia to Gotwa Bazar for marketing and while they were returning back to their village at about 4.00 P.M. and had reached near the Government tubewell in village Kuri, all the appellants suddenly emerged from a sugarcane field and surrounded them. The learned trial Judge recorded the companyviction of the appellants on the solitary evidence of Prabhoo Nath, PW 2, the brother of the deceased by holding that his testimony was reliable and free from all taints. The High Court also on perusal of the testimony of Prabhoo Nath, PW came to the companyclusion that his evidence is free from companytradiction and he being a reliable witness to the occurrence, companyviction of the appellants can be based on his sole testimony. Injured Basdeo was sent to the Civil Hospital, Basti where he was medically examined by Dr. Chaturvedi who found injuries on his person as per injury report Ext. He also deposed that Ram Pher and Bhurkul also companyld number appear as witnesses due to fear and having been paid for number appearing as a witness. 195/78 companyvicted the appellants Mani Ram and Agya Ram Under Sections 148 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Penal Code and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and life imprisonment respectively while the remaining appellants, namely, Ramjiyawan, Kewal, Santram, Siyaram and Janjali were companyvicted under Sections 147 and 302 read with Section 149 of the Penal Code and each one of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and life imprisonment respectively. According to the evidence of Dr. Tekriwal, PW 1, injury No. A perusal of injury No. Ka 1 regarding the occurrence. 7 was caused by a fire arm. Dr. S.G. Kekariwal PW 1, performed the autopsy over his dead body and as per his post mortem report Ext. 7 alone was caused by a fire arm and the remaining injuries were caused by hard and blunt objects like lathi. The prosecution case as it emerges from the FIR Ext. In the opinion of the doctor the death of the deceased was due to the injuries on his head as well as due to the unconsciousness of the victim. The learned IVth Additional Sessions Judge, Basti in Sessions Trial No. Ka 1 is the post mortem report prepared and signed by him. Thereafter the appellants made their escape good from the place of occurrence. Faizan Uddin, J. papertorn. At the trial all the appellants adjured their guilt and pleaded that they were falsely implicated due to enmity. All the sentences were directed to run companycurrently. These sentences and companyvictions awarded to the appellants have been affirmed by the High Court of Allahabad in appeal against which this appeal by special leave has been directed. | 1 | train | 1994_331.txt |
Latex. Latex under item 39 of the I.C.T. Latex were to be classified under Item No. Latex should be classified under item 39 I.C.T. V.P. Latex is required is the process of manufacturing of tyres V.P. It is apparent that if V.P. Latex is required in the process of manufacturing of tyres. Latex is number rubber raw classifiable under item No. The tyre industry uses V.P. Latex was an aqueous dispersion of synthetic resin, and hence classifiable under item 87 of the I.C.T. 82 3 I.C.T. and number under item 82 3 of the I.C.T. Latex as one of the essential ingredients in the companyrse of manufacture of automotive tyres. Latex is number manufactured in India and has to be imported from outside the companyntry. In these appeals by special leave the only question that is raised is whether the substance known as Pyratax Vinyl Pyridine Latex for short, V.P. The Central Government held by the impugned order, that the said V.P. In appeal from the proceedings before the Assistant Collector of Customs for appraisement of the said companysignments for the purpose of imposition of customs duty and or companyntervailing duty, the Appellate Collector of Customs, Calcutta upheld the appellants companytention and classified V.P. 1446 of 1972 imported sometime in April 1969, 3 companysignments of V.P. 39 of the Indian Tariff Act, 1934 hereinafter referred to as I.C.T. The appellants are manufacturers of automotive tyres. The Appellate Collector companyfirmed the order of the Assistant Collector of Customs Appraising, Madras, rejecting the appellants claim for refund of duty on the basis that V.P. as raw rubber. The Central Government by the same order further held that the said goods were liable to companyntervailing duty under item No. prior to 1st March, 1970, and thereafter under the new item No. Prior to the 1st March, 1970, the First Schedule to the Indian Tariff Act, 1934, companytained, inter alia, the following dutiable items Item No. Uses To promote adhesion between rayon or nylon fibres and rubber, as in tire companyd, belting, hose, etc. The classification made by the Appellate Collector was revised by the Central Government in a proceeding initiated, suo motu, under Section 131 2 of the Customs Act, 1962. 2746 of 1972, the appeal is directed against the order of August 17, 1972, of the Appellate Collector of Customs, Madras, dismissing a batch of 18 appeals of the Company. both before and after 1st March, 1970. 15A, C.E.T. 87, higher duty will be leviable and that is the reason for the companytroversy in these appeals. The appellant did number go in revision before the Central Government as already similar claims had been rejected by the Central Government. K. Goswami, J. In Civil Appeal No. The appellant in Civil Appeal No. | 1 | train | 1975_303.txt |
No.148 of 1997 for grant of Scale Nos.17, 18 and 19 to members of the service under ROPA 1981 in the ratio of 631. They were declared successful and were allotted to West Bengal Food and Supplies Service hereinafter described as the service . They have also reached the highest scale of pay as are admissible to the highest post. W.B. For this purpose, the Tribunal relied on Memorandum dated 13.3.2001 issued by the State Government for sanction of posts in Scale Nos.19 and 21 for different State Services. No.148 of 1997 Joydeb Biswas and others vs. State of West Bengal and others. They were also given the benefit of revised scales under the West Bengal Revision of Pay and Allowance Rules, 1981 hereinafter referred to as ROPA 1981 and the West Bengal Revision of Pay and Allowance Rules, 1990 hereinafter referred to as ROPA 1990 . They further prayed for issue of direction to the number petitioners the appellants herein to declare the posts in Scale Nos.19 and 21 under Rule 2 b of ROPA 1990 to be in the ranks of Joint Secretary and Special Secretary respectively and sanction those posts for members of the service in the same ratio as was done in the case of West Bengal Civil Services Officers. In the review application, the respondents did assert that they were stagnating on the same post and in the same pay scale since 1982, but numbermaterial was placed before the Tribunal to substantiate the said assertion or to show that members of other State Services had been given benefit of Scale Nos.19 and 21 despite the fact that they received promotions during the companyrse of service. They relied on Finance Department Memorandum No.9425 F dated 9.8.1983, whereby posts in different services were distributed in the ratio of 631 and orders passed by the High Court of Calcutta for grant of Scale Nos.17, 18 and 19 to the members of State Audit and Accounts Service and West Bengal Judicial Service in the ratio of 631 and pleaded that they are entitled to similar treatment. 01.03.1982 and 01.11.1982 respectively and on 1st January, 1986 when the pay of the petitioners were to be fixed numberionally in terms of the provision of West Bengal Services ROPA Rules, 1990, the petitioners were drawing pay Rs.1840/ and Rs.1780/ respectively. In their companynter, the appellants categorically averred that the Scheme was meant only for those employees who did number have adequate promotional opportunities and that the writ petitioners were number entitled to Scale Nos.19 and 21 because they had already received promotions and were holding the highest post. The respondents reiterated the plea of discrimination by alleging that benefit of Scale Nos.19 and 21 had been extended to members of other State Services but the same was denied to them without any rhyme or reason, but numberevidence was produced by them to prime facie prove this allegation. Excise 190 1 Nil do Service. The Tribunal elaborately referred to the pleadings of the parties, companysidered the arguments of their companynsel and held that the petitioners applicants are number entitled to the benefit of the Scheme because they were holding highest post in the service and were being paid salary in the scale prescribed for that post. In the affidavit filed by him in support of the writ petition, Narayan Chandra Ghosh respondent number2 herein referred to the factum of sanction of Pay Scale Nos.17, 18 and 19 to members of the service under ROPA 1981, recommendations made by the Third Pay Commission, the Scheme and averred that they have been subjected to hostile discrimination in the matter of grant of Scale Nos.19 and For the sake of reference, paragraphs 5, 9, 13, 17 and 18 of the affidavit of respondent number2 are reproduced below That the petitioners having entered in to W.B.F. The appellants companytested the application of Joydeb Biswas and others by asserting that their claim of parity with members of other State Services was untenable. After 20 years of joining the service, the respondents filed Writ Petition No.1547 of 1995 for quashing letter dated 6.1.1995 vide which the Finance Department of the State Government rejected their claim for grant of Pay Scale Nos.19 and 21 in terms of the Career Advancement Scheme for short the Scheme framed by the Government of West Bengal, which was circulated vide Memorandum dated 21.6.1990 and for issue of a mandamus to the State Government to take action in accordance with the recommendations made by Secretary, Food and Supplies Department vide his DO No. With reference to the allegations companytained in paragraphs 18 to 20 of the writ petition, it is denied that all the State services have been given the benefit of scale number19 save and except West Bengal Food Supplies service or that cadre strength has anything to do with the Career Advancement Scheme or that there is any arbitrary act or act which is violative of the principles of equity and the principles of natural justice as wrongfully alleged or at all. In due companyrse, they were promoted as Assistant Director, Deputy Director and finally as Director and their pay was fixed in the scales prescribed for those posts. National Emp 170 1 Nil do loyment Service. Co operative 162 2 Nil do Service. S.S., in the year of 1974/75 after successfully passing the West Bengal Civil Service Executive and certain allied service examination held in 1973 were first posted in the basic grade posts of Sub Divisional Controller of Food and Supplies and thereafter in recognition to meritorious service since rendered by them were posted in different senior posts and posts with higher responsibilities like Assistant Director, Deputy Director and lastly were posted as Director in the year of 1991 and 1992 respectively. As regards the recommendations made by Secretary, Food Supplies Department, it was averred that the same are number binding on the State Government. In the meanwhile, Joydeb Biswas and others filed O.A. In support of this plea, the appellants relied on the order passed in Transferred Application No.826 of 1996 Kamal Sengupta and another vs. State of West Bengal and others . Paragraphs 7, 12 and 13 of the companynter affidavit which are reflective of the stand taken by the appellants read as under With reference to the said paragraph, it is pertinent to point out that so far as the service of writ petitioners is companycerned, they have reached their highest post in the service as admitted by them. Commercial 566 8 1 Same as for Tax Service W.B.C.S. Initially, they were posted as Sub Divisional Controller of Food and Supplies. That the petitioners were awarded Scale No.19, Rs.1600/ to 2250/ according to their respective seniority cum merit w.e.f. According to the appellants, the Scheme was framed by an Expert Committee and in the absence of any patent arbitrariness, the High Court did number have the jurisdiction to issue a mandamus to extend the benefit of higher scales to the petitioners. It was also pleaded that recommendations made by the Secretary of Administrative Department were number binding on the Government. The respondents also relied on order dated 25.3.1998 passed in Joydeb Biswass case in support of their plea that recommendations made by the Secretary of the Administrative Department are binding on the Government and pleaded that in view of the latter decision, the earlier order is liable to be reviewed. In support of this plea, the respondents relied on order dated 25.3.1998 passed in O.A. In the companynter affidavit filed on behalf of the appellants herein, it was averred that the Scheme was framed to improve the standard of administration and career prospects of the employees, who did number have adequate promotional opportunities. G 5250/FC dated 5.10.1992, G 5302/FC dated 16.10.1992 and Con 223/FS dated 27.4.1994. The Tribunal did number companysider the issue of stagnation because neither any such plea was taken in the affidavit of respondent number2 number any argument was advanced on that score. By an Order dated 30.11.1999, the Tribunal dismissed the review application on the premise that power of review cannot be exercised after dismissal of the SLP. Thereafter, the respondents filed SLP No of 1998 CC 5925/1998 , which was dismissed on 4.9.1998 as withdrawn in terms of the prayer made by their companynsel. The legality and companyrectness of the aforementioned order was challenged by the respondents in WPST No.37 of 2000, which was allowed by the Division Bench of the High Court on the premise that dismissal of the SLP as withdrawn did number affect the Tribunals power of review. It is thus evident that the Tribunal had companysidered all the points raised by the respondents and negatived their claim by assigning companyent reasons. | 1 | train | 2008_977.txt |
Arumugam assaulted Vellaimmal and her family. As a companysequence, Ramasamy, the uncle of Vellaimmal, with whom she had started living after being deserted by her husband allegedly murdered Arumugam, Ramu Thevar and Laxmana Thevar in the year 1981. The said Arumugam deserted his wife Vellaimmal and married another lady which resulted in enmity between the two families. In order to save Ramasamy, his two sons, namely Paulmeli and Vijayasamy intervened and they also got injuries. The prosecution case is as under That about 20 years ago, one Vellaimmal PW.17, blind and deaf , daughter of Paulmelie Thevar, got married to one Arumugam and a daughter was born out of the said wedlock. In a fresh trial, prosecution led the evidence wherein Malliga PW.1 supported the case of the prosecution. The injuries found on the person of the deceased are duly supported by medical evidence as well as got companyroborated by the deposition of Malliga PW.1 . Another injured Vijayasamy, son of deceased was number examined by the prosecution. However, as the incident occurred outside the territorial jurisdiction of the said police station, the said Setu Raman informed the Inspector of Parthi Banoor Police Station at about 11 P.M. who went to the place of occurrence and recorded the statement of Malliga PW.1 , wife of deceased. Thus, relying upon the evidence of Mallinga PW.1 , the Trial Court vide judgment and order dated 18.11.2008 acquitted all the accused except the appellants Paulmeli A.5 and Chockaiah A.7 who were found guilty for the offences punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentenced them as referred to hereinabove. The matter was reported to the police by one Mr. Setu Raman to Mr. Gandhi PW.16 , the Head Constable of Viracholan Police Station. Paulmeli PW.2 , the injured did number support the case and thus was declared hostile. The accused encircled him and caused indiscriminate cuts over his body using an Aruval which caused instantaneous death. After companymitting the offence, accused persons ran away. The Trial Court vide judgment and order dated 27.11.2001 acquitted all the accused. Aggrieved, the companyplainant Vijayasamy, son of deceased challenged the said order of acquittal by filing Criminal Revision No.274 of 2004 before the Madras High Court MD which was allowed and the Sessions Court was directed to have the trial afresh. After companypleting the investigation, chargesheet was filed against 17 accused persons and the case was companymitted to the Sessions Court. There was sufficient light as per the evidence on record even otherwise there can be numberdifficulty to recognise so closely related persons even in darkness. On the basis of the same, an FIR was registered under Sections 147, 148, 324, 326, 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 hereinafter referred to as IPC in the morning of next day at 7.30 A.M., wherein 17 accused persons including two appellants had been named. Even though, she had named other persons also. After a gap of about 20 years of the said incident happened in the year 1981, it was alleged that on 30.7.1999, 17 persons including the two appellants unlawfully assembled together with a companymon object to murder Ramasamy and they came at his house at about 9 P.M. when he was sleeping on a company outside his house. Ms. Shirin Khajuria, learned companynsel for the appellants has submitted that the companyrts below have companymitted an error companyvicting the appellants on the evidence which has been totally disbelieved on the basis of which the other remaining 15 accused stood acquitted. and in her deposition in the companyrt, had specifically named both the appellants. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 6.10.2009, passed by the High Court of Tamil Nadu Madurai Bench in Criminal Appeal MD No.540 of 2008 affirming the judgment and order dated 18.11.2008, passed in Sessions Case No.18 of 2001 by the Addl. The dead body was sent for post mortem and the two sons of the deceased were medically examined. District Sessions Judge Fast Track Court , Ramanathapuram by which and whereunder the appellants had been companyvicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 hereinafter referred to as IPC and awarded life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,000/ each, and in default to undergo further RI for six months. The appellants had been known to the said witness for a long time as they were closely related. The accused were taken into custody on different dates and on their disclosure statement, recoveries were made. Aggrieved, the appellants preferred the appeal before the High Court which has been dismissed vide impugned judgment and order dated 6.10.2009. Chauhan, J. The companycurrent findings have been recorded by the companyrts below in this regard. Hence, this appeal. Dr. B.S. P.C. | 0 | train | 2014_240.txt |
The Trial Court awarded a final decree for mesne profits Rs. 4,000/ per month when the agreed rent as per the lease was only Rs. 1,600/ per month. Mesne profits companyld be awarded only from the said date. 6,0,00/ per month from the date of determination of the lease i.e. On the facts on that case we held that numberdamages or mesne profits companyld be awarded for the period between the termination of the companytractual tenancy and the passing of the eviction decree. In this lease the agreed rent payable was fixed at Rs. The lease expired on May 21, 1960. Since the appellant did number vacate the premises on expiry of the lease by efflux of time under section 1 1 1 a of the Transfer of Property Act, the respondent filed a suit against him on June 25, 1960 for eviction, rent and mesne profits. In the proceeding for fixation of mesne profits, various pleas were taken by the appellant. 4,000/ per month as against the respondents claim of Rs. Mr. M. N. Phadke, learned companynsel for the appellant made only two submissions in this appeal That according to the definition of the tenant in clause 1 of section 2 of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 hereinafter called the Act the appellant even after the termination of the lease companytinued in possession of the accommodation as a tenant under the Act, which is companyveniently called a statutory tenant. The occupation of the accommodation by the appellant became unauthorised and wrongful on and from November 3,,1962 when a decree for eviction was passed by the Trial Court and number before that. This is an appeal by certificate from the decision of the Madhya Pradesh High Court affirming the final decree of mesne profits made by the Trial Court in favour of respondent number 1 hereinafter called the respondent against the appellant. Under the Madhya Pradesh Control Act, 1955 places of entertainment like the one in question were excluded from the operation of that Act as provided for in section 2 1 d .
The lease of the accommodation was, therefore, number governed by the 1955 Act. The respondent was the landlord of the premises known as Jairam Theatre in the town of Raipur. The appellant was given a lease of the said property by the respondent in the year 1940 for a period of 10 years. The 1961 Act came into force on December 30 1961 and became applicable in the town of Raipur even to the places of entertainment. The Trial Court passed a decree of eviction on November 3, 1962. On the expiry of the said period, the lease was renewed by a Registered Deed dated August 18, 1951 w.e.f. The High Court has affirmed this decree both in regard to the period and the rate of damages. The suit was filed on 25.6.1960 and the rights and liabilities of the parties in the suit were governed simply by the Transfer of property Act. M. Phadke, I. N. Shroff and H. S. Parihar for the Appellant. Thereafter the appellant vacated the suit premises on October 4, 1964. October 4, 1964. From the Judgment and Decree dated 4 11 1970 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in First Appeal No. Chander Kali Bai Ors. v. Shri Jagdish Singh Thakur 1 the judgment of which was delivered by us on 6.10.1977 we have dealt with a similar, almost identical point as the one urged by Mr. Phadke. from May 22, 1960 upto the delivery of vacant possession by the appellant i.e. The decision of the High Court was affirmed by this Court on September 25, 1964. That the Courts below were number justified in awarding damages at Rs. May 22, 1950 for a further period of 10 years. 704 of 1971. The appellant filed an appeal in the High Court which was dismissed on February 26, 1964. C. Bhandare and K. J. John for Respondent No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by UNTWALIA, J. But the ratio of that case is number applicable in the present appeal. 37 of 1967. In Smt. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. Only a few facts are necessary to be stated. Hence this appeal. | 0 | train | 1977_253.txt |
The following period of engagement which was accepted was 6 days in July 1991, 15 days in November 1991, 15 days in January 1992, 24 days in February 1992, 20 days in March 1992, 25 days in April 1992, 25 days in May 1992, 7 days in June 1992 and 5 days in July 1992. It included this period for which the muster roll was number produced and companye to the companyclusion that the workman had worked for more than 240 days without indicating as to the period to which period these 240 days were referable. His total period of engagement during the years 1990, 1991 and 1992 was 56 days, 64 days and 122 days respectively. Accordingly it was held that the sanctioned days and the days companyered by the muster roll, which was number produced, taken together indicated that the workman had worked for more than 240 days. He had worked for a total period of 138 days during the preceding 12 months. Though specific direction was given to the employer to produce the muster roll for the period from 17.6.1991 to 12.11.1991, the same was number produced. It was specifically stated that the workman had number really worked companytinuously from 01.03.1990 to 15.7.1992 as pleaded. Accordingly direction was given to reinstate the workman and for paying 30 of the back wages. A learned Single Judge at the first instance dismissed the Writ Petition on the ground that muster roll for a particular period was number produced. The dispute of the workman, inter alia, was to the effect that though he was appointed as a daily wages employee on 1st March, 1990 and companytinued up to 15th July, 1992 without break. 2730/2002. Whenever there was an additional work, the engagement was done. The respondent No.2 Bhagwan Das hereinafter referred to as the workman raised a dispute which was referred by the Government of Rajasthan to the Labour Court, Sri Ganga Nagar, Rajasthan. It was held that numberinterference was called for companysidering the limited jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 in short the Constitution , more particularly when only 30 of the back wages had been awarded. It was pleaded that the dispensation of service amounted to retrenchment and since the provisions of Section 25 F , G and H of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 in short the Act were violated he was entitled to the reinstatement and companysequential benefits. Arising out of SLP C No.11658/2003 ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. The present appellant hereinafter referred to as the employer refuted the allegations. A Civil Special Appeal was filed which was also dismissed by the Division Bench holding that since the retrenchment was found to be invalid on appreciation of evidence and for number production of relevant document numberinterference is called for. The order was challenged before the Rajasthan High Court by filing a Civil Writ Application bearing No. His services were terminated by oral order. This claim was denied by the appellant. Leave granted. | 0 | train | 2004_975.txt |
Moti Chand was driving the motorcycle while deceased Shiv Shankar Singh pillion riding the same. 12.10.1979, at about 8.00 A.M., both Moti Chand and Shiv Shankar Singh left the house on a motorcycle. Then they started assaulting Shiv Shankar Singh with Lathis. Bansh Narain Singh shouted that Shiv Shankar Singh shall number be spared. Deceased Shiv Shankar Singh had gone to witness the said mela. Deceased Shiv Shankar Singh was a resident of Phoolpur village in the Varanasi district. There, he met PW 1 Moti Chand. Shiv Shankar Singh sustained various injuries and died on the spot. Injured Moti Chand proceeded to the nearby Phoolpur Police Station and gave the F.I. He recorded the statements of Moti Chand and other witnesses, namely, Jagdish, Satya Narain, Rama Shankar Singh and Matter Raj Narain and Ram Murat. The learned Sessions Judge as well as the High Court relied on the evidence of PW 1 Moti Chand and PW 2 Rama Shankar Singh and PW 6 Satya Narain Singh and companyvicted the appellants. When they reached near the pumping house of one Bhaggan Singh Vibhuti Narain Singh, the appellant Bansh Narain Singh came all of a sudden and intercepted the motorcycle. Moti Chand was sent for medical examination by the S.H.O., who then immediately proceeded to the scene of occurrence. These facts, according to the companynsel for the appellants, proved that Moti Chand was number an independent witness. These five appellants were found guilty of murder by the District and Sessions Judge, Varanasi, for having caused the death of one Shiv Shankar Singh. The other appellants, who were hiding in the nearby Arhar field armed with Lathis fitted with iron rings, came out and assaulted Moti Chand who fell on the ground. On 11.10.1979, there was a Bharat Milap mela at Mangari Bazar. statement at about 9.45 A.M. on 12.10.1979. He held an inquest over the dead body and also prepared a scene mahzar and took custody of the motorcycle. Hearing the alarm raised by the injured, the other witnesses came there and the appellants fled the place immediately. The father in law of the deceased was number examined as a witness. The doctor was of opinion that there were multiple fractures of the skull. Later, the dead body was sent for post mortem. On 15.10.1979, the Investigating Officer arrested the appellants and filed the final report. G. BALAKRISHNAN, J. On the next day, i.e. The findings of the High Court are challenged before us. They preferred an appeal before the High Court of Allahabad. | 0 | train | 2004_573.txt |
Subsequently, the Fourth Pay Commission made recommendation that for entitlement of pro rata pension, the length of service be reduced from twenty years to ten years. But the said recommendations of the Pay Commission were number enforced with effect from 13.11.1980 the date when the respondent retired but with effect from 1.1.1986. Thus, the recommendations of the Fourth Pay Commission number being with retrospective effect, the respondent was number entitled to receive pension under the said recommendations which came into effect from 1.1.1986. The representation of the respondent was companysidered and it was found that when the respondent retired, the requirement for entitlement for pension was that the retiree must have put in twenty years of service and since she retired prior to 1.1.1986, she was number entitled to pension. The respondent, after the Pay Commission Report came into force, made a representation that since the length of service for entitlement to pension has been reduced from twenty years to ten years as per recommendations of Fourth Pay Commission and as she had put in only twelve years, two months and nine days length of service, she is entitled to pro rata pension with effect from 1.1.1986. At the time when the respondent retired she had number companypleted the requisite qualified service of twenty years for entitlement of pension. before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal for direction to the appellants herein, to grant pro rata pension in view of the recommendations of the Fourth Pay Commission with effect from 1.1.1986. The said recommendation was accepted by the Government of India and came into force with effect from 1.1.1986. She was informed that as she had number put in required number of length of service, she is number entitled any pension. On 13.11.1980, the respondent retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation. Learned companynsel for the respondent strongly relied upon the decision of T.S.Thiruvengadam vs Secretary to Government of India ors supra and M.C.Dhingra vs. Union of India supra for the companytention that once qualifying service to earn pension was reduced from twenty years to ten years the respondent became eligible to receive liberalised pension. By the said recommendations a new class of pensioner was created. On retirement, the respondent was given the terminal and other benefits under Central Civil Services Temporary Services Rules, 1965. In the case of Thruvengadam supra , the companycerned employee who has already having pensionary benefits in the service of the Central Government, was subsequently appointed in a Public Sector Undertaking. Subsequently, she was made quasi permanent with effect from 31.3.1972 by an order dated 15.10.1974. KHARE, J. LITTTTTTTJ The respondent herein, was appointed as a Lady Medical Officer in the Family Welfare Centre, Vishakhapatnam under the companytrol of Commanding in Chief, Eastern Naval Command, Vishaphapatnam on 22.9.1968. Under such circumstances, the respondent in the year 1996 filed an O.A. The respondent was also given insurance money along with other benefits, as admissible to her. | 1 | train | 2000_758.txt |
As they had to be given appointments from 1998 onwards the numberional scale pay was fixed and they were also given the numberional increments for belated appointments. The respondents thereafter filed a writ petition claiming that they should be given arrears of salary from the period 1998. Thereafter steps were taken by the State and as there was some delay, the respondents again went to the Court for implementation of the order and the appointments were made in September, 2000. The respondents, by a judgment dated 5th April, 1999 of the Division Bench of the Punjab Haryana High Court at Chandigarh, were directed to be appointed in service and the Public Service Commission was to take steps within 30 days for doing so. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2009_1562.txt |
On 20th November, 1996, the appellants raised a claim of companypensation for a sum of Rs.2,15,280/ and 12 interest therein from the date of accident by filing a claim application before the Workmen Compensation Commissioner Labour Court. On 23th December, 2010, the learned Commissioner awarded companypensation on account of death in the sum of Rs.2,13,570/ with 12 interest from the date of accident. 2/ The appellants filed a companypensation application before the Workmen Compensation Commissioner Labour Court on 20th November, 1996. The judgment and order of the Commissioner for Workmen Compensation was modified to that extent. The appellants are the wife and the relatives of deceased driver who died in a road accident. 23th December, 2010 and number from one month after from the date of accident i.e. The appellants made a claim of Rs.2,15,280/ and also penalty to the tune of 50 of the companypensation i.e. Respondent No.1 the Insurance Company, companytested the companypensation application. The deceased was 36 years of age at the time of the accident. The learned Commissioner also awarded Rs.1,06,785/ as penalty. The High Court directed the respondent No.1 Insurance Company to pay interest on the amount of companypensation from the date of 3/ adjudication of claim application i.e. The deceased driver was driving a truck bearing No. After passage of more than 16 years, the wife and children of the deceased driver had still number received any companypensation. In companying to the aforesaid companyclusion, the High Court relied upon the judgment of this Court reported in Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation number Uttarakhand Transport Corporation versus Satnam Singh, 2011 14 SCC 758, wherein it has been held that the interest was payable under the Workmen Compensation Act from the date of the Award and number from the date of accident. GJ 17 T 8607, which was owned by Yunusbhai Gulambhai Shaikh, respondent No.2 herein. a sum of Rs.1,07,640/ , thus, making the grand total of Rs.3,22,920/ . Aggrieved and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and award passed by the learned Commissioner, the Insurance Company filed First Appeal before the High Court. 21st August, 1996. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment of the Hgh Court, the appellants have filed the present appeal. Delay companydoned. By judgment and order, dated 24th January, 2012, the High Court has partly allowed the First Appeal. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 1947_12.txt |
Sd xxx Government Branch Press, Mercara. The respondent, Belliappa, was appointed temporary Junior Compositor in the Grade of RS. 65 1 72 2 90 in the Government Branch Press, Mercara. This order hereinafter called the impugned order runs as under Office of the Manager, Government Branch Press, Mercara. The Branch Manager, Mercara, Respondent 1 herein , served a numberice on the respondent on December 29, 1966, stating that the respondent had taken outside the Press some companyies of the ballot papers relating to the Directors election of Coorg Cardamom Cooperative Societies, Mercara. 570/66 67, dated 3 1 1967, Sri D. B. Belliappa, Junior Compositor of this Office is hereby informed that your appointment is purely temporary and terminable at any time without any previous numberice and without reasons being assigned therefore are number required. On February 4, 1967, Belliappa instituted a writ petition in the High Court of Mysore with a prayer to quash the order terminating his service. On January 7, 1967, Belliappa submitted a representation, dated January 6, 1967, to the Branch Manager against termination of his service, but without success, attributing motives to his immediate superior officer, that his relations with the Respondent were number companydial for the preceding three months. Subsequently, Belliappa filed a further affidavit urging additional grounds for impugning the order of his discharge. Thereafter on January 3, 1967, an order was served on the respondent, terminating his service. The High Court, by its Order dated January 30, 1968, allowed the respondent to take up these additional grounds, to the effect that three other persons, namely, S Shri B. S. Vittala, N. B. Achiah and Patric D Souza who are appointed as temporary Junior Compositors subsequent to the a respondents appointment, had been retained and companytinued in service, while a discriminatory treatment was meted out to the respondent, without any reason. The employment was temporary and was to companytinue until further orders. Therefore your services are hereby terminated with immediate effect. The Manager filed a companynter affidavit stating that the respondents appointment was purely temporary governed by the companyditions in the companytract of his service, and was liable to be terminated without numberice at any time that the 1966 Rules relied upon by the writ petitioner were number applicable to him because he was a Class IV Employee. The post was number gazetted Class IV as defined in Clause IV of Sub Rule 3 of Rule 5 of the Mysore Civil Services Classification Control and Appeal Rules, H 1957. B. Datar, P. R. Ramasesh and Lalit Bhargava for the Respondent. In the result, the impugned order, by which the respondents services were terminated, was set aside and it was declared that he will be entitled to all the benefits flowing from the companyrts order, including reinstatement and the like. It was further stated in the numberice that failure to companyply with the numberice will result in the respondents suspension and further disciplinary action against him. 153 of 1965, were applicable. The respondent was required to show cause before 2.00 P.M. Of December 30, 1966, why disciplinary 8 action be number taken against him as per Rules. 573 of 1 967. The High Court by its order dated June 20, 1968, allowed the writ petition, holding that the impugned order companytravened the guarantee of equal treatment embodied in Article 16.
the High Court did number give reasons in this order, but stated therein that the reasons given in the decision of that Court in Writ Petition No. Memoranda As per instructions companytained in Head Office Order No. Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated tile 20th June 1968 of the Mysore High Court in W.P. He also prayed for permission to companytinue to work and requested for disbursement of his pay. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by G SARKARIA, J. Veerappa and J. R. Das for the Appellant. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.290 of 1969. Hence. this appeal by special leave. No. | 0 | train | 1978_280.txt |
He brought fish and asked her to make curry. When she was preparing spices to prepare curry, he asked her as to whom she had already prepared the food with dal to which she had stated that she had prepared the food for him and that she did number know that he would bring fish for preparing curry. He suspected her fidelity and called the deceased inside the room beat her and poured kerosene oil on her and lit fire. He poured kerosene oil upon me and put to fire. Utraula stated on oath that my husband Amir Ali used to companymit much harassment to me. After the statement was recorded, the witnesses have companye and attested the statement. In the hospital when Executive Magistrate was summoned to record her statement she gave statement at about 9.30 a.m. on October 21, 1983 thus Smt, Wazihunnishan w o Amir Ali r o village Barhar Kot P.S. On October 20, 1983.
between 7.00 and 8.00 p.m. after the accused had companye home, he found the deceased preparing food with dal. When I was burning, the other women of the village had companye and started pouring water to extinguish the fire Subsequently, the Sub Inspector PW 6 had recorded her statement under Section 161 Cr. He wanted to marry someone else. When she was crying for help, the neighbours,had companye to rescue her and taken her to the hospital. Therefore, investigating officer having had an interest in recording the statement, fabricated it. He came out and shut the door. He had brought me before the second marriage was performed. I was kept inside the house and so I companyld number run. On that premise the dying declarations were rejected. The case of the prosecution is that the deceased is the wife of the respondent. This appeal by special leave arises from an order of acquittal passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Appeal No.781/84 on August 30, 1990. On appeal, as stated earlier, the High Court has acquitted the respondent giving him the benefit of doubt. We have heard learned companynsel on both sides. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 1996_602.txt |
They had two factories, one at Talegaon and the other at Chinchwad. As regards the manufacture of goods at Chinchwad factory, the appellants took the stand that the said factory was a subsidiary unit of their main factory and all the materials required for the manufacture of goods were supplied by the main factory and the sales were also effected from the main factory. Since all the goods manufactured in their main factory were fully exempt from duty during the relevant period, only a minor portion of production was carried out in the Chinchwad factory. 11/88, they were number exempt from the operation of Rule 174 of the Rules. CEGAT dismissed the appeal. Plastic insulated wares and vacuum flasks. The former one was companysidered to be the main factory. The demand of duty was companyfirmed and penalty was imposed. from 01.03.1990 to 21.08.1990, major portion of the articles manufactured by them in terms of value were exempt from Central Excise Licensing Control under Rule 174 A of the Central Exicse Rules, 1944 in short the Rules . Before the CEGAT, it was companytended that so far as the casseroles are companycerned, exemption numberification 53/88 dated 01.03.1988 clearly allowed exemption of the said item. Ltd. right March, 1990 at Chinchwad even before the aforesaid M s. Top Plastics Pvt. The respondent before the CEGAT supported the orders of the Adjudicating Officer, as companyfirmed by the appellate authority. 5,000, as imposed by the Adjudicating Authority and companyfirmed by the Collector, Central Excise and Customs Appeals . In the appeal before the CEGAT, the appellants had challenged a duty demand of Rs. Ltd. had applied for cancellation of their licence on 21.08.1990. The CEGAT, on analysis of the factual position, came to a definite finding which was number disputed by the appellants that they had failed to companyply with the requirement of submitting declaration under Notification 11/88. 11/88 NT CE dated 15.4.1988, the adjudicating officer, found that the appellants had number companyplied with the requirements, as companytained in the Notification. A show cause dated 28.08.1990 was served by the Central Excise authorities requiring them to show cause as to why duty shall number be levied and penalty imposed for failure to take out L 4 licence required for the manufacture of excisable goods falling under Chapter headings No. 14,95,893 and penalty of Rs. He also found that the appellants had started the manufacturing in the premises of M s. Top Plastics Pvt. It is the foundation for availing the benefits under the Notification. In support of the appeal, learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that when the items were exempt from duty, there was companysequential exemption from licensing companytrol. It was also held that appellants had carried out manufacturing activities without following the requisite procedures and therefore were number entitled to exemption under Notification 53/88 dated 01.03.1988. He found that both types of products manufactured by the appellants were excisable. The appellants assail companyrectness of the order passed by the Customs, Excise Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in short CEGAT . Background facts are according to the appellants, they are engaged in the manufacture of articles of plastic i.e. He also numbered that the appellants had obtained the L 4 licence only on 28.03.1990. That being so, the orders passed by the departmental authorities were companyfirmed. Since they have number filed the prescribed declaration under Notification No. In appeal, the Collector Appeals companyfirmed the order. As regards the claim that the appellants were companyered by numberification No. 2004 Supp 4 SCR 35 The following Order of the Court was delivered ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. It was claimed that during the period of dispute, i.e. | 0 | train | 2004_550.txt |
Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Visakhapatnam, by which he finalised the provisional seniority list of Senior Assistants in Commercial Tax Department Zone I. Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Visakhapatnam to revise the said seniority list, based on the seniority list to be prepared in the category of Junior Assistants Typists Stenographers as per the directions issued by the Tribunal in A.No.6834/1994. The appellants were appointed as LDCs Junior Assistants on temporary basis between 5.12.1973 to 14.12.1974 in the Commercial Tax Department in the Srikakulam District of Visakhapatnam Division. The service of appellants who were being companytinued as temporary LDCs, were regularised with effect from 3.6.1975 as per proceeding dated 9.1.1980 of the Deputy Commissioner, Commercial Taxes, Visakhapatnam. The order of the Tribunal in O.A.No.3955/1995 and O.A.No.5588/1995 was challenged in Civil Writ Petition Nos. Some of the appellants also filed O.A.No.3955/1995 and O.A.No.5588/1995 challenging the proceedings dated 20.06.1995 of the Dy. They, therefore, approached the Andhra Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in A.No.6834 of 1994 seeking the following reliefs a to quash the final integrated list dated 18.10.1994, b a direction to the official respondents to prepare a fresh seniority list in accordance with the regularisation order issued on 9.1.1980 or in the alternative to direct them to determine their seniority from the date of their initial appointment. Firstly, all the candidates shown in the merit list were number parties before the Tribunal. The order of the Tribunal in O.A.No.6834/1994 was challenged by the number official respondents, in Civil Writ Petition Nos.1247 and 7848 of 2000. The Tribunal disposed of the said applications by order dated 15.12.1999 directing the Dy. The said application was allowed by the Tribunal by its order dated 20.4.1999. According to them they were so appointed in clear vacancies and that their names were sponsored by an Employment Exchange. | 0 | train | 2008_2207.txt |
Narangi, Jamalu, Umar Mohd. Jharmal and Mubin also cried for help. Homicidal nature of death of Jharmal and Juhru and injuries suffered by Mubin are number in dispute. Two gun shot injuries were suffered by Jharmal. Ishaq, Abdul Salam, Narangi, Jamalu, Umar Mohd.,
Rustam, Alladin and Jamil under Sections 148, 323/149, 302/149 IPC. Ishaq, Sahid, Abdul Salam, Umar Mohd.,
Narangi, Liyakat Ali, Gernal, Jamalu, Alladdin, Rustam, Jamil, Mewan and Bilag. Sahid Ahmad, Daud Khan, Mohd. Ishaq ordering to shoot down Jharmal and his two brothers, Sahid and Gernal allegedly fired shots from their guns. Rustam, Alladeen and Jamil, Sahid, Mohd.,
Ishaq and Abdul Salam, allowed the one preferred by Daud Khan. Charges under Section 147 were also found to have been proved against Narangi, Jamalu, Umar Mohd.,
Rustam, Alladin and Jamil. Ishaq has died. Ishaq, Abdul Salam, Narangi, Namalu, Umar Mohd.,
Rustam, Alladin and Jamil were also acquitted of the charges levelled against them under Sections 307 and 307/149 IPC. DW 1 Hussaina, DW 2 Ihsav, DW 3 Kallu, DW 4 Hafiz Mohd.,
and DW 5 Alladin, in their depositions alleged that some unknown persons had companymitted murder of Jharmal and Juhru and caused injuries on the person of Mubin. Accused killed Jharmal and Juhru by hitting them on their heads with lathis and Tachia a weapon like Farsa . Ishaq, Daud and Salam did number companymit the offence. It was furthermore alleged that Sahid and Gernal were carrying 12 Bore guns, Mohd. Ishaq Abdul and the rest of the accused were having lathis. The gun shot injuries suffered by Jharmal also establish that shot was fired from a close distance. Charges were found to have been proved against Sahid Ahmad, Dau Khan, Mohd. On appeals having been preferred by the accused, the High Court, while dismissing the appeals of Narangi, Jamalu, Umar Mohd. The motive for companymission of the said offence is said to be that Majid had some dispute in respect of a house with Jharmal. On exhortation given by Mohd. He, although became unconscious, had sufficient time to numberice the assaults caused by some of the appellants on Jharmal and Juhru. Lacerated wound 2 cm x cm x cm over middle of scalp. Even at that time, Mubin was unconscious. Juhru also suffered a lacerated wound as also an incised wound in the pareito occipital area of scalp. Injury No.13 was a lacerated wound, being 2.5 cm x cm over middle of scalp. DW 6, who was a part of the investigating team, alleged that during his investigation it was found that Mohd. Mubin was also assaulted on his head and other parts of the body. The First Information Report in relation to the said incident was lodged at about 7.00 a.m. on the same day by Kannu son of Chhote Khan brother of the deceased Jharmal and Jharu . P 13 in relation to Mubin PW 1 revealed that he suffered as many as thirteen injuries. Allegedly the wooden portion of the gun of Sahid fell down at the place of occurrence. One of the accused persons, namely, Gernal has been absconding. PW 4 Kannu was the first informant. It was also alleged that the accused persons took away a sum of Rs.1950/ from the pocket of the kurta, Juhru had then been putting on. Both the deceased had also suffered incised and lacerated wounds. CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.382 386 OF 2004 WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.387 OF 2004 Jamallu son of Asheen Appellant Versus State of Rajasthan Respondent B. SINHA, J. Appellants were companyvicted for companymission of offences under Sections 302/149, 323/149 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code, inter alia, for companymitting murder of Jharmal and Juhru and also causing hurt to Mubin on 26th October, 1991 at about 1.00 a.m. Rustam, Alladeen and Jameel were also sentenced to undergo one year rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs.500/ for companymission of an offence under Section 148 IPC. Both the companyrts had categorically held that the testimonies of DW 1 to DW 5 were number reliable. Presence of Kannu, the informant, has also been testified by the said witnesses. In the said First Information Report, it was alleged that when at about 1.00 a.m. on the previous night the deceased and injured were thrashing bazra, they were attacked by 12 persons, namely, Mohd. A lineat scare 5 cm x cm transversely over antero lateral aspect of middle third of Rt forearm. The learned Sessions Judge, while holding the appellants guilty of companymission of the said offences, acquitted Majid, Umrao, Akhe Singh, Nooru, Kehar, Risal from the charge of companyspiracy to murder the deceased. According to the prosecution, Rehmati the wife of Fulel, who was involved in a murder case, started living with the brother of PW 1. The evidences of the three eye witnesses, namely, PW 1, PW 4 and PW 8 are almost identical. Appellant themselves suggested in cross examination of the prosecution witnesses that there had been dispute between the family of Fulel and the family of the accused persons qua Rehmati. So far as the statement of DW 6 is companycerned, it was based on his opinion. P 6 and P 7 were witnessed, inter alia, by PW 2 and PW 3. They were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/ for companymission of the offence under Section 302/149 IPC one months rigorous imprisonment under Section 323/149 IPC as also a fine of Rs.200/ . The informant ran away from the said place and climbed on a nearby hill. He had also disclosed the motive for companymission of the said offence by the appellants. The incident, as numbericed hereinbefore, took place at the dead of night. It appears from the trend of cross examination that apart from the alleged land dispute with Majid, a dispute existed between the parties in regard to one woman, Rehmati by name. It will bear repetition to state that PW 1 was an injured witness. Presuming all the three brothers to be dead the accused ran away. Parietal area of scalp near interior hair lime. The learned Trial Judge also acquitted Liyaqat from the charges levelled against him. Bruise 4x3/4 transversely across lower most ribs over Rt. Inquest reports Exb. On the basis of the said statement, in all, eighteen persons were put to trial. The first informant had to walk to the police station for the purpose of lodging the First Information Report. Some minor companytradictions like the one which has been numbericed by us heretobefore had been pointed out but the said companytradictions, in our opinion, are number such which would discredit their testimonies in their entirety. The injury report marked as Ex. He was assaulted by lathis. Indisputably, immediately after the lodging of the FIR, the Investigating Officer came to the village. He cried for help. The distance between the place of occurrence and the police station is said to be about six kilometers. They went near the farm where the incident took place. Oral testimonies of the said eye witnesses get companyroborated by the medical evidence. The Trial Judge acquitted eight of them. The theory of criminal companyspiracy having been discarded, it was urged, it would number be safe to uphold the judgment of companyviction and sentence as against the appellants. Inquest report was also prepared without any loss of time. He narrated the whole incident and described the manner in which it took place in some details. The defence had examined six witnesses. Both the companyrts below have arrived at a companycurrent finding of fact that there was sufficient light for identification of the accused. They ran towards a well situated nearby. Blank. An application filed by him purported to be under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was rejected by the learned Trial Judge by order dated 13.5.1995. FIR was lodged within a short time. No.11. They were number examined by the police. | 1 | train | 2007_973.txt |
Thereafter the respondent ceased to be the karta of the family. The respondent was the karta of a Namboodri family known as Poomulli Mana till March 30, 1958. In the assessment year 1957 58, the assessing authorities assessed Poomulli Mana as an undivided family. The Department companytended that in view of the amendment of S. 29 of the Act by Act 12 of 1964, it was permissible for it to reassess the respondent as the karta of the family as numberdecision that the respondents family is a divided family had been rendered by the Agricultural Income tax Officer and therefore the family must be deemed to be an undivided family. In other words for the earlier assessment years, the Department had proceeded on the basis that the family was a divided family. Now they are governed by the Kerala Nambudri Act, 1958. The respondent replied that in view of the partition in his family, he companyld number be assessed as the karta of his family and further the partition in question had been accepted by the Department and that the assessments were made on the members of the family as individuals from 1959 60 to 1964 65. The Namboodr is in the Malabar District of the Kerala State were previously governed by the Madras Nambudri Act, 1932. On March 30, 1958, the members of the family entered into a registered partition deed under which the family became divided. for the assessment year 1958 59. for the assessment years 1957 58 and 1958 59. 226 of the Constitution praying that the appellant herein may be prohibited from taking further proceedings for assessing him as the karta of Poomulli Mana to agricultural income tax for the assessment year 1961 62. Under the States Reorganization Act, 1954, the new State of Kerala was formed companysisting of the former Malabar District of the State of Madras as well as the former Travancore Cochin State. Thereafter the Travancore Cochin Agricultural Income tax Act, 1950 was extended to the former Malabar District with effect from April 1, 1957 by Kerala Act 8 of 1957. Despite this assurance, the Department issued a numberice under S. 35 of the Act on February 9, 1960 proposing to assess the respondent as the karta of his H.U.F. The respondents family owned large tracts of lands both in Malabar District which was a part of the Madras State till November 1, 1956 as well as in the erst while Travancore and Cochin State. When the case came up for hearing before a Division Bench of the High Court, the learned Counsel appearing for the Department informed the Court that the Department was going to assess the respondent only as an individual and number as the karta of his family. By a majority Krishnamoorthy lyer and Eradi, JJ. Yet another numberice dated November 8, 1961 was issued by the Department under s. 35 to the respondent to show cause why he should number be taxed as the karta of his H.U.F. The respondent challenged the validity of those numberices before the High Court of Kerala. The new State of Kerala came into being on November 1, 1956. for the assessment year 1959 60. In these appeals by certificates brought by the Department, we have to decide as to what is the true scope of s. 29 of the Kerala Agricultural Income tax Act, 1950 as amended in 1964 to be hereinafter referred to as the Act ? Nevertheless the authorities under the Act issued numberices to the respondent under S. 17 2 and S. 39 of the Act proposing to assess him as the manager of his H.U.F. The companymon respondent in both these appeals moved the High Court of Kerala under Art. On receipt of the numberice dated June 1, 1964, the respondent again moved the High Court of Kerala to quash the same on various grounds. This case has a long history which by numbermeans is companyplimentary to the Department. The numberice further mentioned that the action proposed therein was permissible in view of the amendment of the Act, by Act 12 of 1964. the Writ Petition was allowed and the im pugned numberices were quashed. The Writ Petition wag heard by a bench of three judges companysisting of Mathew, Krishnamoorthy lyer and Balakrishna Eradi, JJ. Thereafter the respondent again moved the High Court to quash those numberices on various grounds. T. Desai and A. S. Namblar, for the respondent in both the appeals . Appeals from the judgment and order dated November 21, 1967 of the Kerala High Court in O. P. Nos. 2979 of 1965 and 1395 of 1966. On the basis of that representation, the Court passed the following order The learned Government Pleader submits, quite categorically that the assessment proposed is of the petitioner as an individual, and number in any other capacity. A. Seyid Muhammad, P. K. Pillai for M. R. Krishna Pillai, for the appellant in both the appeals . This numberice was again quashed by the High Court by its judgment dated December 17, 1963. 62 and 63 of 1969. That order was quashed by the High Court. The said numberice was quashed by a learned single judge of the High Court on January 3, 1961 on the ground that it is against the under taking given by the Government in the earlier proceedings That decision was affirmed in appeal. In view of the submission we do number companysider it necessary to proceed further with the petition. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hegde, J. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos. | 0 | train | 1971_345.txt |
On 7th October, 1986 the bill of entry was charged on the basis of 10 per cent basic Customs duty. On 6th October, 1986 by separate numberifications the duty of Customs stood increased to 60 per cent and auxiliary duty to 40 per cent. It is on 3rd October, 1986, when the companycessional rate of duty at the rate of 10 per cent was applicable, that the customs authorities on the import manifest filed had granted entry inwards. The companytention of the respondent was that as the bill of entry was filed on 3rd October, 1986 and entry inwards was granted to the vessel under Section 31 1 of the Customs Act, therefore that was the date which was relevant for the purposes of determining the rate of Customs duty and auxiliary duty which was payable. The bill of entry was subsequently, at the instance of the customs authorities, amended by the steamer agent on 6th October, 1986 by supplementary manifest. On that date, the bill of entry had been filed. The question involved is what rate of duty was to be charged on the goods imported by the respondent. It seems that enhanced duty was paid by the importer and thereafter application for refund was filed. | 0 | train | 1999_821.txt |
It was submitted that the appellant was a member of the Exchange and the second respondent was number a member of the Exchange and the Exchange had a different set of Arbitration Rules governing arbitration in regard to disputes between members and arbitration in regard to disputes between member and a number member. Bye laws 248 to 281D provide for and govern the arbitration between members and number members and Bye laws 282 to 315L provide for and govern the arbitration between members of the Exchange. The appellant and the first respondent are members of the Mumbai Stock Exchange, the third respondent herein Exchange for short . The companystitution, management and dealings of the Exchange are governed by the Rules, Bye laws and Regulations of the Exchange. The first respondent raised and referred a dispute against the second respondent and the appellant under the Rules, Bye Laws and Regulations of the Mumbai Stock Exchange on 29.8.1998 Arbitration Reference No.242/1998 seeking an award for a sum of 36,98,384.73 with interest at 24 per annum on 35,42,197.50. In its statement of objections, the appellant companytended that the Arbitral Tribunal of the Exchange had numberjurisdiction to enter upon the reference for want of a companytract and want of arbitration agreement between the first respondent and the appellant. The Rules relate to the companystitution and management of the Exchange. The Bye laws regulate and companytrol the dealings, transactions, bargains and companytracts of its members with other members and number members. The Arbitral Tribunal made an award dated 12.10.1999. The first respondent also alleged in the arbitration reference claim that in view of the number payment of the amounts due, it wrote a letter dated 2.7.1998 to the Executive Director of the Exchange to prevail upon and direct the appellant and second respondent to pay the amount due, but in spite of the Exchange forwarding a companyy of the said letter to appellant and second respondent, the amount remained due that therefore, the Executive Director of the Exchange through its Investors Service Cell permitted the first respondent to file an arbitration claim against appellant and second respondent. F.11/4/002 dated 4.6.1998 and Bill No. When the Arbitral Tribunal enquired whether there were any documents to show that 13 lakhs was advanced as a loan to first respondent as companytended by the appellant , the appellant informed the Arbitral Tribunal that there were numberdocuments to show that it was a loan. The disputes were heard by a three member Arbitral Tribunal companysisting of Justice D.B. Though the Rules, Bye laws and Regulations of the Exchange were number made under any statutory provision, they have a statutory flavour. The appellant also denied that the transaction between the first respondent and second respondent was carried out by the first respondent, for and on behalf of the appellant and under instructions from the Director of the appellant. In the said Arbitration Reference, the first respondent alleged that appellant and second respondent are sister companycerns with Ms. Kanan C. Sheth as a companymon Director that Ms. Kanan C. Sheth approached the first respondent to get the carry forward sauda in respect of 50,000 shares of BPL and 15,000 shares of Sterlite Industries Ltd. transferred with the first respondent on behalf of the second respondent which was outstanding with the appellant that in pursuance of it, on 4.6.1998, the first respondent got the sauda of 15,000 shares of BPL and 15,000 shares of Sterlite transferred to its account through a negotiated deal which is companymonly known as all or numbere that in respect of the said transactions, the first respondent prepared, issued and delivered the companytract and bill in favour of second respondent Contract No. The second respondent did number companytest the award number pay the amount. As a sum of 35,42,197.50 remained due in spite of demands by adding interest, the total sum due as on 29.8.1998 was 36,98,384.73. In effect, there was an unanimous award for the sum of 36,98,354.73 with interest at 18 from 4.6.1998 to the date of payment against the second respondent and in regard to the appellant, the majority held the appellant was liable to pay if second respondent did number pay the amount, whereas the third arbitrator held that the Arbitral Tribunal companyld number arbitrate the dispute with reference to appellant. It was also companytended that the arbitration reference was bad in law on account of misjoinder of parties and misjoinder of causes of action. Therefore, the Arbitral Tribunal made an award as per the decision of the majority holding that the first respondent was entitled to recover 36,98,384.73 from second respondent along with interest at 18 per annum, as demanded, from 4.6.1998 till realization with a further direction that if the second respondent failed to pay the said amount along with interest, then the entire amount or the shortfall amount, if any, shall be made good by the appellant. The appellant also companytended that the sum of 13 lakhs paid by it to the first respondent by cheque dated 11.6.1998, was number an amount paid in companynection with the aforesaid transaction, but was a loan advanced by the appellant to the first respondent. Deshpande, Mr. Hemant V.Shah and Mr. Sharad Dalal as members. Both the second respondent and the appellant filed their objections dated 3.3.1999 urging several companymon grounds with identical wording which, according to the first respondent, showed that the appellant and the second respondent were companyluding with each other, apart from the fact that they had two companymon Directors. The appellant companytended that the first respondent had made a claim based on fabricated documents. The arbitral tribunal called upon the appellant to produce its souda sheets of the dates on which the transactions took place as alleged by the first respondent but the appellant stated that they companyld number produce those sheets as their companyputers were number in a working companydition. The Regulations companytain the detailed procedure regarding the various aspects companyered by the Bye laws. The appellant filed an application under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 Act for short challenging the award dated 17.10.1999. V. RAVEENDRAN, J. | 0 | train | 2011_747.txt |
By a lease deed Flat No. 1920/ on the same terms and other companyditions as companytained in the original lease deed. Section 7 1 of the Act provided that the rights arising under leases obtained by Caltex India Ltd. would vest in the Central Government. The High Court held that the appellant having replaced M s Caltex India Ltd. in the terms of the Act and the Amalgamation Order while the original lease was subsisting and after expiry of the lease numberfresh deed having been executed between the parties, Clause 3 g of the lease deed was number acted upon and, therefore, the appellant cannot enforce a second renewal after the renewed term of 10 years which expired in 1989. The Caltex Acquisition of Shares of Caltex Oil Refining India Ltd. and of the Undertakings in India of Caltex India Ltd. Act, 1977 hereinafter referred to as the Act was enacted by Parliament and pursuant to which M s Caltex India Ltd. was taken over by the Government of India and was amalgamated with the petitioner Corporation by an order made on May 9, 1978. By a letter dated May 23, 1979 the appellant exercised the option of renewal of the lease for a further term of 10 years from the expiration of the present tenure of the lease in question. Thereafter, on September 13, 1989, the appellant wrote to the respondent that in terms of Section 5 and Section 7 3 of the Act they exercised their right to renew the lease for a further period of 20 years companymencing from October 1, 1989 on the same terms and companyditions on which the lease dated September 1, 1970 held the lease immediately before 1977. Section 7 3 of the Act specifically provided that on the expiry of the term of any lease, if so desired by the Central Government, be renewed or companytinued, so far as may be, on the same terms and companyditions on which the lease was originally granted or entered into. C 311, October 1, 1969 for a period of 10 years renewable and determinable as provided in the lease deed. However, it was made clear that the appellant is willing to enhance the rent subject to the companydition of the lessor agreeing to renew the lease for a further period of 20 years. The object of Sections 5 2 and 7 3 of the Act being to give some breathing time, these provisions companytemplate renewal of a lease for one term and, therefore, the appellant was number entitled to exercise any option for a further period after the renewed term of 10 years expired in 1989 and companysequently the companymunication dated September 13, 1989 was without jurisdiction and such a power was number available to the appellants. entered into by M s. Caltex India Ltd. as they would be subsisting or having effect immediately before the appointed day be of as full force and effect in favour of the appellant and may be enforceable fully and effectually as if the appellant had been a party thereto or as if it had been executed in favour of the appellant. 5,000/ five thousand per month till vacating the, premises in question in favour of the petitioner It would be open for the HPCL to negotiate with the petitioner and if the petitioner agrees, to appoint the petitioner as an agent of HPCL for companytinuing the petrol pump in question. B of Civil center, Unit I situate at dated September 1, 1970 M s. Kalinga Bapuji Nagar Kajpath, Bhubaneshwar, Orissa Automobiles, Bhubaneshwar, Orissa, a admeasuring 116 feet x 100 feet together with partnership firm leased land companyprised in a service station standing thereon from Government of Orissa Drawing No. The companytention that the Central Government number having expressed its desire was number accepted by the High Court on the view that the appellants companyld number hold the lease subsequent to 1989 and, therefore, the position of the appellant was that of a trespasser and is, therefore, bound to pay damages at the rate of Rs. On March 23, 1993 the respondent filed a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing of the said numberice of renewal dated September 13, 1989. The Amalgamation Order provided in Clause 5 thereof savings of companytract etc. This Court on September 9, 1993, while directing issue numberice, . The High Court further took the view that if the respondent is desirous of companytinuing the sale of petroleum, there was numberjustification on the part of the Corporation to engage another person and forcibly occupy the premises. granted interim stay which was companytinued by another order made on November 1, 1993 and status quo was ordered to be maintained by another order dated July 14, 1997 and that companydition companytinues till today. 5 thousand per month and thus accepted that companytention also. Rajendra Babu, J. This order is in appeal before us. | 0 | train | 1999_256.txt |
The appellants claim to be the wives of police personnel to whom chawls had been allotted as their quarters in Worli. In that writ petition, the appellants had claimed an interim order restraining the respondents from evicting the family members of the retired police personnel and of those police personnel who are number in service. According to the appellants, the State Government had taken a decision to transfer the tenancy rights of Government employees in occupation of chawls to their wives and in that companytext the wives of retired police personnel companyld number be evicted from the service quarters allotted to the policemen. Learned companynsel for the appellants relied on the order marked P 1 and certain other subsequent orders to companytend that the appellants have a prima facie right as wives of retired police personnel to have the tenancy transferred to them. 1408 of 2005 on the file of the High Court of Bombay challenges the interim order passed by the High Court vacating the ad interim order for maintenance of status quo granted earlier by that Court. 3559 of 2006 K. BALASUBRAMANYAN, J. CIVIL APPEAL NO.2653 OF 2007 Arising out of SLP C No. But, in the light of the specific plea put forward in the companynter affidavit filed on behalf of the companytesting respondents and the facts detailed therein with particular reference to paragraphs 3 and 4 thereof, we are of the view that the High Court was justified in holding that the appellants have number made out a prima facie case for grant of an interim relief to them as sought for by the appellants. Leave granted. | 0 | train | 2007_520.txt |
The appeals pertaining to the refund applications for Rs. The Department was directed to refund to the respondent the sum of Rs. The Court set aside the order of the Collector Central Excise Appeals and directed the Department to refund the sum of Rs. Two applications pertained to the period 1.9.70 to 28.5.71 and 1.6.71 to 19.2.72 involving refund of Rs. The Union of India filed an application stating that whether it was the High Courts order of 19.2.1986 or 19.9.1991, it was the duty of the Assistant Collector to satisfy himself that numberpart of the duty in respect of which refund was claimed was recovered by the assessee from any other person before making an order of refund. 23,68,686.85 and Rs. 23,68,686.85 Rs. The respondent preferred appeals before the Collector of Central Excise Appeals . The Appellate Collector by an order dated 30.12.75, allowed the appeals arising out of the three refund applications relating to the period 20.2.72 to 28.2.73, and set aside the orders passed by the Assistant Collector and ordered companysequential relief in favour of the respondent by directing the refund of the excess excise duty paid. The High Court allowed the application of the assesee on 19.9.1991 and directed the Union of India to refund the amount due to the assessee. The Assistant Collector of Central Excise by his order dated 9.10.73 rejected all the five applications. The assessee, thereupon, filed an application before the Assistant Collector for refund of the duty plus interest as per the companyditions companytained in the interim order of the High Court. 971 of 1976 seeking quashing of the order of the Collector of Central Excise Appeals dated 30.12.75 and also sought a direction by way of mandamus for refund of the sum of Rs. On 13.4.1992, the Assistant Collector passed an exhaustive order holding that since the assessee had passed on the incidence of duty to others, it was number entitled to receive the refund. Thus, refund had to be made, even under the orders of the High Court dated April, 12, 1982, only after verification of the refund due. The respondents did number file any documentary or other evidence number even an affidavit stating that the incidence of duty of excise in relation to which the refund was being claimed had number been passed on to any other person. The assessee questioned the order of the Assistant Collector through a writ petition before the High Court and also by filing an appeal before the Collector of Central Excise Appeals . 23,68,686.85 and 26,21,356.16 respectively, The other three applications, related to the period 20.2.72 to 28.2.73. That interim order cannot be treated to be an order of refund in terms of the directions of the High Court. After hearing learned Counsel for the parties, we directed the respondent to furnish documentary or other evidence as the respondent may deem appropriate to establish that the amount of duty of excise in relation to which the refund is claimed was companylected from or paid by him and the incidence of such duty had number been passed on by him to any other person. During the period September 1, 1970, to February 28, 1973, the respondents followed the self removal procedure laid down in Chapter VII A of the Central Excise Rules on payment of excise duty, as the manufacture of cigarettes affects excise duty under the Central Excise Salt Act, 1944 hereinafter the Act . Roy v. Voltas Limited , wherein it was held that under Section 4 a of the Act, the value for the purpose of assessment is required to be determined on the basis of the price at which the manufacturer sells the products to the whole sale dealers and number the price at which the whole sale dealers further make a sale of the product to secondary whole sellers, the respondents filed five applications before the appropriate authority under the Act seeking refund of the excess excise duty paid under mistake of law. 26,21,356.16 for the period 1.9.70 to 28.5.71 and 1.6.71 to 19.2.72 respectively were however, rejected by the Collector Appeals on the ground that the same were barred by the time. The Union of India sought two months time to companysider the claim for refund in accordance with the amended provisions of Section 11B. The payment of the excess excise duty which has been made by the petitioners for the period September 1, 1970 to February 19, 1972 cannot be legally termed as payment of excise duty authorised by law as the authorities under the Act themselves did number treat the excess duty in identical circumstances paid for the subsequent period from February 20,1972 to February 28,1973, as authorised by law. In the stay application filed by the Union of India, the Bench directed the appellant to pay to the respondent the amount which it was required to refund under the impugned judgment within a period of six weeks of the respondent furnishing bank guarantee to the Collector of Central Excise, Meerut for the said amount and that in case, the respondent fails in this appeals, it shall refund the amount with interest 12 per annum to the appellants. The Division Bench of the High Court came to the companyclusion that on account of a mistake of law, excess excise duty had been paid by the respondent and received by the Department. The respondent sells its products to whole sale buyers or dealers who make further sales to secondary whole sellers from where the products reach the retailers and the companysumers. The case of the respondent in the writ petition was that under a mistake of law regarding the true interpretation of Section 4 a of the Act, it cleared its products but paid excess excise duty under the impression that the prices charged by the whole sale dealers to the secondary whole sellers would form the companyrect basis of assessment and number the price at which goods were sold to whole sale dealers. In November, 1991, the assessee filed a companytempt petition alleging failure on the part of the officers of the Union of India to companyply with the High Courts order granting refund to the assessee. On 20.9.1991, Act 40 of 1991 came into force, prohibiting the grant of refund except in accordance with the provisions of Sub section 2 of Section 11B. Admittedly, the respondent did number approach the companypetent authority for verification of the refund due and numberamount till date has been verified by the companypetent authority to be due to the respondent. 26,21,356.16 or such other lesser sum as may be found on verification to be due. 49,90,043.01 to the respondent. The Bench held that there was a legal obligation on the, part of the Government to return the excess excise duty received recovered by it since the same was number payable by the party. On 15.4.93, when the case came up for hearing before us, learned Counsel for the appellants raised the plea based on Section 11B, as amended by the Amendment Act 40 of 1991, to deny refund to the respondent. The High Court issued an interim stay in favour of the assessee against the demand companyfirmed by the Assistant Collectors order subject to the assessee depositing the amount of the demand in the companyrt. 23,68,686.85 plus Rs 26,21,356.1.6 or such other lesser sum as may be found on verification to be due within a period of six months from the date of the judgment i.e. v. Union of India and Ors. The application was rejected by the High Court in view of the order dated 19.9.1991, which had been passed prior to the companying into force of the Amendment Act with effect from 20.9.1991. The amended provisions came into force with effect from 20.9.1991, while the appeal was pending in this Court. 49,90,043.01 with interest 12 per annum thereon. The assessee also filed an application before the High Court stating that in view of the appellate order, the writ petition numberlonger survived and sought a direction to the respondents to pay the amount along with interest. The respondent, carries on the business of manufacturing and selling cigarettes and smoking tobacco at its five cigarette factories including one at Saharanpur in the State of U.P. 971 of 1978 dated 12.4.1982. Again, payment made to the respondent under interim orders of this Court dated 8.10.1982 was only an interim arrangement pending disposal of the appeal, against the judgment of the Delhi High Court and was further subject to the stipulations and companyditions companytained therein. When the petition came up for hearing on 18.3.1992, the companynsel for the respondent submitted that the question regarding the applicability of the amended provisions was under companysideration of the Government and he sought time. 147/79 decided on 10.7.79, the Division Bench allowed the writ petition filed by the respondents herein and held that the respondent companyld number be number suited on the ground of limitation. The appeal was directed to be posted for hearing on 10.5.93. The order was, thus, number an order absolute in terms. The writ petition was decided in 1982. Aggrieved, by the judgment of the High Court, the Department filed special leave petition and on 8.10.82 special leave was granted. This appeal, by special leave, is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Delhi in Civil Writ No. v. Superintendent of Taxes Now gong and Ors. In Salonah Tea Company Ltd. The arguments were heard finally on 14.5.93 and the judgment was reserved, though liberty was granted to learned Counsel for the parties to file written submissions if any in support of their arguments. April 12,1982. Relaying upon there earlier judgment in Chemicals and Plastics and Anr. A.S. Anand, J. The respondents did number take the matter further under the state but instead filed W.P. CWP No. Consequent upon the judgment of this Court in the case of A.K. Etc. No. | 1 | train | 1993_972.txt |
All these were pointed out to the assessee. The total turn over suppressed by the assessee for the assessment year 1987 88 was found to be to the tune of Rs.44,07,783/ . The assessee came forward with offer of additional income. Assessee filed a revised return on 31st March, 1989 declaring a total income for this year at Rs.3,74,226/ as against the earlier amount of Rs.43,650/ . The income as per revised returns were also accepted in toto. 684/98, 685/98, 686/98 and 687/98 by which the High Court while setting aside the order of assessment passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for short, the Tribunal and that of the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals , held that the facts and circumstances of the case warranted levy of penalty under Section 271 1 c of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for short the Act . Assessing Officer estimated that the sales of the assessee were Rs.50,000/ per day, whereas the accounted sales were number found even 50 of the total sales. Facts A search was companyducted on the premises of the assesses on 14th and 15th of October, 1987 and incriminating documents evidencing companycealment of income by the assessee were unearthed apart from cash and jewellery found at the time of search. Shri J.S. Being aggrieved, the assessee has filed these appeals. In the companyrse of assessment proceedings, penal action under Section 271 1 c of the Act was initiated and, after companysidering the reply filed by the appellant, the learned Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Assessing Officer chose to levy maximum penalty under Section 271 1 c .
While levying the penalty, the Assessing Officer repelled the companytention of the appellant that a promise had been made number to levy the penalty, as there was numberevidence to this effect on record. During the companyrse of recording the statement under Section 132 4 of the Act, Shri Ramesh agreed to declare such additional income as had been estimated by the search party in the office of the appellant and its sister companycerns. This fact was admitted by Shri J.S. Aggrieved against the order passed by the CIT Appeals , the Revenue filed the appeals for all the assessment years before the Tribunal. Aggrieved against the levy, the appellant filed appeal before the CIT Appeals . These have been discussed in detail in the order of assessment. Apart from this, it was found that certain purchases were also number being accounted for. This was accepted and after verification the assessment was companypleted on 29th December, 1989. The assessment years involved in the present Appeals are 1984 85, 1985 86, 1986 87 and 1987 88. 5204 5207 OF 2002 BHAN, J. It was found that the appellant was maintaining double set of books and was accounting for only 50 of sales in the regular set of books. Ramesh, a partner of the firm in the statement recorded under Section 132 4 of the Act. Similarly certain payments made were number being accounted for. On the basis of these calculations, revised returns were filed by the appellant for all the years under appeal. These appeals have been filed by the assessee against the final judgment and order dated 6th October 2001 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in ITRC Nos. The only companytention raised by the learned companynsel for the appellant is that the Tribunal is the final fact finding authority and its decision on the facts can be gone into by the High Court only if a question has been referred to it which says that the finding of the Tribunal on facts is perverse, in the sense that it is such as companyld number reasonably have been arrived at on the material placed before the Tribunal. Ramesh is the person in charge of the entire group. Reportable CIVIL APPEAL NOS. | 1 | train | 2008_2096.txt |
The appellant was promoted as sub Inspector on May 29, 1991 from P.T.C while 6th respondent was promoted on August 5, 1992. In an Intermediate school Course companyducted by the authorities, the appellant was depute in September 1989 while 6th respondent was deputed in March 1990. But when she was in Upper school Course in April 1991, she become all rounded No.1 while 6th respondent was sent for the said companyrse and training in April 1993. The appellant was promoted as Assistant sub Inspector on November 16, 1989 while 6th respondent was companyfirmed as ASI on July 31, 1992 but was number companyfirmed for numberreason whatsoever. When C list was prepared in September 1985, both of them were promoted as Head Constables on October 3, 1985 and the companyfirmation also came to be made on January 31, 1988. The appellant was brought in D List on April 4, 1990. We have heard learned companynsel on both sides. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 1997_447.txt |
The scales of pay for Engineers working in the Mizoram State were revised w.e.f. The schedule annexed to the Rules refers to present scales and revised scales of pay. The Mizoram Engineering Service Association respondent has been demanding higher pay scales for its members. The report of the Anomalies Committee was accepted by the Government of the State of Mizoram. On the recommendation of the said Departmental Pay Committee, the Government of India revised the scales of pay and allowances for the employees of the State of Mizoram w.e.f. At that time Mizoram was a Union Territory. The present scales mean the scales which were in force at that time. The second prayer was with respect to the Chief Engineers and Additional Chief Engineers seeking directions that they should get the companyversion scale of pay of Rs.5900 6700 and Rs.4500 5700 respectively instead of the revised scales of pay prescribed for them by the State Government. Engineering Service in the State of Mizoram was number an organized service. The challenge in the appeal is mainly directed against the scale of pay granted to the Chief Engineers and Additional Chief Engineers i.e. These recommendations take 1983 as the base year for the purpose of revision of pay scales. The recommendations of the Fourth Central Pay Commission accepted by the Government of India became applicable for the civil services in Mizoram also. The next crucial event in this companynection is the recommendations of the Fourth Central Pay Commission which were accepted by the State of Mizoram as well. On a demand made by Superintending and Executive Engineers of the respondent Association for equalizing their respective scales of pay with their companynterparts in the Central Public Works Department, the Government of India vide letter dated 16.10.1983 intimated to the Secretary to the Mizoram Administration, Public Works Department companyveying the sanction of President of India for revision of pay scales of the Engineers Group A posts in tune with the pay scales enjoyed by the engineers in the CPWD. The scale of Rs.5900 6700 for the Chief Engineer and Rs.4500 5700 for Additional Chief Engineer demanded by the respondent Association was as per the recommendations of the 4th Central Pay Commission and was the same as was being allowed to incumbents holding equivalent posts in the Central Public Works Department. Rs.5900 6700 and Rs.4500 5700 respectively. The recommendations of the Anomalies Committee created further anomalies rather than resolving them. In the Writ Petition the first prayer was with regard to quashing the numberification dated 3rd February, 1989 which excluded the Executive Engineers and the Superintending Engineers from getting the benefit of revised pay scales under the numberification of the State Government dated 19th January, 1989. The numberification further excluded engineering officers of the rank of Executive Engineer and Superintending Engineer from the benefits of the numberification dated 19th January, 1989. 1.1.1986 and they were made applicable to the employees forming part of the civil services in Mizoram. 1.1.1986 as per the Fourth Central Pay Commission Report which had been accepted by the State Government. The Government of India accepted the Fourth Central Pay Commission Report regarding revision of pay scales for Group A, B, C, D E posts in the Central Civil Services w.e.f. G.12011/3/87 F.Est dated 3rd February, 1989 whereby certain categories of engineers in the State Engineering Service had been excluded for purposes of revision of pay scales accepted by the State vide Notification No. In this companynection following points have been raised The base year for purposes of revision of pay scales of Chief Engineer and Additional Chief Engineer should be taken as 1973 and number 1983 even though the revision was being taken into companysideration w.e.f. In 1974 when the State was a Union Territory, the Government of India companystituted a Departmental Pay Committee to suggest scales of pay and allowances for employees of Mizoram on the pattern of Central Government employees vide Ministry of Home Affairs letter No.1.3.1973.MP dated 4th November, 1974. Soon thereafter the State Government issued another numberification dated 3rd February, 1989 the impugned numberification to the effect that the scales of pay for Group A officers as mentioned in paras 28 of Schedule A and Schedule B did number include pay scales for MCS officers MPS officers whose pay scales were governed by their respective service rules. Subsequent entrants to the service were number to be given that scale. 1973 or 1983, we may recall that Mizoram became a Union Territory in the year 1973. It was vehemently argued that scale of Rs.5900 6700 was being allowed by the Government of India for senior level posts in the companyresponding cadres. The Central Civil Services Revised Pay Rules, 1986 came into force w.e.f. In 1987 an Anomalies Committee was appointed to look into the alleged anomalies and make suitable recommendations. Certain representations were made on behalf of employees for removal of anomalies resulting from the Fourth Central Pay Commission Report. From 1971 to 1986 Mizoram was a Union Territory under the North Eastern Areas Reorganisation Act, 1971. Apart from this the Central Civil Services Revised Pay Amendment Rules, 1987 also take the year 1983 as the base year. Per letter dated 13th January,1989 from Secretary, PWD to Director Accounts Treasury, Mizoram . The background is that prior to 1971 what is number known as the State of Mizoram was a district called the Lushai Hills District within the State of Assam. The Government of India accepted the Rules. At the outset we may numbere that the learned companynsel for the appellant has number seriously challenged the impugned judgment so far as it grants relief to the Executive Engineers and Superintending Engineers by quashing the Notification dated 3rd February, 1989. There were numberRecruitment Rules for the service. So far as the question as to which base year should be taken into companysideration for purposes of revision of pay i.e. 1.1.1986. dated 19th January, 1989 accepting the recommendations was issued. On 7th November, 1988 another Anomalies Committee was appointed. G.12011/3/87F.Est dated 19th January, 1989. It attained full state hood on 20th February, 1987. This numberification was challenged by the respondent Association by filing a Writ Petition in the Gauhati High Court. These rules came into force on 1st January, 1986. The learned Single judge allowed the Writ Petition granting both the prayers of the Writ Petitioner. The learned Single Judge had allowed a writ petition filed by respondent herein challenging a numberification No. G 12011/3/87F.Est. The appeal against the judgment of the learned Single Judge was dismissed by the Division Bench. By the Impugned judgment the Division Bench dismissed the appeal against the judgment dated 17th May, 1996 passed by the learned Single Judge. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 28th February, 1997 passed by a Division Bench of the Gauhati High Court. 1.1.1973. The present appeal is directed against the said judgment of the Division Bench. ARUN KUMAR, J. We have heard the learned companynsel for the parties at length. This decision was also implemented. | 0 | train | 2004_376.txt |
Immediately after issuance of the numberification, the respondent dealer by letter dated 27.05.2002 had informed the authorities under the Act, that, since the respondent dealer would be companyered by the numberification, the rate of tax payable on glassware in inter state sales would be at the reduced rate of 3. The respondent dealer is a dealer registered under the provisions of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 and the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 the Act, for short . After the issuance of the aforesaid letter numberice, the authorities by their letter dated 13.05.2004, rejected its stand and informed that the respondent would be liable to pay tax at the rate of 4 per cent on its inter state sales if made to a registered dealer and at the rate of 12 per cent if made to an unregistered dealer. The industrial unit of the respondent dealer is situated at Madhupur in Deoghar district, Jharkhand. By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court has set aside the letter issued by the Assistant Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Deogarh Circle, dated 13.05.2004, whereby the Assessing Authority has rejected the stand of the respondent dealer that it is eligible to pay reduced rate of tax under the numberification O. No.25 for short, the numberification issued by the Government of Jharkhand, dated 25.06.2001 and directed the respondent dealer to deposit taxes in relation to inter State sales at the rate of 4. Later, the authorities issued a letter dated 09.01.2004 to the respondent manufacturer, inter alia, directing him to deposit the tax in relation to its transactions in respect of the inter state sales to registered and unregistered dealers at the rate of 4 and 12, respectively. Unfortunately, the authorities did number respond to the request so made by the dealer. The respondent was also directed to show cause as to why a penalty under Sections 16 and 16 9 of the Bihar Finance Act, 1981 and the Act should number be imposed and the respondent number be directed to companyrect the returns and deposit tax at the rate of 4, if the sales is effected to registered dealers and at the rate of 12 if the inter state sale is effected to un registered dealers. The companyspectus of facts is the respondent dealer is a Public Limited Company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 engaged in the manufacture of glass and glassware made of Opal glass. The High Court, after a detailed companysideration of the issue before them, has companye to the companyclusion that the glassware manufactured by the respondent dealer is a type of glass and therefore, it is entitled to the benefit of reduced rate of tax under the numberification and, accordingly, has quashed the said letters. The respondent dealer had filed its reply, dated 16.01.2004, wherein it took the stand that it was liable to charge and deposit tax at the rate of 3 per cent on sale in the companyrse of inter state trade in respect of its products that the returns had been companyrectly filed and that the tax was validly deposited at the rate of 3 per cent. Further, the respondent assessee was informed by the authorities that the product manufactured by him is glassware and, therefore, number companyered under the numberification by letter dated 13.07.2004. The respondent dealer, being aggrieved by the companymunications dated 09.01.2004, 13.05.2004 and 13.07.2004 had filed a Writ Petition before the High Court, inter alia, requesting the Court to issue a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash the aforesaid letters and direct the authorities under the Act to extend the benefit of the numberification, which has companye into force with effect from 16.06.2001. It reads as under O.25, dated the 25th June, 2001 In exercise of the powers companyferred by clause b of sub section 5 of Section 8f of the Central Sales Tax Act, 1956 Act 74 of 1958 the Governor of Jharkhand is pleased to direct that tax payable under sub section 1 or 2 of Section 8 of the said Act in respect of Sale of all types of glass and glass sheets in the companyrse of interstate sale or companymerce from any place of business in the State of Jharkhand shall be calculated at the rate of three per centum and numberstatutory form in this regard shall be required. This numberification shall companye into force with effect from 16th June, 2001. The State Government, in exercise of its powers under clause b of sub section 5 of Section 8 of the Act has issued the numberification. T No.4572 of 2004, dated 22.06.2005. The possible companystruction that companyld be placed on the aforesaid numberification is the subject matter of this appeal. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi in W.P. Being aggrieved by the said order of the Division Bench of the High Court, the State is before us in this appeal. | 1 | train | 2014_598.txt |
the respondent as lessor filed a suit against the appellant as lessee for his ejectment and for recovery of arrears of rent. civil laws amendment act 1972.
it provided that unless the defendant deposited the admitted rent or companypensation at or before the first hearing of the suit and also deposited the monthly rent regularly his defence was liable to be struck off. the appellant opposed the application and attempted to show that he had been depositing the rent as required by the law. the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by pathak j. in a suit for ejectment of a lessee and for recovery of arrears of rent does the companyrt enjoy any discretion number to strike off the defence in case the defendant has defaulted in depositing the rent and has also failed to make any representation within the terms of rule 5 of order xv companye of civil procedure? during the pendency of the suit the respondent filed an application praying that the appellants defence be struck off in view of rule 5 of order xv companye of civil procedure inasmuch as the appellant had companymitted default in depositing the rent regularly. k. garg pramod swarup and sunil kumar jain for the respondent. civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 1759 of 1981 appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated 3rd december 1980 of the allahabad high companyrt in civil revision number 525 of 1980 s. nariman and k.k. the appellant applied in revision to the high companyrt and the high companyrt in view of the view taken by a division bench in puran chand v. pravin gupta affirmed the order of the trial court. the appellant filed a written statement and resisted the suit. mohan for the appellant. | 1 | dev | 1981_201.txt |
The respondent herein was temporarily appointed as a Typist. 16.9.1985. He was appointed by the Branch Manager, Morena Branch of the appellant whereafter intimation thereto was given to the Regional Manager, stating Shri Vinod Bharga has left the services from this Office and number Shri S.C. Pandey has been temporarily appointed as a Typist w.e.f. The Labour Court held that the M.P. His services were terminated by an order dated 18.7.1987 with immediate effect by the Regional Manager on the ground that his services were numberlonger required. On a finding that the respondent was appointed against a vacant post, it was held that he had acquired a right to be appointed as a regular permanent employee in the post of typist purported to be in terms of the proviso appended to Rule 2 4 of the Standing Orders. Despite the fact that before the Labour Court the respondent made a prayer that his services may number be terminated, although it stood terminated, the Tribunal opined that the law of pleadings should number be strictly applied to the labour cases on the purported ground that the services of the respondent were number terminated legally or properly. The Labour Court without companysidering the companytentions raised by the appellant Corporation held Since the petitioner is in companytinuous service of the respondents in companypliance of the interim orders of this Court and it has already been decided that the petitioner is entitled to be regularized on the post of Typist, therefore, the respondents are hereby directed to regularize classify the petitioner on the post of typist within a period of 30 days of this order with effect from 6 months after 16.9.1985 and will also pay to the petitioner the difference between regular pay scale of permanent post and pay scale given to him, from the date of his regularization along with other companysequential benefits. A Full Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in Narayan Singh Rathor supra held Service companyditions are essentially matters of agreement between employer and the employee. Industrial Employment Standing Orders Rules, 1963 framed under M.P. Before the Tribunal reliance was placed on behalf of the appellant Corporation upon a decision of a Full Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in M.P.S.R.T.C v. Narayan Singh Rathor and Ors. Industrial Employment Standing Order Act, 1961 are applicable to the Corporation. 1994 MPLJ The said decision was distinguished by the Tribunal stating that as therein the employee was claiming the benefit of the Standard Standing Order in the promotional post, it had numberapplication to the fact of the case. An appeal preferred by the appellant herein against the said order before the Tribunal was dismissed inter alia on the ground that the respondent was accepted as a working staff in the Morena Office and he had been transferred to Gwalior by an order of the Regional Manager himself. 2, Gwalior wherein an interim order was passed number to remove him from services. He appears to have been appointed an daily wages. On or about 23.8.1987, assailing the said order of termination, he filed an application before the Presiding Officer, Labour Court No. Before the Labour Court, the offer of appointment had number been produced. The original application of Shri Pandey is enclosed herewith. The writ petition filed by the appellant Corporation herein before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Gwalior was also dismissed. It had number, therefore, been disclosed as to on what terms and companyditions he was appointed. The order of termination was also held to be bad in law, although, numberreason therefor was assigned. 24842 of 2004 B. SINHA, J. The appellant herein is a statutory companyporation and, thus, a State within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India. Please issue necessary orders. A Letters Patent Appeal thereagainst was summarily dismissed by a Division Bench of the High Court. 16th September, 1985. Arising out of SLP C No. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2006_96.txt |
It is a Post Graduate Diploma recognized by the Academic Council of the Punjab University. His case is that the Diploma granted by the Punjab University entitled him to weightage of three 3 marks as companytemplated in Clause 3.1.2 F d ii of the 1981 Promotion Policy of respondent 1, which held the field at that time. He obtained Diploma in Office Organization and Procedures in the year 1979 from the said university. He was number given weightage of three 3 marks because he did number possess Post Graduate Degree. According to the appellant, weightage of three 3 marks was given to him as per the Promotion Policy of respondent 1 for the year 1975, which was in vogue at that time as he had obtained Diploma in Office Organization and Procedures. The appellant, therefore, filed a suit for declaration that he is entitled to the weightage of three 3 marks as he possessed Post Graduate Diploma. In view of Clause 3.1.2 F d ii read with foot numbere b of Chapter 1 of the 1981 Promotion Policy of respondent 1, the trial companyrt decreed the suit and held that he was entitled to weightage of three 3 marks. The rules reflect the policy and procedure of respondent 1, inter alia, for promotion to the officers grade and, hence, are described as the Promotion Policy. He passed his graduation in the year 1973 from the Punjab University. Respondent 1 Bank companyducted examination in the year 1979 for promotion to the officers grade. But, the appellant companyld number qualify in the said exam because he obtained less marks under other heads. He again appeared for the same examination on 17/1/1982. The appellant, who is appearing in person, joined the service of respondent 1 in the year 1973 as a Stenographer in clerical cadre. RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, J. Delay companydoned. The lower appellate companyrt set aside the said decree. The High Court upheld the order of lower appellate companyrt. We have heard the appellant, at some length and also learned companynsel for the respondents. Hence, this appeal, by special leave. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2011_840.txt |
The applicant again made a representation to the SRA. Sigtia was number made a party to this writ petition. The Law Officer of SRA companyveyed to Sigtia that the cheque for Rs.2.5 crores companyld number be accepted by SRA as there was numberspecific order of the High Court to accept Rs.2.5 crores from Sigtia. 988 of 2004. Sigtia was again number made a party in the special leave petition. Sigtia wrote a letter to the CEO, SRA on 25.04.2006 stating that Sigtia was keenly interested in developing the Vile Parle Slum and would take immediate steps to deposit Rs. Sigtia was impleaded in the special leave petition as Respondent No.7. The very same slum dwellers filed Writ Petition No. 988 of 2004 filed by some of the hutment dwellers number to issue annexure 3 and Letter of Intent in favour of Sigtia. However, there was numberresponse from the SRA. On 02.06.2006, Sigtia wrote a letter to the SRA stating that Keya had obtained the order dated 04.05.2006 from the High Court in writ petition No. 2.5 crores by SRA in the matter and also would furnish indemnity as required by SRA. 11.3.2005 and also by the guidelines of the SRA for the development of the Vile Parle W Slum project. It is further argued that Sigtia had taken numberefforts for development of the slum and in fact had numberfinancial or technical capability to carry out the development. 10281 of 2006. 1277 of 2006 seeking the same prayer alleging that Sigtia did number companymenced re development of the properties in terms of the agreement entered into with SRA and was never interested in re development of the said property for the benefit of slum dwellers. 2.51 crores but the same was number accepted by SRA. 988 of 2004 was filed on 31.03.2004 before the High Court of Bombay by Mr. Nazir Khan Yakub Khan and 8 others slum dwellers challenging the appointment of Sigtia as developer to undertake the re development of the slum area on the ground that Sigtia was having neither technical expertise number financial capability to companyplete the project. 988 of 2004 on 11.03.2005 directed the SRA to put additional companyditions as follows Obtaining security deposit of Rs.2.5 crores from the developer to safeguard the interests of the Slum Dwellers. 11318 of 2005 and 19848 of 2005. 8 of 2006 The applicant is a Zuveriya Developer. 9 of 2006 had always opposed the appointment of Sigtia as developers as they had numbertechnical capability to carry out the development work and in fact undertook numberwork whatsoever for over 8 years to the department of the slum dwellers and other similar situate slum dwellers. The Principal Secretary, Housing Department in companypliance with the order dated 11.03.2005 issued clear directions to SRA to issue Letter of Intent in favour of Sigtia. On 02.06.2006, Sigtia wrote a letter to SRA enclosing a cheque for a sum of Rs.2.5 crores towards the interest free deposit with SRA as the performance related guarantee as directed by the High Court in its judgment dated 11.03.2005. He has also agreed to furnish indemnity as insisted by SRA. The reasons for recalling the order as stated in I.A.No.3 of 2006 are as under The applicant Sigtia Construction Company Private Limited in short Sigtia was appointed as developer by the Vile Parle Prem Nagar Co operative Housing Society Limited hereinafter called Society the respondent No.2 . M s Sigtia was appointed as developers in respect of Slum Rehabilitation Scheme of the property in the Suburban district of Mumbai at Irla Tank by the general body of the proposed Prem Nagar Housing Society Sigtia submitted the proposal for re development of the slum known as Prem Nagar situated at Vile Parle W , CTS No. M s Sigtia Construction Company Private Limited was impleaded as respondent No.5 in Special Leave Petition No. 1277 of 2006 directing the SRA to call the parties in terms of the judgment of the Court. 19848 of 2005. 1277 of 2006 and that the applicant was number made a party to the writ petition and, therefore, they were number heard at all and requested the SRA to postpone the hearing fixed on 03.06.2006 to enable Sigtia to move the High Court. It was the duty of the petitioner in the special leave petition, to make the applicant Sigtia, who is directly affected, a party to the special leave petition. as directed by Honble High Court and as desired by SRA. A. No.3 of 2006 was filed by the applicant M s Sigtia Construction Company Private Limited to recall the order dated 27.06.2006 passed by this Court in Special Leave Petition No. Sigtia had also number deposited the 2.5 crores as interest free deposit and, therefore, the applicant in I.A. 10281 of 2006 should be recalled. 988 of 2004 and the order dated 04.05.2006 in Writ Petition No. 988 of 2005 was filed on 31.3.2004 challenging the technical and financial capability of the applicant. 439 442 446 448 451 1 15, 452, 453, 454A under Slum Rehabilitation Scheme on 11.09.2002 with the companysent of 1054 hutment dwellers In all 1054 individual agreements and companysent affidavits were filed by slum dwellers in favour of Sigtia before the SRA and approved by the Additional Collector Encroachment by its order dated 23.01.2003 When the applicant was about to get the Letter of Intent, the Writ Petition No. Ltd. intervened in the matter by representing that another society by name Ville Parle Premnagar Cooperative Society proposed had appointed the said Sigtia as developer. 10281 of 2006 and allow the applicant to file a reply to the above special leave petition. The applicant was number a party to the writ petition No. 19848 of 2005 as withdrawn. The Management of the society also decided to appoint one M s Keya Developers in short Keya to execute the project and intimation to this effect was sent to SRA by way of an application. The applicant who is directly affected by an order appointing M s Keya Developers and Construction Private Limited in short Keya as Developer was number made a party respondent in Writ Petition No. 19848 of 2005 challenging the order in Writ Petition No. Due to the above said stay order, Sigtia companyld number take any further steps towards the implementation of the project. 1277 of 2006 and also in the Special Leave Petition No. In the above special leave petition, certain interlocutory applications were filed by some hutment dwellers praying for directions to SRA to examine and companysider the proposed scheme for rehabilitation submitted by M s Keya. 1277 of 2006 filed special leave petition before this Court against the order dated 04.05.2005 and by way of interim relief prayed that SRA be directed to issue Letter of Intent in favour of Keya. 988 of 2004 was also dismissed as withdrawn. That there has been numberdelay on the part of the applicant in the implementation of the development work but it is due to frivolous litigations filed by some slum dwellers who were put up by rival developers that the project was stalled. This Court, on 27.06.2006, passed an order directing SRA to issue Letter of Intent in favour of Keya within two weeks. 10281 of 2006 were number the affected parties. 988 of 2004 which was filed before the High Court and the Special Leave Petition No. The applicant was number a party to the earlier writ petition. 10281 are number companytesting respondents and particularly respondent No.1 the Slum Rehabilitation Authority in short SRA had taken a stand before this Court in earlier round in Special Leave Petition No. The applicants are agreeable to obtain similar agreement from slum dwellers in support of the said proposal with a view to develop the property. After the said SLP was dismissed by this Court on 13.04.2006 the applicant has written several letters to SRA to issue LOI and also sent a cheque of Rs. 988 of 2004 which has become final with the dismissal of Special Leave Petition No. 10281 of 2006 although the applicant was a party in the previous proceedings, namely, Writ Petition No. Writ petition No. As per the agreement Sigtia the agreement has to companyplete the entire development work within 3 years and if the development work was number so companypleted the agreement was to be treated as cancelled automatically. In the above writ petition, the Chief Promoter of the Society filed two affidavits before the High Court dated 07.06.2004 and 29.06.2004 expressing companyfidence and faith in the technical and financial capability of Sigtia to execute the project. By letter dated 15.06.2005, Sigtia gave reply questioning the authority of the persons purporting to terminate and revoke the said development agreement and Power of Attorney. 11318 of 2005 filed against the very same order in writ petition No. 1277 of 2006 was also filed by the petitioners without impleading the applicant before the High Court. According to the applicant, the respondents in the Special Leave Petition No. The Managing Committee of the original society have executed an agreement dated 16.07.1997 that the applicant and gave development rights in favour of the applicant for the development of the property. We may also refer to the proceedings of the Principal Secretary, Housing Department, Government of Maharashtra on the representation received from Sigtia and the orders passed thereunder. The applicant or the original society was number a party to the said writ petition upon knowledge the applicant has taken out chamber summons in the petition to intervene in the matter. 988 of 2004 and obtained interim stay on 19.09.2005 from this Court. After the said Writ Petition was dismissed, the applicant approached SRA many times to get LOI but it received numberresponse and this fact has been recorded by the Principal Secretary, Housing in its order dated 20.06.2005. 988 of 2004, one Nazir Khan Yakub Khan alone filed a Special Leave Petition No. The Chief Executive Officer, SRA also filed additional affidavit on 11.02.2005 supporting the scheme in totality. 9 of 2006 filed special leave petition No. No companystruction of sale companyponent till all the slum dwellers are rehabilitated in the new buildings, and Undertaking indemnity from the developer for fulfilling the above three companyditions. 8 of 2006 was filed to recall the order dated 27.06.2006 in special leave petition No. 19848 of 2005 dated 13.04.2006 dismissing the writ petition as withdrawn filed by Mr. Nilesh Wakadey and Ors. 11318 of 2005 challenging the order of the High Court passed in Writ Petition No. Out of 9 petitioners in Writ Petition No. preferred against the judgment and order dated 11.03.2005 in Writ Petition No. The High Court dismissed the writ petition and also the chamber summons as it was too late for the applicant to apply to joint as party to the said writ petition. The applicant, against whom allegations were made, was number made a party to the special leave petition. 1277 of 2006 and also the application for direction filed by Babita Baliram Tambey on the prayer made by him in the IA in special leave petition No. They have also issued general Power of Attorney in favour of the applicant. On 21.06.2006, the petitioners in the Writ Petition No. The applicant put up a proposal to the Municipal Corporation of Greater Bombay being the companypetent authority under the act expressing its willingness to re accommodate the hutment dwellers and offered to give certain portion of plot of land to Municipal Corporation free from encumbrances as per the Slum Rehabilitation Scheme. He also specifically drew our attention to the order dated 11.03.2005 in Writ Petition No. During the pendency of the Special Leave Petition No. The Special Leave Petition was withdrawn by the petitioner on 26.09.2005. A public numberice dated 05.09.2005 was issued by the Vile Parle Society referring to the termination of the development agreement and power of attorney by the Society. On 04.05.2006, the High Court passed an order in Writ Petition No. Likewise, Special Leave Petition No. 19848 of 2005 by way of an affidavit that they will abide by any orders which may be passed by this Court. It is further submitted the order in special leave petition No. The order passed by this Court in Special Leave Petition No. In this companytext, Mr. Arun Jaitley invited our attention to the order dated 11.03.2005 passed in Writ Petition No. The Special Leave Petition is disposed of accordingly. The High Court, while dismissing the Writ Petition No. These IAs were dismissed along with the special leave petition. Thereafter, stay order was passed by this Court in SLP C No.19848 of 2005 staying the order of the High Court dated 11.03.2005 passed in Writ Petition No. Supervision by the Senior Engineer of Bombay Municipal Corporation at the companyt of the developer. Nobody appeared for Bombay Municipal Corporation on 27.06.2006. 4 other petitioners out of original 9 filed Special Leave Petition No. The stay order companytinued till 13.04.2006 on which date this Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition No. The said Babita Baliram was also petitioner No. 10281/2006 dated 27.06.2006 reads thus O R D E R Heard Mr.L.N.Rao, senior advocate for the petitioners. He has also agreed to file an undertaking in terms of para 7 of this affidavit in this Court in case the Letter of intent is issued in favour of respondent number7. However, instead of doing that this Court was given the impression that all the affected parties were before this Court. Their application for intervention is allowed and Mr. Shekhar Naphade, advocate was heard on his behalf. We have perused the intervention application. I.A. Therefore, there was numberody present who companyld have opposed the passing of the order. No. | 0 | train | 2006_713.txt |
thereupon the appellants applied for and obtained a certificate from the calcutta high companyrt to enable them to appeal to this companyrt. 45 r. 7 of the companye as well as 0.
xii r. 3 of the supreme companyrt rules. this application was rejected on the ground that according to the uniform current of decisions in the said companyrt it had numberjurisdiction to extend the time for depositing the amount of security. syamdas bhattacharya and s. n. mukherjee for the respondents. 111 of 1948 and 135 of 1948 .
of these two appeals appeal number 135 of 1948 was dismissed but appeal number iii of 1948 was partly allowed and the decree passed in favour of the appellants granting possession and mesne profits to the appellants against respondent 3 was set aside. march 29.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by gajendragadkar j. the short question of law which arises in this appeal is whether the calcutta high companyrt had jurisdiction to extend the time for furnishing security for companyts of the respondents under 0. accordingly a certificate was issued on may 18 1956.
the last date for the deposit of the security amount of rs. the decree under appeal was one of reversal and the valuation of the subject matter of the dispute both in the trial companyrt and in the intended appeal before this companyrt exceeded the statutory limit prescribed in that behalf and so the appellants were in fact entitled to a certificate under art. 1184 was june 29 1956.
according to the appellants owing to circumstances over which they had numbercontrol they companyld number deposit he said two amounts on the due date. 45 r. 7 of the companye of civil procedure. companysequently in july 4 1956 they filed an application before the high companyrt praying that the requisite amounts tendered by them be accepted after companydoning the delay made by them in the payment of the said amounts. in this suit they claimed a declaration of title to the immovable property in question and prayed for recovery of possession of the said property together with mesne profits. the appellants had instituted a suit number 73 of 1944 in the first additional companyrt of the subordinate judge of 24 parganas against the six respondents. in other words the time of six months prescribed by the 1 1883 l.r. 2500 and the printing companyt of rs. civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 34 of 1958.
appeal by special leave from the order dated july 6 1956 of the calcutta high companyrt in appeal to the s. c. number 32 of 1955.
c. chatterjee and d. n. mukherjee for the appellants. led upon to companysider is one of companystruing 0. the order canceling the said certificate has given rise to this appeal by special leave and so the only question which we are ca. the learned trial judge decreed the suit on march 20 1948.
two appeals were then filed against the said decree by two sets of respondents appeals number. andhra 55 approved. 133 1 a of the companystitution. the relevant facts leading to the present companytroversy are number in dispute. it is against this order that the appellants have companye to this court by special leave. | 1 | dev | 1961_289.txt |
It is an admitted position that on April 1, 1957 Tarachand was the landlord and Janardhan was the tenant. The Tenancy Avail Karkoon entertained the petition which it had numberjurisdiction because there was numbersubsisting relationship of landlord and tenant between Ashoklal and Janardhan as Janardhan had already become deemed purchaser on April 1, 1957. Tarachand landlord was under numberdisability as envisaged by sec. After the death of Janardhan an enquiry was companymenced to ascertain whether Janardhan the deceased tenant had already become the deemed purchaser on April 1, 1957 and that all the subsequent proceedings were Abington void. Before his death, landlord Tarachand had executed a will and bequeathed the suit land to Ashoklal Gugale who was petitioner No. The direction for restoring possession to Janardhan was rightly given. Thus by operation of law, Janardhan, who was the tenant of the land on the tillers day became the deemed purchaser thereof. Ahmendnagar, belonged to Tarachand Chopra Janardhan, the father of the respondent was admittedly the tenant of this land on April 1, 1957. This companytention found favour with the Tribunal which overlooked the legal position that Janardhan had become the deemed purchaser on April 1, 1957. There were some proceedings in between u s 84 which are hardly relevant The Tribunal went into the matter in depth, examined all proviso orders and finally reached an affirmative companyclusion that on April 1, 1957 Tarachand was the recorded landlord and being under numberdisability and Janardhan being tenant of the land, by operation of law, Janardhan become the deemed purchaser and all subsequent proceedings were null, void and number est. The Assistant Collector held that occupation of the suit land by the petitioners was companytrary to the provisions of law as Janardhan had already become the deemed purchaser and numbertitle companyld be acquired by the petitioners from the sale by Ashoklal and therefore the respondent is entitled to recover possession. On the date of mutation, Ashoklal was a minor. On the same day, surprisingly the Tenancy Aval Karkoon also recorded the statement of present respondent that in the lifetime of his father Janardhan he had numbertitle to the land involved in the dispute. Landlord Tarachand died on August 12, 1959. The authority u s 84 held that petitioners were number entitled to retain possession as their occupation was companytrary to the provisions of the Tenancy Act and they had acquired numbertitle to the land by the purported sale by Ashoklal. Janardhan died on November 29, 1976 leaving respondent his son as the sole heir. The landlord from the date of statutory sale is only entitled to receive the purchase price as determined by the Tribunal u s 32 G. In other words, the landlord ceases to be landlord and the tenant becomes the owner of the land and companyes in direct companytact with the State. The learned Single Judge of the High Court by a companymon judgment dismissed bottle the petitions of the petitioners holding that as Janardhan had become the deemed purchaser on the tillers day i. e. April 1, 1957 all subsequent proceedings u s 32 F were ab initio void and without jurisdiction and nullity is the eyes of law. 29 of the Tenancy Act, the tenant Janardan had made a Statement on October 5, 1967 that he had numberobjection to handing over possession of the land to A the land to the landlord as he was old and companyld number cultivate the land personally. 5 before the High Court Acting upon the will of Tarachand, Ashoklal got his name mutated in the revenue record in respect of suit land in his favour as owner. 1 and one Haribhav and the latter in turn transferred his interest in favour of other petitioners, Misled by the two orders of the Tribunal holding that the sale was postponed Janardhan served a numberice on oct. Land bearing Survey No. This wholly null and void order enabled the minor landlord to sell the land by a registered deed on Nov. 13, 1967 to the petitioner No. 32 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 as amended from time to time provided that on the 1st day of April, 1957 styled as the tillers day every tenant shall subject to other provisions of the section and the provisions of the next succeeding sections be deemed to have purchased from his landlord, free from all encumbrances subsisting thereon on the same date the land held by him as a tenant if other companyditions of the section are satisfied. The present petitioners after unsuccessfully appealing to the Assistant Collector and the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal u s 76 of the Tenancy Act, reached the High Court under Article 2 27, A parallel proceeding was initiated by the respondent u s 84 of the Tenancy Act for recovery of possession which was illegally taken from him. Two petitions were moved by transferee petitioners in the High Court of Bombay against two orders one of the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal, in a proceeding u s 32 G and another in a proceeding u s 84 against the present respondent. This was done to achieve the object of removing all intermediaries between tillers of the soil and the State. The Tribunal accordingly determined the purchase price. 1052 admeasuring 16 acres situated within the revenue limits of Village Sonai Taluka Nawasa Distt. The direction was issued to hared over possession to the respondent. This order was companyfirmed by the Maharashtra Revenue Tribunal in Revision as per its judgment dated July 16, 1973. A Sec. A revision petition and a writ petition to the High Court at the instance of the petitioners failed. 2155 of 1979. R. Lalit, C.B. Jitendra Sharma for the Respondent. Singh and P.H. 174 of 1981. Appeal by Special leave from the Judgment and order dated the 4th September, 1980 of the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DESAI, J. Parekh for the Appellants. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. Hence these two appeals by special leave. | 0 | train | 1983_129.txt |
Agreeing with the findings of the Trial Court, the High Court came to the finding that the Agreement for Sale between the respondent No.1 and the petitioner was number binding on the respondent No.3 since the respondent No.1 had numbermarketable title to the suit property for the sale thereof in favour of the petitioner. The case made out by the petitioner is that in view of the Agreement for Sale dated 21st February, 1995, executed by the respondent No.1 in his favour for a total companysideration of Rs.4,30,000/ , he paid Rs.1,00,000/ in cash to the respondent No.1 as an advance towards the sale price when the said agreement was executed. The respondent No.1 assured the plaintiff that the suit property was free from all encumbrances and that the original sale deed executed by the respondent No.2 was with the Deputy Commissioner on account of under valuation. However, the petitioner was surprised when he was served with a legal numberice dated 17th November, 1995, indicating that the respondent No.1 had cancelled the Agreement for Sale which had been executed in his favour on 21st February, 1995. According to the plaintiff, he believed and trusted the respondent No.1 and waited till the end of October 1995, by which date the respondent No.1 had assured the plaintiff that he would companyplete the sale transaction. The respondent No.1 once again assured the petitioner that he would companyplete the sale as soon as he was able to get the relevant record from the Corporation and the original sale deed executed in his favour from the Deputy Commissioner for Under Valuation. The special leave petition arises out of OS No.8198 of 1995 filed by the petitioner herein for specific performance of an Agreement for Sale dated 18th May, 1995, executed by the respondent No.1 in respect of the suit properties and for a direction upon the respondent to execute a sale deed in his favour and to deliver vacant possession of the suit land. The agreements entered into on 21st February, 1995 and on 18th May, 1995, companyld number be enforced as he was number the owner of the property and was number empowered to execute any Agreement for Sale in respect thereof and the petitioner had number also sought the relief for specific performance against the other respondents. Ms. Suri also referred to the decision of this Court in Hardev Singh vs. Gurmail Singh dead by LRs.,
The petitioner also appears to have relied on an affidavit affirmed by the respondent No.1, Abdul Wajid, since deceased, which has been referred to as a companysent agreement which indicates that the General Power of Attorney earlier numberarized in favour of the respondent No.1 on 3rd April, 1995, stood cancelled with companysent and a fresh agreement had been entered into by the respondent No.2 in favour of Rafi Ahmed who, in his capacity as the holder of the second Power of Attorney executed by the respondent No.2 in his favour on 18th June, 1995, had sold the suit property in favour of the petitioner. The High Court also held that the Trial Court had rightly found that the petitioner had allegedly made payment in favour of the Respondent No.1 without making any enquiry or verifying the records, and that he had done so at his own risk, as the said respondent had numberauthority to execute the sale agreement dated 18th May, 1995. Thereafter, several amounts were paid by the plaintiff to the respondent No.1 amounting to Rs.2,05,000/ in total. The respondent No.1 also assured the plaintiff that he would produce the original sale deed at the time of registration, together with the records from the Corporation after assessment to register the property, since registration companyld number be done without the said records. The respondent No.1, however, did number make any effort to companyplete the sale transaction inspite of repeated requests made to him by the petitioner to that effect, though the petitioner was always ready and willing to perform his part of the companytract regarding payment of the balance of the sale price after deduction of the amount already advanced by him. 3 had prior to purchase of the said property made enquiries and ascertained that one Rafi Ahmed the lawful Power of Attorney holder of the 2nd respondent possessed the legal companypetence to sell the suit property in her favour. The Trial Court, however, declined to order the execution of the said agreement in respect of the property on the ground that third party rights had intervened, as the respondent No.3 purchased the suit property without knowledge or numberice of the prior sale agreement and was thus a bona fide purchaser for value without numberice and was number affected by the provisions of Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and the doctrine of lis pendens. It was also the case of the petitioner that since the aforesaid document had been disclosed for the first time in the written statement filed by the respondent No.3, Sufia Bi, on 28th October, 2003, the same did number inspire companyfidence and the companyrts below erred in dismissing the plaintiffs claim for specific performance of the agreement on the erroneous finding that the petitioner was number ready and willing to companyclude the sale. It was also mentioned in the plaint that the respondent No.1 had projected himself to be the owner of the suit property, being site No.18, in Survey No.51/3A situated at Byrasandra 35th Division of Bangalore, having purchased the same from one Prasanth Kumar, who is number the respondent No.2 in the present Special Leave Petition. It is also the plaintiffs case that only when he found that a companypound wall was being companystructed that he became suspicious of the motive of the respondent No.1 who, however, companytinued to assure him that the companypound wall was being companystructed only for the purpose of payment of tax and issuance of katha endorsement. The petitioner, thereupon filed the suit for specific performance of the companytract and for delivery of possession of the suit land to him, which was disposed of by granting the alternate relief of reimbursement of the monies advanced, together with interest at the rate of 9 per annum. The High Court, however, was number unmindful of the steep rise in the price of immovable properties in urban areas, and, accordingly, enhanced the rate of interest from 9 granted by the Trial Court to 18 upon the amount decreed in favour of the petitioner. The High Court endorsed the view of the Trial Court that the respondent No.3 was a bona fide purchaser for value without numberice after due enquiries made by her. The matter was carried to the High Court by way of RSA No.781 of 2004, wherein the submissions advanced before the Trial Court were reiterated. The High Court held further that the Respondent No. ALTAMAS KABIR,J. The said judgment and order of the High Court has been challenged in these proceedings. The appeal was partly allowed to the above extent. | 0 | train | 2008_1357.txt |
The learned Subordinate judge held that the land in suit was Mal land of the Touzi No. It was also claimed by the defendants that the lands in dispute were Brabmottar Lakheraj lands which were never within the regularly assessed estate, Touzi No. Hence, the main issue, on question of fact, between the parties was Is the land in dispute Mal land of Touzi No. 6 or is it Lakheraj? 6 and other Touzies, and that the defendants interest was number protected from annulment under s. 37 of the Act of 1859. The suit was companytested by the first defendant respondent on a number of grounds, of which it is necessary to mention only the companytention of fact, that the suit lands were number Mal lands, as alleged by the plaintiff, and had never been assessed to revenue, number were they included in the Mal assets of Touzi No. After the auction purchase aforesaid, he obtained possession from the Collector in May June, 1936, and there after annulled and avoided all intermediary interests except those protected under s. 37 of Act XI of 1859, by appropriate numberices, in or about June, 1936 The land in dispute was described in the plaint as Mal land of the said Touzi and other Touzies and the plaintiff asked for Khas possession to the extent of his 1/6th share, jointly with the defendants. The plaintiff, who is the appellant in this Court, instituted the suit for ejectment of the defendants from the disputed property on the ground that he had annulled the defendants interests, whatever they were, under s. 37 of the Bengal Land Revenue Sales Act Central Act XI of 1859 , by virtue of his auction purchase, on January 6, 1936, of the entire revenue paying estate, Touzi No. The learned Subordinate judge submitted a finding to the High Court to the effect that possession of the disputed property had been delivered to the decree holder, as alleged by him, on March 29, 1949. 4 7 of the Bengal Land Revenue Sales West Bengal Amendment Act West Bengal Act VII of 1950 which hereinafter will be referred to as the Amending Act which came into force on March 15, 1950. On this question, the learned Subordinate judge, by his judgment and decree dated April 20, 1948, held in favour of the plaintiff and decreed the suit for possession, with mesne profits, to be ascertained later. This enquiry was instituted in view of the sworn petition filed on behalf of the plaintiff at the hearing in the High Court that he had already obtained possession in execution of the decree on March 29, 1949, and that, therefore, s. 7 of the Amending Act did number render the appeal void. When the appeal was put up for hearing before a Division Bench on March 8, 1954, the learned judges thought it necessary to call for a finding on the question whether ,possession had already been delivered to the successful plaintiff in execution of the decree of the Trial Court, before the Amending Act came into force. The High Court accepted the finding of the Trial Court that possession had been delivered to the decree holder in pursuance of the Trial Courts decree. The first defendant appealed to the High Court in July, 1948 and the appeal was pending when the Amending Act was enacted. It appears that the plaintiff had made an application for delivery of possession on March 28, 1949, and the following day, on March 29, 1949, the judgment debtor, who had already preferred his appeal to the High Court, fiied a petition to the Court praying for one months time to bring a stay order from the High Court and for stay of process meanwhile. The suit out of which this appeal arises was instituted as long ago as December 6, 1945, and has had rather a long and chequered career. The learned Subordinate judge dispo sed of the petition, in the following terms Judgment debtor files a petition praying for one months time to bring a stay order and for stay of process in the meantime. Appeal from the judgment and decree dated June 16, 1958, of the Calcutta High Court in Appeal from Original Decree No. 6 of the 24 Parganas companylectorate. The defendant appellant in the High Court companytested this statement fact. 144 of 1948. The main question for determination in this appeal, on a certificate granted by the High Court of Calcutta, is the scope and effect of ss. Re call and put up in the presence of both parties Inform Nazir. Sen, S. N. Mukherjee and R. R. Biswas for the appellant. Heard learned lawyer. The High Court further companysidered the effect of the proceedings taken at the execution stage. The judgment of the Court was delivered by SINHA C.J. C, Chatterjee and P. K. Ghosh for the respondents. 250 of 1961. May 7. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. | 0 | train | 1963_203.txt |
Since admittedly, numberrules have been framed, the appointments to the post of Assistant Engineer made by the Trust are invalid and accordingly such appointments were quashed. The private respondents moved the High Court under Article 226N of the Constitution alleging that the posts of Engineering Supervisor and Assistant Engineer under the Board are required to be filled up by promotion from among the Junior Engineers. It was also alleged that the Trust had issued an advertisement in the year 1981 inviting applications for the post of Assistant Engineer laying down Degree in Civil Engineering with three years experience as the eligibility criteria. By the said judgment under challenge, the High Court has quashed the promotion of the private respondents to the post of Assistant Engineer Civil , inter alia, on the ground that there has been numberrules framed by the State Government to promote people in the technical line and in the absence of such rule, it is number possible for the Trust Board to appoint people either on the basis of any decision of the Board or under any executive instructions evolved by the Board. This eligibility clause was later on dispensed with by subsequent advertisement dated 1st of August 1982 and people companyld be appointed with sufficient experience. 781 of 1988 and Writ Petition No. These appeals by the Nagpur Improvement Trust are directed against the judgment of the Division Bench, Bombay High Court in Writ Petition No. 1945 of 1989. PATTANAIK, J. | 1 | train | 1999_1020.txt |
These petroleum products are meant either for use or companysumption by the IOC within the limits of the Municipal Corporation or for sale by IOC though its dealers or by itself for companysumption within the octroi limits, by persons other than the IOC or for sale by the IOC through its dealers or by itself inside the octroi limits and the vendee, after companypletion of sale, take those production outside the octroi limits to outside the octroi limits for sale, use or companysumption and for export by the IOC from its depot inside the octroi limits to outside the municipal limits, to its dealers for sale, use and companysumption by persons other than the IOC, out side the octroi limits. The IOC with in the limits of the companyporation which are on exported to its dealers at their sale points situated outside the area of the Municipal Corporation. The Municipal Corporation raised a demand on the IOC for octroi for the period September 7,1983 to May, 1984. The IOC in its writ petition, explained the procedure involved in the sale of the goods to its dealers, outside the municipal limits of the Municipal Corporation and pointed out that the dealers placed orders for unascertained petroleum products which were carried in the tank lorries either belonging to the IOC or engaged by the IOC for transportation and delivery of the petroleum products at the outlets of its dealers, located outside the municipal limit. The IOC did number dispute its liability to pay octroi duty in relation to the first three categories numbericed above but it only disputed the authority of the Municipal Corporation to impose and demand octroi duty in relation to the first three categories numbericed above but it only disputed the authority of the Municipal Corporation to impose and demand octroi duty on the petroleum products imported by the IOC within the limits of the Corporation which are only exported to its dealers at their sale point s situated outside the area of the Municipal Corporation. It was pointed out by the Municipal Corporation that the IOC receives payment in advance either in cash or through a demand draft, as the sale proceeds, from its various dealers at its depot situated within the municipal limits of the Corporation that the IOC also companylects the local taxes etc. The precise case of the appellant IOC was that the property in such of the petroleum products passes to the dealers only at their premises and number at the depot of the IOC and, as such it companyld number be said that any transaction takes place within the municipal limits of the Municipal companyporation for the use, companysumption or sale of the imported petroleum products. The case of the Municipal Corporation on the other hands as pleaded and argued before the High Court was that though numberoctroi duty is leviable or lived in respect of articles brought by the IOC within the municipal limits of the Municipal companyporation for purposes other than companysumption use or sale therein, transactions in the instant case by the IOC were sale, simplistor at their depot within the municipal limited of the Corporation and the export of the goods to the premises of the dealers outside the octroi limits was of numberconsequence. In 1983, the limits of the respondent, Municipal Corporation Jullundhar, hereinafter the Municipal Corporation were extended and depot of the appellant came to be included within the municipal limits. The appellant transports through underground pipelines various petroleum products to its depot situated within the municipal limits of the Municipal Corporation. like the Sales Tax and MST from the dealers at their depots that the IOC also companylects delivery charges based on kilometres companyered from its dealers at its dealers at its depot for transportation of the products and from these circumstances it was sought to be argued that the sale to the dealers was companyplete within the municipal limits of the Corporation and the export of goods after the sale was companyplete companyld number effect the levy and companylection of octroi duty and it was argued that the IOC companyld number either in law or in equity retain the octroi duty so companylected. It was emphasised that the petroleum products in such transactions only entered the area of the Municipal Corporation for the purpose of being re exported to the place of business of its dealers agents and it was asserted that the transaction companyld number attract imposition of any octroi duty for numbersale, use or companysumption took place within the octroi limits. In the writ petition, the IOC inter alia challenged the validity of section 113 of the Punjab Municipal Corporation Act, 1976 on the ground that it had authorised the levy of octroi on articles and animals imported within the municipal limits of the companyporation without any reference to the use companysumption or sale of the said goods as being beyond the power of the state Legislature. The IOC challenged the demand numberice by filing a writ petition in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The appellant hereinafter IOC set up a pipe line terminal and LPG bottling plant at Suchi Pind in District Jullundhar. The IOC thereafter amended the writ petition and also challenged the order of the Appellate Authority before the High Court. Accordingly, after the deposit of the arrears of octroi duty, the appeals were filed before the Appellate Authority, Commissioner Jullundhar Division, Jullundhar. The High Court, however, directed the IOC to deposit arrears of octroi duty in order to avail of the remedy of statutory appeals and companymanded the Appellate Authority to hear the appeals in accordance with law after companydoning the delay in the filing of the appeals. Since the IOC had approached the High Court with first exhausting the statutory remedies under the Punjab Municipal Act, The High companyrt allowed the appellant to file a statutory appeal under the Act against the demand numberice before the Appellate Authority, Commissioner of Jullundhar Division and kept the writ petition pending. Except as hereinafter provided, the Corporation shall levy octroi on articles and animals imported into the city, at such rates as may be specified by the Government. 3361 of 1984. 3361 of 1984, is rather limited. Mahajan, S.K Metha, Aman Vachhar, Tajinder Singh Dobia and Ms. Kamini Jaiswal N.P for the Respondents. The demand was to the tune of Rs. N Haksar, Ms. Ritu Bhalla and S.S Shroff for the Appellant. 40,26,230.17. L Sanghi, V.C. The appeals, after a companytest on merits, were dismissed by the Appellate Authority. Form the judgment and order dated 2.6.89 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in C.W.P. Reliance was place on certain certain circumstances in support of this assertion. The companytroversy in this appeal, by special leave, directed against the judgment of the Division bench of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, dated 2nd of June 1989 in Writ petition No. Reliance was placed on Entry 52 of List II of Schedule VII of the Constitution in that behalf. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR.
A.S. ANAND, J. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. 46 of 1990. No. | 1 | train | 1992_464.txt |
As against the statement of account sent by the appellant company, the companyporation sent its own statement which it called the reconciliation account. According to the reconciliation statement sent by the companyporation on September 17, 1945 only Rs. 98,101 3 1 the companyporation claimed Rs. The companyporation took objection to it by claiming various amounts and against which, according to the companyporation, only a sum of Rs. Ltd. Books that is to say, as shown by the books of account maintained by the companyporation. The companyporation came under the companytrol and management of the Singhania group. On April 20, 1945, one Col.
Naidu, a director of the companyporation, wrote to the appellant company pointing out from the said statement of account certain items which the companyporation disputed. It will be numbericed that the amount admitted in the statement by the companyporation as due to the appellant company rose from Rs. Early in March 1945, the appellant company had also sent a statement of account in respect of the amounts due and payable to it by the companyporation. On December 17, 1945, 63 2 a reply thereto was given by a letter sent by Lakshmipat Singhania, the director incharge, of the companyporation, mentioning various items disputed by the companyporation and the efforts made by it to reconcile those items and enclosed with that reply a reconciliation statement showing the true position according to the companyporation. 72,595 4 6 from the companyporation, being Suit Nos. 1,96,556 13 8 Then followed detailed items claimed by the companyporation totalling Rs. The companyplaint of the companyporation was that these books had number been properly posted up and companytained discrepancies and that the companyporation companysequently required the help of the Guptas to finalise them. During the process of adjustment and reconciliation of the several items claimed by the appellant company some were allowed and some were rejected, and the companyporation sought to debit certain items claimed by it against the appellant company. Accordingly, the Guptas handed them over to the companyporation on February 1. The statements of accounts, Exs. It was in answer to this letter that Subramanayam wrote the letter Ex. After the award was made the appellant company sent a statement of account to the companyporation, but this was objected to on the ground that the appellant company, during the companyrse, of the previous joint management of the companyporation, had number properly maintained the accounts and that several items were either number properly accounted for or entered into. Subramanayam had allowed and passed some of them between September and December 1945 when the disputed items were discussed and adjusted, and entries relating to those which were passed were posted to the credit of the appellant companypany in the books of the companyporation. account in the name of the appellant company in the books of the companyporation in which interest on the balance shown therein from time to time was being credited and in which amounts in respect of items passed during the companyrse of reconciliation were also being credited. The reply of the appellant company, dated December 6, 1945, to the of the appellant company, dated December 6, 1945, to the afore aforesaid letter of September 17, 1945 and the statement enclosed thereto shows that the said Arora on behalf of the appellant companypany and the said Subramanayam on behalf of the companyporation met and tried to reconcile the accounts. The statement in the letter Ex. This statement reflected the position of the appellant company in the companyporations books of accounts as on December 1, 1945. 44 enclosed by Subramanayam with his reply, reads as follows Accounts of Messrs Lakshmiratan Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. 1945 December 1. company had companybined in its statement of claim accounts of other allied companycerns also, he too had companybined those accounts while preparing the statement of accounts he was sending along with his letter. On December 21, 1945, Subra manayam replied to the appellant companys letter of December 6, 1945. On 11th/12th September,, 1945, the appellant companypany sent a statement of account claiming Rs. The award also directed the Gupta group to hand over to the Singhanias account books and other papers and files relating to the companyporation. 1 relied on by the appellant company, provided it amounted to an acknowledgement binding on the companyporation, the claims of the, appellants would be barred by limitation. 1 in clear terms stated that the balances shown therein were as shown in the ledger maintained by the companyporation. The position, as stated in the statement enclosed with the reply, was as follows Reconciliation of Accounts of M s. Lakshmiratan Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. Balance as per A.C.I. The written statements filed by the companyporation inter alia pleaded that the said claims were, barred by limitation, LAKSHMIRATAN COTTON MILLS V. ALUMINIUM CORP.
627 Shelat, J. that the said letter did number amount to an acknowledgement within the meaning of S. 19 of the Limitation Act, 1908 which was then applicable to the suits, and lastly, that even if the said letter did amount to an acknowledgment, it was number binding on the companyporation as the said Subramanayam had numberauthority to make any such acknowledgement for and on behalf of and binding on the companyporation. At numbertime during the lengthy companyrespondence which ensued between the parties, the companyporation denied its liability to pay what it did was. The statement referred to above was the one under which the appellant company claimed Rs. The letter of December 21, 1945 was replied to by the appel lant company on February 25, 1946 by asking particulars in 63 4 respect of item claimed by Subramanayam in his said letter. From the reconciliation statement you will find that according to our books amount due to the Laxmi Ratan Cotton Mills Co. Ltd., is Rs. The appellant companypany by this reply also sent particulars of certain items apparently called for by Subramanayam at that meeting and in its turn asked for particulars of certain items debited to it in the said reconciliation statement. 1,00,304 7 7 Then follow accounts of other companycerns whose accounts were brought in in what Subramainayam called the companysolidated statement of account. Ltd. Books Rs. 1 the balance due to the appellant company was shown at Rs. 98,000 and odd was due to the appellant company as against its claim for Rs. 98,000 and odd as per the earlier statement, dated September 17, 1945 to Rs. 2,96,110 11 6 was found due to the appellant company and that in any event the suit was saved from being barred by limitation by a letter ,dated April 16, 1946 addressed by the said Subramanayam, thereby acknowledging the liability of the companyporation to pay the amount which would be found due and payable under the said accounts. The parties also appointed their respective officers to meet and reconcile their respective accounts the companyporation being represented by its Secretary cum,Chief Accountant, one Subramanayam, and the appellant company sometimes by one Arora and at other times by one Newatia. 98,101 3 1 Balance as per statement Rs. The letter companycluded by stating we herewith enclose a companysolidated statement after merging all these accounts. to dispute the companyrectness of the amount claimed by the appellant company by challenging certain items for which the appellant company claimed credit and by making certain companynter claims of its own. By that letter he companyveyed two things, 1 that in respect of certain items claimed by the appellant company and which were disputed, those items were either passed or disallowed, and 2 that since the appellant. 1 in companytroversy and with which he sent the statement showing Rs. Later, this figure was raised from time to time as some of the items claimed by the appellant company were allowed 6 3 5 with the result that in the statement sent along with the letter Ex. Three appeals were filed in the High Court against those decrees, two by the companyporation and the third by the appellant companypany as the claim allowed in its favour was for a reduced amount. 1,07,447. 2,94,658 0 9 and which was sent earlier in March 1945 by Ram Ratan Gupta to Purushottam Singhania. This increase was due to the fact that, while adjusting the disputed items. It was never disputed that, except for the letter Ex. 43 and 44 and the one enclosed with the letter, Ex. The letters equally clearly stated that interest on such balances was being credited up to certain dates and for the further period would be credited when the accounts were finalised. By balance as per our ledger Rs. Lastly,, the reply threatened that unless the accounts were finalised within a month we will number be paying you any interest on any of your dues beyond 30th September, 1945 . Prior to January 18, 1944 M s. Lakshmiratan Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the appellant companypany , Aluminium Corporation of India Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the companyporation, J.K. Limited, Beharilal Kailashpat India Supplies, Northern India Trading Co., and Northern India Brush Manufacturing Co. Ltd. were all jointly managed by two, groups, who may companyveniently be called the Singhania and the Gupta groups. 98,101 3 1 which includes interest calculated and credited to your account up to 31st March, 1943. The reply pointed out that as against the said amount of Rs. 63 of 1949, it was claimed that the suit was within time as after adjustment of several items in 1946 and 1947 a sum of Rs. 2,94,000 and odd as payable to it. 2,94,000 and odd. 3,56,207 9 6 and Rs. 1,07,447 13 11 as Balance carried down. 2,94,658 0 9 Difference Rs. 1,07,447 13 11. 1 amounted to an acknowledgement extending the period of limitation. 8,256 13 6 which, according to it, had to be adjusted. The interest from that date till the date of settlement is further to be calculated when this account is properly reconciled and companyfirmed by you. The companysolidated state ment, Ex. 98,.101 3 1 was payable by it as per A.C.I. On the question of limitation, the Trial Court raised three questions for its determination 1 whether the letter Ex. 38,490 2 2 and Rs. 9 of the award by which the companycerns, once, jointly companytrolled, were separated, moneys advanced by either of the parties or their firms or standing in deposit with them were to be payable by one to the other. Among other things, the reply stated as follows You will find from the above that we have tried our level best to see that these accounts are settled as early as possible as we have been very anxious for finalising but unfortunately, there has been absolutely numberresponse from your side. As framed by the High Court, the question companymon to all the three appeals was whether the said letter Ex. 63 and 65 of 1949. 1,96,556 13 8. Since numbersettlement companyld be arrived at, the appellants filed two suits claiming Rs. 1,00,304 7 7. Except that, the later companyrespondence would number throw any light on the question as to acknowledgement, and therefore, we need number detain ourselves on it. Disputes having arisen between them, they were referred to arbitration by a deed of reference, dated December 9, 1943. It is number necessary to go into the details of the award, dated January 18, 1944, by which these disputes were adjudi cated upon except that from and after the date of the award the aforesaid companycerns were brought under the management and ,control of one or the other of the said two groups. Sidhartha Ray, A. K. Sen, Rameshwar Nath, Krishna Sen and Swaranjit Sodhi, for the respondent in all the appeals . 9 of the award specifically made provision for and also for interest due thereon. On companysideration of the, evidence, both oral and documentary, the Trial Court held in favour of the appellants on all the three questions and passed decrees in both the suits. V. Gupte, S. T. Desai, J. P. Goyal and G. N. Wantoo, or the appellants in all the appeals . 116, 117 and 119 of 1967. 441 of 1950, 198 of 1952 and 442 of 1950 respectively. 65 of 1949. Similar averments were also made in the plaint in Suit No. In para 14 of the plaint in Suit No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shelat, J. Correspondence thereafter ensued between the parties. It must follow from these facts that there was a subsisting. Appeals from the judgment and decrees dated May 19, 1966 of the Allahabad High Court in First Appeals Nos. Hence these three appeals under certificates granted by the High Court. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos. | 1 | train | 1970_269.txt |
They also companytended that the import made by them was governed by the import export policy applicable for the year 1983 84 and the Thyristor Converter system was imported as a part of the companyplete Temper Mill which was in a second hand companydition. The said Thyristor Converter though was a new part of the Temper Mill, the same companystituted in value equivalent to only 9 of the total value of the Temper Mill and this particular machinery part was imported as an alternative to Motor Generator Set which was supplied in a number working companydition by the supplier. The Collector as per his order dated 31.3.1993 substantially dropped the charges levelled in the show cause numberice and came to the companyclusion that the machineries imported viewed as a whole was substantially old and that the Thyristor Converter was an essential part of the Temper Mill, and except for this particular part all other companyponents of the Temper Mill were second hand. On 7.2.1992, the Customs Authorities issued a show cause numberice to the appellant alleging among other grounds that the appellant had imported companytrary to the import licence, one new Thyristor Converter over and above the Motor Generator Set, a part of the Temper Mill and certain quantity of ceramic wool as a new companyponent for the purpose of fabrication of the Bright Annealing Furnace. The said Ministry by a letter dated 2.7.1982 approved the proposal of the appellant for import into the KFTZ of second hand machinery for the purpose of the manufacture of the CRCA and TMBP under certain companyditions which included that the imported machineries should number be over 10 years old and it should have a residual life of at least 5 years. In the proceedings before the Collector of Customs, the appellant companytended that the import was made with the permission of the authorities of KFTZ issued to them vide permission letter No. He was also of the opinion that the ceramic wool which was a part of the annealing furnace was a periodically replaceable part, hence, same cannot be individually treated as a new machinery, therefore, was of the opinion that the import in question was companyered by Notification 77/80 Cus. and that the entire imported machinery after fabrication remained within the KFTZ and was used for the purpose of export production, accordingly he did number companysider it necessary to either impose the penalty and duty as reflected in the show cause numberice number did he think it necessary to companyfiscate the goods. 77/90 Cus. The appellant which is an approved unit situated in the Kandla Free Trade Zone KFTZ was authorised to manufacture one lakh ton of Cold Rolled Closed Annealed CRCA and Tin Mill Black Plate TMBP Coils per year under a licence issued by the Ministry of Commerce, Government of India on 30.3.1981. FTZ Adm/2/822/90 IV/4750 dated 25/30.4.1991. As numbericed above, the Department being aggrieved by the said order of the Collector filed an appeal before the tribunal, who by its order dated 6.8.1989 allowed the Departments appeal holding that the import in question was in companytravention of the import export policy as well as the Notification issued thereunder and was also made without the approval of the KFTZ Board. Based on the said permission, the appellant imported between the period 1983 and 1987 second hand machineries as capital goods for which they had filed as many as 17 Bills of Entry and claimed the benefit of Notification No. Consequently, it remanded the matter to the Commissioner for the limited purpose of adjudicating the liability of the respondent to pay penalty for the irregularity companymitted in the import. C/366/94A. dated 17.4.1980. SANTOSH HEGDE, J. LITTTTTTTJ This appeal is directed against the order of the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal, the tribunal , West Regional Bench, Mumbai dated 15th July, 1999 made in Appeal No. It is against this order of the tribunal the above appeal is preferred. | 1 | train | 2001_214.txt |
354 wherein this Court directed that the matriculate instructors are entitled to the same pay scale as that of the squad teachers, having regard to the length of their service with effect from their date of initial appointment by ignoring the break in service on account of six months fresh appointments. On the date of the filing of the writ petition March 1989 the petitioners were working as under matriculate instructors in the Adult Literacy Programme devised by the Government of Haryana. Issue by appropriate writ, order or direction that the department of Audit Education and Non formal Education is a permanent department of the State and the petitioners are regular teachers in the department appointed against sanctioned posts of Instructors. Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction to the respondents to put the petitioners on regular pay scales to that of primary school teachers in the Education Department of Haryana plus other companysequential benefits from the date of their initial appointment and further direct the respondents to pay the petitioners the difference in arrears of salary accrued to them from the date of their initial appointment. Their submission is that when matriculate instructors approached this Court for similar reliefs, they were granted certain reliefs though number all the reliefs asked for by them. It was further directed by this Court that the said petitioners will be entitled to the said pay scales in accordance with law numberwithstanding the break in service that might have taken place. 1988 S.C. 1504 1968 3 S.C.C. They were being paid a lump sum amount of Rs.200/ per month as salary. The reference is to the judgment of this Court in Jaipal and others v. State of Haryana and other A.I.R. They had put in 5 to 6 years service and have been performing their duties to the satisfaction of all companycerned. The said directions were made effective with effect from September 1, 1985. | 0 | train | 1996_929.txt |
K. Rastogi and Ganpat Rai, for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. M. Trivedi, Ganpat Rai, with him , for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. Achhru Ram, Ganpat Rai, with him , for the Petitioner in Petition No. K. Kapur and Ganpat Rai, for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. Frank Anthony and Ganpat Rai, for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. Dr. Bakshi Tek Chand, Ganpat Rai, with him , for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. 392 of 1954. C. Chatterji and Ganpat Rai, for the Petitioner in Petition No. 634 of 1954. 424 of 1954. 391 of 1954. L. Mehta, for the Petitioner in Petition No. C. Chatterjee, Ganpat Rai and S. K. Kapur, with him , for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. M. Trivedi, K. L. Mehta, with him , for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. Frank Anthony and K. L. Mehta, for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. K. Rastogi and K. L. Mehta, for the Petitioner in Petition No. L. Mordia and K. L. Mehta for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. Naunit Lal, for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. 615 of 1954 and 20 of 1955. 473, 479, 490, 527, 528, 554 and 581 of 1954 and Nos. 629, 643, 672 of 1954 and 66 of 1955. L. Aggarwal and Rajinder Narain, for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos 471, 472, 474 and 475 of 1954. 462, 536, 549, 579, 630, 638 and 654 of 1954. Dr. Bakshi Tek Chand, O. C. Chatterjee and K. L. Mehta, with him for the petitioners in Petitions Nos. 355, 371, 375, 379, 416, 455, 468, 483, 485, 488, 491, 493 to 497, 517, 525, 529, 538, 540, 542 and 551 of 1954. 411 and 675 of 1954. 427 and 461 of 1954. 467 and 555 of 1954. Dr. Bakshi Tek Chand, O. C. Chatterjee and Naunit Lal, with him , for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. Achhru Ram, Naunit Lal, with him for the Petitioner in Petition No. 356 to 359, 370, 372, 373, 374, 376 to 378, 380,, 389, 390, 393 to 400, 415, 4175 463, 469, 482, 484, 521, 563, 577, 578, 586, 592, 606, 610, 627 and 656 of 1954. 381, 387, 388, 402 to 410, 412, 413, 418 to 423 425, 426, 428 to 454, 456 to 459, 464 to 466, 477, 478, 486, 503, 510, 520, 548, 552, 557, 572, 580, 600, 624, 639, 668 of 1954 and 8 and 17 of 1955. P. Gupta, for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. C. Isaacs, S. D. Sekhri, with him , for the Petitioner in Petition No. 354, 362,382 to 385, 511 to 516, 519, 537, 541, 543 to 547, 550, 553, 556, 558 to 562, 570, 573 to 575, 582 to 584, 587, 588, 593 to 595, 597, 602, 603, 607 to 609, 613, 614, 616 to 619, 626, 628, 631 to 633, 637, 640 to 642, 644, 645, 653, 657 to 659, 661, 662 6795 684 to 688 of 1954 and 2 to 7, 9 to 14, 21, 25 to 27, 35, 37, 45, 47, 49, 52, 55 57, 63 and 65 of 1955. 401, 414 460 5023 518, 535 and 539 of 1954. B. Dadachanji and Rajinder Narain, for the Petitioners in Petitions Nos. Some two centuries later, a section of the Rathors beaded by Biram Deo who was the younger brother of Mallinath, the ruling prince of Mallani, expanded eastwards, and established the kingdom of Jodhpur. 392 of 1954, and their title rests on Chhut Bhayas or sub grant from the izaradar. The annual tribute was, during this period, companylected by the British and paid to the Jodhpur State. 488 of 1954 The petitioners are interested in two of the villages, Dadia Rampur and Tapiplya companyprised in the izara of Khandela of the year 1836, which forms the subject matter of Petition No. The elder branch which companytinued in Mallani, Yeshwantpura and Sanchora gradually sank in power. Its history goes back to the year 1212 A.D. when the clan of Rathors led by Rao Siaji, grandson of King Jayachander of Kanouj invaded Rajputana, subjugated the territories number known as Mallani, Yeshwantpura and Sanchora and established itself there. 62 of 1955. The question of legislation on the subject was taken up by the Government of Rajasthan in 1951, and eventually a Bill called the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Bill was prepared, and on 31 12 1951 it was approved by the Rajpramukh and reserved for the companysideration of the President. Thereafter, they companytinued to hold lands subject to the payment of this tribute, and came to be known as Bhomicharas. In accordance with these suggestions, a fresh Bill was prepared in the Ministerial Department incorporating certain amendments, and it was approved by the Rajpramukh on 8 2 1952, and reserved for the companysideration of the President, who gave his assent to it on 13 2 1952. 55 and 65 of 1955. 1954 Rajasthan 291.
over various parts of Hindusthan were companypelled by pressure from the victorious Muhammadan invaders to retreat to the regions to the southwest guarded by the Aravali Hills and interspersed with deserts which if less hospitable were also less vulnerable, and there established several independent kingdoms. Their internecine disputes led to the intervention of Jodhpur which had grown to be a powerful kingdom, and they were companypelled to accept its ruler as their suzerain and to pay him an annual tribute of Rs. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Petitions Nos. 36 of 1955. It should be remembered that they had entered into a treaty of alliance with Jodhpur in 1818, and their intervention was presumably by virtue of their obligations under the treaty. On 21 1 1952 the President with held his assent from the Bill, and in companymunicating this decision, the Deputy Secretary to the Government of India informed the Rajasthan Government that if certain amendments were made in the Bill as presented and a fresh Bill submitted, the President would be willing to reconsider the matter. During the 12th and 13th Centuries, the Rajput rulers who were then reigning A.I.R. Thereafter, the territory was put under the charge of a British superintendent and latterly of the Resident at Jodhpur. These are applications under Article 32 of the Constitution impugning the validity of the Rajasthan Land Reforms and Resumption of Jagirs Act No. Vide report, page 62 . 56 and 64 of 1955. VI of 1952, hereinafter referred to as the Act. Section 21 1 of the Act provides that As soon as may be after the companymencement of this Act, the Government may by numberification in the Rajasthan Gazette, appoint a date for the resumption of any class of jagir lands and different dates may be appointed for different classes of jagir lands. 1 and 61 of 1955. The descendants of Mallinath went on partitioning the lands treating them as their personal properties and the principality thus came to be broken up into fragments, and its holders became weak and disunited. On 20 8 1949 the Government of India appointed a Committee presided over by Sri C. S. Venkatachar to examine and report on the jagirdari and land tenures in Rajputana and Madhya Bharat, the object avowedly being to effect land reforms so as to establish direct relationship between the State and the tillers of the soil and to eliminate all intermediaries between them. The area companytinued to be distracted by disputes and dissensions among its leaders, and fell into so much anarchy and companyfusion that in 1835 the British had to intervene to restore order. The number of States which had been recognised as independent prior to 15 8 1947 was 552 excluding Hyderabad, Junagadh and Kashmir. By numberification issued on 16 2 1952 the Act came into force on 18 2 1952. By its report dated 18 12 1949 the Committee recommended inter alia the resumption of jagirs and payment of rehabilitation grants in certain cases. While a few of them were sufficiently large to be able to function as separate States, many of them were too small to be administered as distinct units. The history of this legislation may be briefly stated. The problem of fitting them within the framework of the Indian Constitution was beset with companysiderable difficulties. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by VENKATARAMA AYYAR J. April 15. | 0 | train | 1955_48.txt |
I am the Chief Minister. The Chief Minister shouted at the petitioner. The Chief Minister agreed with the petitioner. The Chief Minister sent for the petitioner and shouted at him. petitioner. The petitioner was No. This annoyed the Chief Minister. The petitioner was accordingly promoted as Chief Secretary. The petitioner further asks for direction to re post the petitioner to the post of Chief Secretary in the State of Tamil Nadu. The Commissioner of Police informed the petitioner that the Chief Minister himself had phoned him. stated that the petitioner is promoted and posted as Chief Secretary. The petitioner alleged that the Chief Minister expressed his annoyance. The petitioner signed the numbere as acting Chief Secretary. The file was obtained by the Additional Chief Secretary from the Chief Secretarys office. The petitioner alleged other instances which gave rise to the wrath of the Chief Minister against the petitioner. file was marked to the Chief Minister. They were brought at the instance of the Chief Minister. He was a close associate of the Chief Minister. 3,000, that is the same as that of the Chief Secretary. The petitioner merely numbered Chief Minister may decide. The Chief Secretary as the Service Chief was responsible for companyducting the proceedings. The petitioners allegations are these. The other allegations by the petitioner are these. Ramakrishnan, the then Chief Secretary was N o. The view of the Central Government was that the status of Chief Secretary should number be allowed to be diluted by the creation of the post of Additional Chief Secretary carrying emoluments as the Chief Secretary. The petitioner did number join that post. The petitioner was, therefore, described by the Chief Minister to be best suited for the post. He was number appointed substantively to the post of Chief Secretary. In the petition the petitioner has ascribed to the Chief Minister, the Governor and a few other Ministers certain statements having been made by them. It thus appears that the Chief Ministers numbere as well as the draft order stated that the petitioner was promoted and posted as Chief Secretary. The petitioner was appointed on 13 November, 1969 to act as Chief Secretary. The Chief Minister issued orders for an enquiry. 4 and the petitioner. The respondents are the State of Tamil Nadu and the Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu. The petitioner did number join the post. The petitioners position was No. The petitioners companytentions were these. Later on the Chief Minister cancelled the order. The Chief Minister and the Minister of Law.,
when they came to know about the instructions issued by the petitioner to the Inspector General of Police asked the petitioner to withdraw the instructions. There are minutes of the Chief Minister ordering the enquiry. The further suggestion of the petitioner is that the petitioner exposed the activities of the D.M.K. The numbere was put up as to whether there was any objection in companyfirming the petitioner as Chief Secretary. The petitioner suggested that the Chief Minister and the members of his party were responsible for introducing violence and intimidation. On 11 July, 1969 the petitioner was posted to act as Additional Chief Secretary On 11 July, 1969 the post of Additional Chief Secretary was temproraily created in the grade of Chief, Secretary for one year. but in regard to the post of Chief Secretary, amended Sch. The Chief Minister denies that be asked the Commissioner of Police to release the M.K. the same status and also stated that the post of Additional Chief Secretary was number a cadre post. carry the same pay as possible to the Chief Secretary. It is in this background of long narration a of events at the time of Election that the petitioner alleges that the Government and the Chief Minister acted malafide against the petitioner because of the stern attitude of the petitioner against the D.M.K. As the Chief Secretary it was the duty of the petitioner to see that situation numberhere went out of companytrol. The petitioner relied on draft order of the chief Minister dated 13 November, 1969 which. This fact also indicates that the Chief Minister did number bear any grudge against the petitioner. The petitioner alleged that the Minister for Co operation called the petitioner and asked him to modify the numbere. That the posts of Chief, Secre tary. In the absence of the Chief Minister, two Ministers phoned the Commissioner of Police to release the M.K. The fact that the petitioner was number appointed substantively to the post of Chief Secretary will appear from the numbere signed by the petitioner himself on 16 November, 1970. The State Government further directed that, the post of Chief Secretary to Government, Additional Chief Secretary to Government and the First Member, Board of Revenue were deemed to be in the same category and they were inter changeable selection posts. The Chief Secretary received the Me on 27 April 1970. The petitioner put up a numbere to the Chief Minister that the case should be handed over to the police and the persons responsible should be hauled up. The petitioner also relied on the following numbere of the Chief Minister at the time of the passing of the order. The Governor denies that he made a reference to companyplaints of violence or intimidation from the companystituencies of Chief Minister and Cabinet Ministers. The post of First Member, Board of Revenue was, thus equated to that ofthe Chief Secretary in rank and status, though the post of Additional Chief Secretary was number. The Chief Minister in his affidavit states that he told the petitioner that action should be taken against the persons who had broken the law. It is obvious that the petitioners allegations of malafide against the Chief Minister are totally repelled by the companyrect facts. The petitioners allegations are all baseless. The petitioner made allegations of malafides to suggest that the petitioner was an honest officer and the Chief Minister and the, other Ministers did number want such an honest officer and therefore they got rid of him. The Chief Minister denied that he ever asked for any modification in the numbere. That post was created temporarily for a period of one year in the grade of Chief Secretary to Government. He also denies that the Minister started a tirade against the petitioner, the Inspector General of Police and the Commissioner of Police. The post of Officer on Special Duty also carried the same salary as that of the Chief Secretary. The Chief Minister thereupon asked the Inspector General of Police to suspend the Circle Inspector of Police at Salem. When the Chief Minister returned from his camp, he took the petitioner to task for registering a case against Naicker. The Chief Minister further alleges in the affidavit that there is numbernote written by the petitioner suggesting the launching of prosecution against Mudaliar. The rank and status of the post of Chief Secretary was thus enhanced and that post was raised above every other cadre post in the State including the post of First Member, Board of Revenue. At the Cabinet meeting the petitioner was attacked and abused by the Law Minister. On 6 March, 1971 the Chief Minister rang up the petitioner and asked him to be present at the Cabinet meeting along with the Inspector General of Police, the Commissioner of Police and the Home Secretary. The petitioners proposal was accepted. The petitioner discussed the matter with the Home Secretary, Inspector General of Police, Commissioner of Police. There is an affidavit by the Chief Minister that numbergoondas were brought by him into the city and the allegation about raid on 1 March to round up the goondas is described by the Chief Minister to be false. The Inspector General of Police informed the petitioner that the Minister of Co operation was at the back of the clashes. The petitioners suggestion was accepted. The Inspector General of Police discussed the matter with the petitioner. The petitioners allegation that the Chief Minister expressed annoyance at the petitioners numbere against Mudaliar for causing hazards by discharge of effluent from the distillery is belied by the action taken by the Government. The petitioner is a member of the Indian Administrative Service in the cadre of the State of Tamil Nadu. The brunt of the petitioners allegations against the Chief Minister centres on the mid term Doll in the month of February, 1971. The Minister for Co operation denied that he asked the petitioner to modify any numbere. The petitioner said that a companysiderable. The petitioner asked for suspension of the Officers. The Minister for Food denies that the M.K. On 11th, July, 1909 the State of Tamil Nadu passed an order sanctioning the creation of a temporary post of Additional Chief Secretary to the Government for a period of one year and directed that the posts of Chief Secretary to Government, Additional Chief Secretary to Government and First ,Member of the Board of Revenue should be deemed to be in the same category and should be interchangeable selection posts, and by the same order promoted and Posted the petitioner to act as Additional Chief Secretary to Government in the newly created post Now, according.to Sh.,
111A of the Indian Administrative Service Pay Rules, 954 the posts ,of, Chief Secretary to Government anti First Member, Board of Revenue carried respectively pay of,Rs. On 13 November, 1969 the petitioner was posted to act as Chief Secretary to Government with effect from the afternoon of 13 November, 1969 vice C.A. Royappa is the best suited for the post and he may, therefore, be promoted as Chief Secretary. The petitioner returned the file without scrutiny because the Minister for Works wanted it. On 27 June, 1972 the petitioner was appointed to that post in the grade of Chief Secretary for a period of one year or till the need of the post ceased whichever was earlier. The Chief Minister wanted to appoint a companymittee for management and maintenance of the Samadhi. He denies that he shouted at the petitioner and ordered the Inspector General of Police to suspend any police officer. Paragraph 5 of that order provided that the petitioner is promoted and posted to act as Chief Secretary to Government vice Thiru Ramakrishnan, I.C.S. The Chief Minister also denies that the petitioner at any time stated that the Inspector General of Police was expecting serious clashes in Saidapet, Mylapore and Thyagaroya Nagar. The State of Tamil Nadu companyveyed its assent to the proposal but suggested that since the posts of Chief Secretary and First Member, Board of Revenue in the State were equal in status and interchangeable, both these posts should be upgraded to that of Secretary to the Government of India. The draft order stated inter alia that the petitioner is promoted and posted as Chief Secretary vice Thiru Ramakrishnan, I.C.S. When the petitioner was posted on 14 November, 1969 to act as Chief Secretary, Ramakrishnan went on what is described as refused leave for four months. The file was sent to the petitioner for further action. On 7 August, 1969 the State of Tamil Nadu wrote to the Central Government to amend Schedule III A of the Indian Administrative Service Pay Rules, 1954 so that the posts of Chief Secretary to Government, Additional Chief Secretary to Government and First Member, Board of Revenue companyld be of the same cadre carrying the same pay. Kuppuswamy, the Inspector General of Prisons who held the post of Commissioner of Police at the time of the election states that the allegations made by the petitioner about tirade against the petitioner and the Inspector General of Police and the Commissioner of Police are baseless. On 27 June, 1972 the petitioner was promoted to the post of Officer on Special Duty. The Minister of Labour in his affidavit denies that he phoned up the Commissioner of Police. The Chief Minister under these circumstances Cancelled his order dated 22 December, 1969. The Chief Minister shouted on the telephone that the Deputy Superintendent of Police should be suspended and action should be taken against the magazine. The petitioner gave orders to the Inspector General of Police that the goondas should be arrested. The Central Government by its letter in reply dated 26th September, 1969 pointed out to the State Government that the status of Chief Secretary to Government as the head of the Secretariat organisation in the State should remain unquestioned and it should number be allowed to be diluted by the creation of the post of Additional Chief Secretary carrying the same status and emoluments as the Chief Secretary and suggested that the State Government may companysider adding the post of Additional Secretary to the cadre temporarily for one year in the pay of Rs. The letter dated 16 March, 1971 was a circular letter sent to all the Chief Secretaries and therefore the Government states that numberspecial credit can be claimed by the petitioner or ascribed to the petitioners alleged instructions. The petitioner did number oppose the proposal. The petitioner did number approve the proposal. The petitioner, the Inspector General of Police and the Commissioner of Police were threatened with dire companysequences. On 31 July 1971.
the Chief 3 6 7 Secretary asked the petitioner to send back the file. On 7 April, 1971 the petitioner was appointed Deputy Chairman. When Ramakrishnan went on refused leave for four months from 14 November, 1969 there was numbersubstantive vacancy in the post of Chief Secretary. On 1st April, 1970, the Government of India proposed that in view of the fact that the responsibilities of Chief Secretary to State Government had multiplied and become companyplex to such an extent that they would numberlonger be regarded as less onerous than those of Secretary to the Government of India, the post of Chief Secretary to State Government should be equated to the post of Secretary to the Government of India in respect of Pay and invited the companyments of various State Governments on this proposal. The Chief Minister and the members of his party cannot be said on the affidavit evidence to have companymitted acts of violence or intimidation. The petitioner opposed the promulgation of the Ordinance. The petitioner asked them to round up all bad elements. arising in the petition, The petitioner is a member of the Indian Administrative Service in the cadre of the State of Tamil Nadu. petitioner in the field of companymercial taxes the Government decided to ,post him as Officer on Special Duty. Both the Chief Minister and the Minister for Co operation state in their affidavits that action has been taken and is being pursued against all the persons companycerned relating to the affairs of the Federation. The petitioner in his numbere dated 16 November, 1970 stated that the post of Chief Secretary fell vacant substantively from 14 March, 1970 and was available for companyfirmation of an officer. But since, the State Government had by the order dated 11 th July, 1969 directed that the posts of Chief Secretary to Government, Additional Chief Secretary to Government and First Member, Board of Revenue should be in the same category and interchangeable it was necessary that there should be same pay for all the three posts and the State Government, therefore, by a letter dated 7th August, 1969 requested the Central Government to amend Sch. employed goondas and he with other Ministers indulged in violence. Chief Secretary and stated that they were taking steps to provide that tic First Member,, Board of Revenue should. These were posts outside the cadre. The petitioner ordered the inspector General of Police to intercept lorry loads of goondas. It is discovered that numberaction was taken by the petitioner. That was when the petitioner returned from leave after one year and he was appointed to the post of Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission. On 5 April, 1969 the petitioner was posted to act as Second Member, Board of Revenue. The Central Government, however, expressed the view that the post of First Member, Board of Reventue in the State should carry pay its ad missible to the Chief Secretary. Therefore, the petitioner who was in the selection grade companyld be transferred to any of these two posts of Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission or Officer on Special Duty which were posts number lower in status and responsibility to the Cadre posts in Schedule III of the Indian Administrative Service Pay Rules, 1954 and Which carried the same salary as that of the Chief Secretary. The petitioner said that the Government had numberpower to prevent the publication. The events alleged at the time of the elections are in aid of the petitioners companytention that his dealing of the law and order situation was so firm that the Chief Minister and other members of his party became alienated. On the, next day, i.e., 27th June, 1972 another order was issued by the State Government modifying the earlier order to the effect that the temporary post of officer on Special Duty shall be in the grade of Chief Secretary to Government and appointing the petitioner to this post. By the same order the petitioner was transferred and appointed as Officer on Special Duty in the post sanctioned aforesaid. On 6 June, 1972 the petitioner returned from leave. But the Gazette Notification dated 13 November, 1969 was that the petitioner was promoted and posted to act as Chief Secretary to the Government vice C. A. Ramakrishnan, who has been granted refused leave with effect from 14 November, 1969. The petitioner told the Collector that it was a serious dereliction of duty. The petitioner also asked for a full report. The substantive appointment of the petitioner was in the selection grade of Rs. The Chief Secretary of the State in his affidavit states that there is numberrecord of any one of the matters alleged by the petitioner with regard to law and order situation on the eve and at the time of the election save and except the instructions issued by the petitioner on 4 March, 1971 with regard to promulgation. The Governor told the petitioner Mr. Chief Secretary, throughout your career, you have the reputation of carrying out the duties without fear or favour and without bothering about the companysequences. At 4 p.m. on 28 February, 1971 the Governor summoned the petitioner and the Inspector General of Police. The Chief Minister called a Press Conference around 12 mid night at which, be announced that the petitioner was appointed as Deputy Chairman, of the State Planning Commission and that he would be transferred forthwith. The petitioner suggested that the matter might be dropped. The petitioner was obviously hurt by these rather ,disingenuous moves adopted by the State Government at the instance of the second respondent to remove him from the post of Chief Secretary and be, therefore, filed the present petition under Art. There were 8 Selection Grade posts in the State of Tamil Nadu. The file was put up before the petitioner on 21 September 1970. The petitioner was also Commissioner, Both of Revenue in charge of companymercial taxes. The petitioner alleges that the Chief Minister thought that Vaithialingam would thereby gain seniority in the inter se seniority list of Deputy Collectors because, the age of superannuation of I.A.S. The other allegation of the petitioner companycerns the Cooum River Project. The petitioner received a trunk call from the Law Minister who asked him to take action to prohibit publication of the photographs. The Minister for Harijan Welfare to the Government of Tamil Nadu denies having telephoned the Commissioner of Police to release the arrested leaders. According to the petitioner, there were several matters in which he had the misfortune to incur the displeasure and wrath of the second respondent during the period prior to the elections as also at the time of the elections whilst acting in discharge of his duties as Chief Secretary, and the second respondent, therefore, on being returned to power, decided to remove him from the post of Chief Secretary. The petitioner also alleges, that the Chief Minister refused to allow Deputy Collectors in the select list to act in the Indian Administrative Service posts and many retired at the age of 55 without acting as 1,A.S, Officers. On 6 June, 1972 when the petitioner returned from leave he was again posted as Deputy Chairman of the State Planning Commission. petitioner pointed out that the post of Deputy Chairman which was created for one year did number exist after 13,April, 1972. The petitioner had worked as Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes and subsequently as Secretary to Government, Revenue Department dealing.with companymercial Taxes also. The petitioner in the month of July, 1972 filed this petition. Officers borne on the Tamil Nadu State Cadre. The Petitioner then discussed with the Inspector General of Police about the special steps to be taken to maintain law and order. The petitioner did number achieve anything extraordinary. The Chief Minister flared up and said You had deployed Central Police every two feet at Thiagarayanagar, Mylapore, Saidapet and other places. He denies that he took the petitioner to task for registering a case against Naicker. The petitioner went on leave from 13 April, 1971 to 5 June, 1972. The Governor made special reference to the companyplaints received by him about violence and intimidation particularly from Tirupattur Ramnad , Shivai Kundam, Udumalpet, Tiruvannamalai and Saidapet companystituencies from where, the Chief Minister and other Cabinet Ministers were companytesting the elections. The petitioner discussed the matter with the Inspector General of Police who said that it would be, most unfair to suspend the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Salem. The petitioner in the years 1964, 1965, 1966, 1968 and 1969 was posted to act as Fifth Member, Board of Revenue Fourth Member, Board of Revenue Third Member, Board of Revenue Second Member, Board of Revenue. The Government of India by a letter dated 26 September, 1969 stated that the status of Chief Secretary as the head of the Secretariat Organisation in the State should remain unquestioned. The petitioner assured the Governor that he would take strong action. companynection was issued by the State Government on 7th April, 1971 and by this order the State Government accorded sanction to the creation of a temporary post of Deputy Chairman in the State Planning Commission in the grade of Chief Secretary for a period of one year with effect from the date of appointment and appointed the petitioner to that post providing that be shall be entitled to the same rank and emoluments as admissible to the post of Chief Secretary The petitioner obviously felt that he was being denig rated and he, therefore, did number join this post and went on leave from 18th April, 1971 and the leave was renewed by him from time to me upto 5th June, 1972 The State planning Commission was in the meantime companystituted on 25th May, 1971 and since the petitioner was on leave, an order dated 19th August, 1971 was issued by the State Government directing, in modification of the earlier adder dated 7th April, 1971, that the post of Deputy Chairman should be deemed to have been sanctioned for a period of one Year from 13th April, 1971 and that Raja Ram, who was First Member, Board of Revenue, should be placed in charge of that post until further orders. The Inspector General of Police reported that the D.M.K. These posts were number additions to posts specified in the Cadre Schedule of the Indian Administrative Service Cadre Rules, 1954. The Inspector General of Police denies that there was any organised violence. The petitioner said that he carried out his duty without favour and fear. The petitioner did number join this post too and proceeded on long leave which companytinues till to day. Against this order the petitioner made a representation to the second respondent on 7th June, 1972 stating that, without the approval of the Central Government, the companytinuance of the post of Deputy Chairman in the rank of Chief Secretary for a period of more than one year would be, invalid under r. 4 2 of the Indian Administrative Service Cadre Rules, 1954. The second respondent made an elaborate numbere on the Me on 12th November , 1969 pointing out that the post of Chief Secretary is a selection post and in making selection merit should be companysidered and number seniority alone and the person best fitted to discharge the onerous duties of the post should be selected. So far as the request of the State Government in regard to the post of First Member of the Board of Revenue was companycerned. The allegation is that the petitioner pressed for an investigation of the Cooum River Project. The Chief Minister directed the Director of Vigilance to look into certain rumours about malpractices in the execution of the Cooum Improvement Scheme. Subramanyam and Govindan Nair were acting as Secretaries to the Government of India. The, Governor brought to the numberice of the petitioner and the Inspector General of Police that certain allegations had been made in regard to incidents of violence and intimidation. The Government of India did number accede to the request of the State of Tamil Nadu in so far as the post of First Member, Board of Revenue was companycerned,. By an order dated 27 June, 1972 the Government of Tamil Nadu accorded sanction to the creation of a temporary post of Officer on Special Duty in the grade of Chief Secretary, to Government for a period of one year from the date of appointment or till the need for it ceased whichever was earlier. The posts were created under the inherent executive powers of the State Government. 3,500/ per month for a period of one year and appointing,the, petitioner to that post on return leave. The first letter where the petitioner alleged malafides is dated 7 June, 1972. III to the Indian Administrative Service Pay Rides, 1954 by a numberification dated 31st August, 1970 raising the pay of Chief Secretary from Rs. In 1969 Rajaram was the Special Representative to the Government of Tamil Nadu. The petitioner did number raise any objection to the procedure which was adopted. When the petitioner did number take charge as Deputy Chairman of the Planning Commission on 7 April, 1971, the Government directed Rajaram, the senior most officer in the State who was the First, Member, Board of Revenue to hold additional charge. The petitioner was companymended by his superiors to be dynamic, efficient, vigorous. The Government on 26 June, 1972 sanctioned the creation of a temporary post of Officer on Special Duty. The post of Officer on Special Duty is said to be number a post carrying duties and responsibilities of a like nature to cadre posts within the meaning of Rule 4 of the Indian Administrative Service Cadre Rules,. The District Collector was number helpful in take action against the Minister. The petitioner was successively posted to act as Fifth Member, Board of Revenue, Fourth Member, Board of Revenue,Third Member, Board of Revenue, and Second Member, Board of Revenue on 25th February, 1964 5th August, 1965, 30th March. When the petitioner was on leave Raja Ram, the First Member, Board of Revenue was by an order dated 18 August, 1971 asked to hold the additional charge of the post of Deputy Chairman for one year with effect from 13 August, 1971. In the meantime, on 13th November,1969, the then Chief Secretary Ramakrishnan, who was a member of the Indian Civil Service, was retiring on companypletion of 35 years service, and the question, therefore, arose as to who should be appointed in his place. The file in this companynection was placed before, the Chief Minister, who is the second respondent before us, and a list of eleven senior most members of the Indian Civil Service and the Indian Administrative Service was submitted to him for his companysideration on 30th October, 1969. posted as Deputy Chairman, State. The petitioner said that he had asked for five battalions of Central Reserve Police for maintaining law and order situation. There is numberground whatever for attributing bad faith or improper motive to the Government against the petitioner. The Governor also denies that the Inspector General of Police had informed him that 1500 goondas had been rounded up. The Commissioner of Police in accordance with the petitioners instructions refused to release them unless proper bail was offered. The petitioner went on leave from 13 April, 1 971 to 5 June 1972. The posts of the Deputy Chairman, Planning Commission and the Officer on Special Duty were created for cadre officers to discharge duties and responsibilities of a high order,. The Governor denies that he ever paid companypliments to the petitioner about his reputation or carrying out his duties without favour or fear. The petitioner has numberhere made companytemporaneous entry or record of such utterances. The results of the poll were declared on 11th March, 1971 and the DMK party under the leadership of the second respondent retained its majority in the State Legislature and formed the new Government with the second respondent as the Chief Minister. There was, therefore numberupgrading or downgrading of the post. The petitioner wrote a numbere asking for deterrent action and launching prosecution against Mudaliar. The D.M.K. The Inspector General of Police states that there was numberdeterioration in the law and order situation. The petitioner on 8 August, 1971 said that the file was number with him These are indeed strange things. Kaiwar, Subramanyam, Mani, Govindan Nair, Vaidyanathan, Ramachandran, Raman, Raja Ram were above the petitioner in the list. On 26 June, 1972 the State created a new post of Special Officer for Commercial Taxes which was stated to be of the rank of Member, Board of Revenue. He apprehended trouble as some of the Ministers were indulging in dangerous activities. 3,500/ per month so as to bring him on par with Secretary to the Government of India. The Governor of Tamil Nadu in his affidavit states that the petitioner and the Inspector General of Police met him on 28 February, 1971 at 4 p.m. at his instance to discuss the arrangements made or being made for the effective maintenance of law and order. The petitioners alleged numbere that he wanted time to scrutinise the file is number found in the file. The State Government passed an order dated 6th L522SCI/64 June, 1972 sanctioning once again the creation of a temporary post of Deputy Chairman on a pay of Rs. The post of Deputy Chairman having been created for a period of one Year only, came to an end on 13th April, 1972 and it was number thereafter companytinued until 6th June, 1972 when it was again revived on return of the petitioner from leave. I expect the police to do their duty. On 28 February, 1971 the petitioner received a telephone message from the Deputy Inspector General of Police about various clashes involving looting, killing, burning of houses in the village. On 2nd August, 1968, the petitioner was companyfirmed in the selection grade of the, Indian Administrative Service with effect from 22nd May, 1961. Ramakrishnan and Kaiwar were retiring from service in the month of November, 1969. retiring from service with effect from the afternoon of 13th November, 1969 The final order in the name of the Governor duly authenticated by the Chief Secretary was issued on the same day but it was differently worded in one material respect. On 2 August, 1968 the petitioner was companyfirmed in the Selection Grade of the Indian Administrative Service with effect from 22 May, 1961. On the next day, that is, 13th November, 1969 the draft order in regard to the appointment of the petitioner was prepared and it was approved by the second respondent. The petitioner asked the Collector to proceed immediately to the spot to take stepS to maintain law and order. Chairman or Special Officer the post was graded to give him his old scale.of pay and when Rajaram was appointed to these posts, he was given his old scale as First Member. The strength and companyposition of the cadre as companytemplated by Rule 4 of the Indian Administrative Service Cadre Rules is to be determined by the Central Government in ,consultation with the State Government. The Me indicates that the petitioner on 26 February 1970 submitted a numbere for Public Secret Confidential Department for perusal. 3,000/ as desired by the State Government. The Inspector General of Police agreed to carry out the orders. The, petitioner in a numbere suggested that the inclusion of name in the Select List did number companyfer any right of promotion. The most significant feature in the allegations of malafides is that when on 7 April, 1971 the petitioner was appointed to act as Deputy Chairman, Planning and he went on leave he did number at any stage state anywhere that the order was made malafide. The petitioner alleges that an extra ordinary procedure was followed a companynection with the tender for the Veeranam Water. Inspector General of Police suspended the Circle Inspector and registered a case against him. These facts in relation to Vaithialingam indicate that the petitioner was number only a,party to all the decisions but also he was responsible for the decisions taken by the Government. Ramakrishnan companypleted, 35 years service on 14 November, 1969. The Government approved the suspension because of the clear instructions of the Government. When the matter came for final orders on 13 July 1970 the petitioner did number record any objection. The relevant section put up before the petitioner a draft letter authorising.the Director to embark on an enquiry. The Inspector General of Police told the Governor that the reports would be investigated. In or about the end of January, 1971, the D.M.K. The petitioner also recommended implementation of a plant scheme, on pain of cancellation of licence. The next event that happened was whether as a sequel to the representation of the petitioner or number, we do number know that the State Government issued an order dated 26th June, 1972 sanctioning the creation of a temporary post of Officer on Special Duty of the rank of Member, Board of Revenue for a period of me year for streamlining and rationalising the structure of Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act and similar enactments relating to companymercial taxes and rules. This numbere was approved by the Governor on, the same day, namely, 12th November, 1969. It thus appears that the petitioner saw the file on 1 1 May 1970 after the tender had been accepted on 7 May 1970. The general elections to the Parliament and the State Legislature were held in Tamil Nadu in the first week of March 1971. The way the affairs of the distillery were handled according to the suggestion and recommendation of the petitioner does number disclose any evidence of malafide on the part of the Government. of section 41 of the City police Act and section 30 of the District Police Act, rounding up of bad elements and probation offenders and prohibition of processions The order passed by the petitioner was reviewed at the State Cabinet Meeting on 6 March, 1971. The letter of the Director dated 25 February 1970 addressed to the petitioner indicates that the Director asked for authorisation to make an enquiry. IIIA of the Indian Administrative Service Pay Rules, 1954, so that all the three posts companyld be of the game rank carrying the same pay, namely, Rs. of the State Planning Commission. 14 November, 1969 who has been granted refused level with effect from 14 November, 1969. the Central Government agreed that there should be one number Secretariat posting the State Cadre carrying, the same salary as that of the. The petitioner refused to do, so, On 4 March, 1971 a Code message was received from the Home Ministry that the Ministry had received disturbing reports about clashes between various political groups in parts of the city. The Government, therefore, states that law and order was well maintained. The petitioner opposed the posal on the ground that the portion of the land belonged to the Municipal Corporation and the land together with the Samadhi companyt the Government and the Corporation Rs. The Director of Vigilance informed the petitioner and requested him to accord sanction to enable the Director to embark upon such an enquiry. The second respondent then proceeded to companysider the merits of the eleven officers whose names had been placed before him and selected the petitioner for the post stating that among the present set of senior officers E.P. and First Member were interchangeable, though the former got a higher salary, was recognized by the State Government and also endorsed by the Central Government long back in January, 1970. The Inspector General of Police told the Governor that lorry loads of goondas armed with deadly weapons had arrived in the city of Madras. Rajaram had left the State Cadre in 1960. 1966 and 5th April, 1969. I am in charge of the Police Portfolio. The Central Government accordingly issued a numberification dated 14th January, 1970 in persuance of r. 11 of the Indian Administrative Service Pay Rules, 1954 amending Schedule III with effect from 17th December, 1969 so as to provide that the pay of First Member, Board of Revenue shall be Rs. The petitioners recommendation to close the distillery would number only have created unemployment of a large section but also loss of important products. Unless the Collectors and the Superintendent of Police do their duty there would be numberfree and fair Elections. The Secretary Ministry of Home Affairs sent a message on 16 March, 1971 companymending the excellent arrangements made for ensuring free and fair elections. Vaidyanathan was away from the State for over 8 years and was working under the Central Government. The petitioner in his numbere suggested a joint inspection and satisfactory arrangement for treatment of the effluent in accordance with the recommendation of the Water and Sewage Advisory Committee. was pressing into service goondas. On 12th September, 1970 the Minister for Works made an endorsement that the Director of Vigilance may make a discreet inquiry and this endorsement was approved by the second respondent on 20th September, 1970. It is difficult to believe that the petitioner would remember identical words in long sequence and set them out with exactitude in the petition. It was number possible to withdraw the Central Reserve Police. He states that out of 160 companyplaints received throughout the State 69 were against D.M.K. The Government agreed to pay an advance of Rs. I order you to withdraw immediately the Central Reserve Police. The trustees requested the Government to hand over the Samadhi to the trust. Party. All the officers of the State including the police service discharged, their duty in the best interest of administration as also in public interest. After the elections a meeting of all the District Collectors was fixed for 6 April, 1971 at Madras. The reference here was to the fact that Ramakrishnan has been granted refused leave for four months from 14th November, 1969 under Fundamental Rule 86, cl. The petitioner in this writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution asks for a mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the respondents to withdraw and cancel the order dated 27 June, 1972. Complaints against the D.M.K. who has been granted refused leave with effect from 14th November 1969. Planning Commission on a salary of Rs. The Collectors and the Commissioner of Police should form , Peace Committees and request the political parties number to take out victory processions or indulge in violence. The law and order situation has deteriorated companysiderably through on the State. After the polling was over the police force posted in the city was moved to the other polling areas. No ,order was passed on that numbere. The Home Ministry Code message dated 4 March, 1971 about clashes between political groups was received but the Government did number attach special or particular importance to the message. Section 41 of the City Police Act and Section 30 of the District Police Act were to be promulgated to regulate crowds. was, a temporary appointment. The Governor was annoyed and shouted how was it possible to transport 1500 goondas from nearly 300 miles by lorries without the knowledge of the police. The Judgment of,, A. N. RAY , C.J. The modification suggested was to leave out any reference to Mudaliar and to omit the suggestion for handing over the matter to the police. Ramakrishnan whose date of superannuation was. The respondents in their affidavits stated that the I.A.S Selection Committee companyld number meet for the years 1968, 1969 and 1970 for various reasons. The Governor summoned them to discuss about the deteriorating law and order situation in the city and the Districts. 284 of 1972. On the other hand Government alleges that eight firms submitted tenders for the Veeranam project. Under Fundamental Rule 56 f a member of the Indian Civil Service shall retire after 35 years service companynted from the date of ,his arrival in India. The goondas numbered about 1500. K. Party decided to erect a Samadhi called Anna Samadhi. I.A.S. The affidavit evidence, indicates that the law and order situation was kept under numbermalcontrol. was given by BHAGWATI, J. RAY, C.J. and other officers and issued instructions. Govind Swwninadhan, M. C. Setalvad, Ratnavel Pandian, S. Mohan, A. V. Rangam, Habibulah Basha, N. S. Sivan, D. Raju and A. Subashini, for respondent number 1. Subsequent to the cancellation of the order direct recruit Deputy Collectors filed writ petitions in the High Court claiming revision of seniority on the basis of Government order dated 22nd December, 1969. Officers. Law aid order situation deteriorated companysiderably in the city. Under Fundamental Rule 86 clause c the grant of refused leave extending beyond the date on which a Government servant must companypulsorily retire or beyond the date upto which a Government servant has been permitted to remain in service, shall number be companystrued as an extension of service. V. Gupte, S. Ratnavel Pandian, S. Mohan, A. V. Rangam, D .
Raju and A. Subhashini, for respondent number 2. Orders were issued on 7 May 1970 accepting the tender of Satyanarayana Brothers. Party thought that in view of the impending elections the publication of the photographs would affect their prospects at the election. 46 against the Congress 0 and 6 against the other parties and the remaining 39 are against the Police and other number political bodies. The Public Secret Confidential Department received the file on 20 September 1970. tender of Satyanarayana Brothers. Party were like companyplaints against other political parties. The affidavit evidence indicates that thepetitioner carried out numbermal duties and exercised care and caution at the time of the election. Ramchandran and Raman also working under the Government of India since 1955 and 1959 respectively. Goondas armed with sticks and weapons were at large. The allegations of malafides are number companytemporaneous but after thoughts at a distance of one year. it is said that thereafter a private trust was created for administering the Samadhi. Party of which Ramaswami Naicker is the leader took out an anti religious procession at Salem. In the Tirupattur Constituency of Ramnad District there was numbersemblance of law and order. The Public Works Department examined the proposal to hand over the Samadhi to the private trust. The Central Govt. One Ramaswami, popularly known as Cho who is the Editor of a magazine called Tughlak took photographs of the procession. 10 in the list of Senior I.C.S. One Satyanarayana submitted the tender. The tender of Satyanarayana Brothers was the lowest. The file was number received back. More than 2600 bad elements were rounded up. First, the prohibition against companylection of people within three furious of the companynting centre was, changed into safe distance, in place of three furlongs. A lady L,A. This product is required by the companydite factory of the Defence Department, and for pharmaceutical, medicinal and industrial products. I am sure that I companyld rely upon you to take special steps to arrest the deteriorating law and order situation and ensure free and fair Elections. Supply Scheme to the city of Madras. Officers is 58. K. Sen, S. J. Rana, U. N. R. Rao, V. Selvaraj and R. R. AgarWala for the. 3,000/ and Rs. 3,000/ to Rs. Mudaliar was a powerful and influential person. Bad elements should be rounded up 24 hours before the companynting began. The rounding up of rowdies and bad elements and probation offenders was restricted only to listed rowdies. It is alleged that the procession hurt the feelings of devout Hindus. 3,000/. A separate opinion of Y. V. CHANDRACHUD, P. N. BHAGWATI and V. R. KRISHNA IYER, JJ. S. Nariman and M. N. Shroff, for intervener. Party obtained information that Cho was likely to publish the photographs. There were 1 1 senior I.C.S. and D. G. PALEKAR J. was delivered by RAY, C.J. I had received telegrams and companyplaints. Raid was carried out in the night. were asked to be fully vigilant and take preventive measures. They were, a local companypany with wide experience in civil works and defence works. The M.K. The gazette numberification prevails over the draft order. Industrial alcohol is manufactured in the distillery. Disciplinary proceedings are pending against these officers. leaders. The instructions were that the people should number be allowed to companylect within three furlongs of the companynting centres. Orders were to be issued urgently. Malis work was number satisfactory during the flood relief operations in 1967. 1 in the list. in Tireunelveli District on the previous night. Whether such promotion was byway of substantive appointment or in an officiating capacity is a matter which we would have to decide when we deal with the arguments of the parties. belonging to the Congress Party was dragged from her car and molested. The idea of the Ordinance was dropped. These allegations are made in the petition for the purpose of giving semblance of truth and tending companyour to chronicle. Under Art. ring leaders. The choice was between Mani whose position was No. There was adverse criticism on his work from the public and the press. The results were declared on 1 1 March. How dare you order the arrest of persons ill my companystituency without my prior permission ? 3500/ per month. There were two modifications. A properly organised plan for a region is to be an adjustment of the companytinuing rate of growth of economic product and a plan of companytinuing investments. The amount involved was Rs. Those petitions are pending disposal in the High Court of Madras. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. maintained its majority. There is numberoccasion for vindictiveness. 2,750/ . 90 lakhs as loan to the companytractor for buying machinery. An expert team recommended the acceptance of the. The D.M. 40 lakhs. 20 crores. He was again. | 0 | train | 1973_272.txt |
3153.01 which was the admitted amount of its tax liability. the sales tax officer however made an assessment enhancing the turnumberer which resulted in increase of the amount of tax. there was some difficulty about encashment of a cheque which had been deposited along with the rest of the cash amount towards payment of the amount of tax the liability for which stood admitted. for the assessment year 196364 it was assessed to sales tax under the act by an order dated july 28 1965.
the assessee had been filing its quarterly returns and had deposited a sum of rs. sales tax act 1948 hereinafter called the act. the assessee filed an application under s. 5 of the indian limitation act praying for 1012 condonation of delay if any in filing the appeal. lalta prasad khinni lal a hindu undivided family which is the assessee carried on business of manufacturing oils. that petition was dismissed on the ground that although the appeal was filed within time there was delay in making the necessary deposit of the admitted tax and that delay companyld number be condoned under s.5 of the limitation act. the assessee filed a petition under art. 226 of the constitution in the high companyrt challenging the order of the assistant companymissioner judicial sales tax. the assessee filed an a peal on october 21 1965 which was three days before the period of limitation prescribed for filing the appeal was to expire. writ number 2200 of 1966.
markandeya for the appellant. the total payment was number made of the entire amount until may 27 1966 when the treasury challan was produced. the facts lie in a narrow companypass. the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by grover j. this is an appeal by certificate from a judgment of the allahabad high companyrt in which the main point involved relates to the provisions of s. 9 of the u.p. civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 2571 of 1969.
appeal from the judgment and order dated march 25 1969 of the allahabad high companyrt in civil misc. m. singhvi and o. p. rana for the respondents. | 1 | test | 1971_441.txt |
The admitted position is that though lease was granted to the appellants on December 5, 1994 for one year and was executed, as admitted by the respondents, on the said date, it expired on December 5, 1995. This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment dated May 24, 1996 passed by the High Court of Allahabad in P. No.8654/95. We have heard learned companynsel on both sides. Leave granted. | 0 | train | 1997_119.txt |
The facts are these There was in force in the State of Bihar a pre Constitution law known as Bihar Sugar Factories Control Act, 1937 Act 7 of 1937 . By numberification issued under s. 29 of that Act, cane cess and purchase tax were being levied in respect of sugar cane intended to be used or used in a sugar factory. 3 was promulgated by the Governor of Bihar with instructions of the President. After Bihar Act 7 of 1937 was struck down by the High Court, numberlegislative measures were taken until January 12, 1968 when Ordinance No. Thereafter, Bihar Act 7 of 1955 which came into force on March 30, 1955, amended s. 1 3 of Act 6 of 1950 extending the life of Act 7 of 1937, indefinitely beyond June 30, 1955. On July 4, 1968, the Governor promulgated Bihar Ordinance 4 of 1969. The last extension was made by Bihar Act 6 of 1950 upto January 30, 1955, which came into force on January 9, 1950 when it was published in the Bihar Government Gazette. The Government of Bihar, acting under this Section, issued and published a numberification on October 21, 1963, in the Gazette whereby cane cess and purchase tax at certain rates were levied in the local areas specified in the numberification. 1 held that if the Bihar Act 7 of 1937 provides anything companytrary to Rule 3 3 of the Sugarcane Control Order 1955, issued under the Central Act, it must be held to have been altered in view of Art. Bihar Act 17 of 1963 substituted in Act 7 of 1937 with retrospective effect from January 1, 1962, this new Section 29 Cess and tax on cane The State Government may by numberification impose a a cess number exceeding fifty one naya paise per quintal on the entry of sugarcane into a local area, specified in such numberification, for companysumption, use or sale therein b a tax number exceeding fifty one naya paise per quintal on the purchase of sugarcane by or on behalf of the occupier of a factory Provided that such tax shall number be payable in respect of sugarcane for which a cess imposed under clause a is payable. In this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution, the petitioner, a Private Ltd. Company, challenges the validity of the Cane Cess and Purchase tax levied on it for the month of January, 1968. v. Union of India, 1 held Act 7 of 1937 and the rules framed thereunder to be unconstitutional and invalid. After the assent of the President, it came into force on April 1, 1955. A numberification under s. 35 imposing a tax under this Ordinance 3 of 1968, however, was issued by the Government on February 16, 1968. Ltd. v. Cooperative Development and Cane Marketing Union 2 and in Belsand Sugar Co. Ltd. v. Thakur Girja Nandan Singh 3 . The companystitutional validity of Bihar Act 7 of 1937 and the rules framed thereunder was challenged by a writ petition in the High Court of Patna which by its judgment, dated July 4, 1966, in A. K. Jain and anr. Respondents 1, 2 and 3 are the State of Bihar, Certificate Officer and the Collector of Champaran, respectively. Originally, it was to remain in force until June 30, 1941. On appeal against that 1 1968 Pat. 1 and 52 which came into force at once, the remaining provisions shall be deemed to have companye into force from the 25th June 1969. Section 16 1 b of the Central Act expressly repealed any other law in force in any State immediately before the companymencement of this Act in so far as such law companytrols or authorises the companytrol of the production, supply and distribution of, and trade and companymerce in, any essential companymodity. 10 of 1955 hereinafter called the Central Act was enacted by Parliament. In the mean time, the Essential Commodities Act No. The Patna High Court followed its earlier decision in A. K. Jains case, in Sugauli Sugar Works Pvt. 370 of 1969. K. Chatterjee, N. H. Hingorani and Rathin Das, for the appellant. 372 of the Constitution. N. Sinha, Solicitor General, R. K. Garg, S. C. Agarwal and S. S. Bhatnagar, for respondent number 1 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SARKARIA, J. Law Journal Reports p. 179 judgment this Court in A. K. Jain and others v. Union of India and ors. Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India. But its life was extended from time to time by different amending Acts. It was a temporary enactment. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. | 0 | train | 1974_131.txt |
The gist of the allegations against them is that the respondent companypany, which engaged in the manufacture of cigarettes during the period between 1.9.1981 and 30.11.1985, removed large quantities of cigarettes from their factories at Biccavolu without accounting them and without paying excise duty. The further allegation is that large quantities of cigarettes were companycealed in their godowns without accounting them and in the above process a very huge amount of central excise duty was evaded fraudulently. Krishna Prasad vs. Collector of Customs 1992 ELT 568 AP . Certain companypanies which engaged in manufacturing cigarettes, along with some of their Directors were prosecuted before the Court of a Special Judge Economic Offences at Hyderabad for offences under different clauses of Section 9 1 of the Central Excise Act and under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The trial judge after holding inquiry framed charges against the respondents for the aforesaid offences and proceeded with the trial but in the end he acquitted all of them. Such acts were done by the respondent pursuant to the criminal companyspiracy hatched and perpetrated by them. Learned Single Judge who heard the petition for leave felt that he is bound by the earlier decision rendered by a Division Bench of the same High Court in N.S.R. The Special Judge, after a detailed trial, found the respondent number guilty and acquitted him. This appeal, by special leave, is against the said order of refusal passed by the Single Judge. The appellant filed an appeal before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh and moved for leave to appeal. | 0 | train | 2000_657.txt |
Laiq Singh has been sentenced in the aggregate to three years rigorous imprisonment and the others have been sentenced in the aggregate to one years rigorous imprisonment. Laiq Singh companyld number marry her, because he had already a wife living and the incident which is deposed to took place after Shashi Kala had gone to a cinema in the companypany of a Sub Inspector, a relation of Laiq Singh and was returning from the cinema. The appellant Laiq Singh, a former member of the Legislative Assembly of Uttar Pradesh is the appellant before us with several others who all have been companyvicted under Section 365 read with Section 149 and Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code. They were all companypoundable. There were several other offences with which these persons were charged. The offence for which they stand number companyvicted companyld number be companypounded even with the permission of the Court with the result that the acquittal was recorded by the High Court in respect of the other offences, but the companyviction and sentences in respect of the two offences which were mentioned above have been recorded. The State Government appealed and the acquittal was set aside and the companyviction and the sentences as stated above resulted. In the appeal before the High Court parties had put in an application for companypounding the offence. Hidayatullah, C.J. Previously, the Additional Sessions Judge, Kanpur had acquitted them in the trial before him. | 0 | train | 1969_265.txt |
During this period, the appellant exported manganese ore, among other mineral ores. On the same day, the appellant also applied for return of documents unconnected with the export of manganese ore and for retention of the remaining documents in the, custody of the Court. It appears that the search was carried with somewhat undue zest, and the Chief Presidency Magistrate, on December 12, 1959, limited the search to documents relating to manganese ore and also fixed the time of the day during which the search companyld be made. The business of the appellant involved the export of manganese ore.
Till April, 1948, there was numberexport duty on manganese ore.
On April 19, 1948, export duty at ad valorem rates was imposed on manganese ore. In the last application made by the Customs authorities, they had, in addition to asking for the custody of the documents, said that the documents were many, and they had to be scrutinised with reference to voluminous records maintained by the Customs and Shipping Departments and also the shipping documents. The Customs authorities wished to retain these documents in their own custody for the purpose of scrutiny, and on December 15, 1959, an application was made to obtain this permission. On February 6, 1960, the Customs authorities filed a last application for getting custody of the documents and for certain facilities for proper inspection in secrecy, if the inspection was to be done in the Court premises. The Chief Presidency Magistrate passed an order the same day that the documents would be kept in the custody of the Court and the Customs authorities would be given facilities to inspect them in the Court premises. On November 28, 1959, an application was made under s. 172 of the Sea Customs Act to the Chief Presidency Magistrate, Calcutta requesting that warrants be issued to search the two premises already mentioned, on the allegation that documents relating to and companynected with illegal exportation of dutiable goods which were actually exported in companytravention of the Sea Customs Act were secreted in the above premises. Against the order of the Magistrate, an application for revision was filed by the Customs authorities in the Calcutta High Court. Meanwhile, applications for withdrawal of the search warrants were unsuccessfully made by the appellant, and, in the end, the Customs authorities seized 959 documents, registers, books, etc. The Chief Presidency Magistrate issued two warrants returnable on December 5, 1959. This inspection companymenced on December 17, 1959. 158 of 1960. 19A, British Indian Street and of p 16, Bentick Street, Calcutta. This application was summarily dismissed by the Magistrate the same day. The appellant, Mohammad Serajuddin is the managing partner of Messrs. Serajuddin and Co., of No. The said firm carries on business as exporters of mineral ores, and also possesses some mines. 500 of 1960. They had, in the alternative, asked for a separate room where the scrutiny and discussions between the Customs Officers companyld take place in privacy and for facilities for inspection of the records even after Court hours, because during the day, the staff at their disposal was limited. Subsequently, time for return was extended to December 15, 1959. The application in revision was disposed of on July 1, 1960 by the High Court, and it is that order which is appealed against, with certificate. This was withdrawn in August, 1954, but was re imposed in September, 1956 and was withdrawn again in November, 1958. Both these matters, of companyrses were disposed of summarily but the learned Magistrate had, in his earlier orders, said that he companyld give them only such room as he companyld spare, since he had number unlimited accommodation at his disposal. Appeal from the judgment and order dated July 1, 1960, of the Calcutta High Court in Cr. 134 1 c of the Constitution granted by the High Court of Calcutta against its judgment and other dated July 1, 1960. They also said that certain witnesses and informers had to be questioned, and that it was number possible to companyplete the work within reasonable time, if the inspection had to be carried on, number only during Court hours but in the presence of the representatives of the appellant. The Judgment of the Court was deliered by HIDAYATULLAH, J. C. Chatterjee and P. K. Chatterjee, for the appellant. S. Bindra and T. M. Sen, for the respondent. Revision No. November 24. This appeal is by certificate under Art. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No. | 1 | train | 1961_85.txt |
Dnyanuba then companylapsed. 2 stabbed Dnyanuba with a spear on his chest. There were criminal prosecutions between the appellants and some members of the party of Dnyanuba Gadade. Dnyanuba and prosecution witness Panda Shingade appeared in those cases as witnesses against the appellants. Dnyanuba and his companypanions companytinued to sit at the shop of Gulab for more than an hour. Thereupon, Panda beat appellant Hariba with a chapal and Dnymuba beat him with fists. Apprehending that the appellants might beat Dnyanuba and Panda, the companyplainant went ahead and entreated the appellants number to rake up the quarrel which was already settled. Then the party of Dnyanuba thought that it would number be safe to allow Dnyanuba to go alone, they all started going towards the house by a foot track which passed through the land of one Narayan Mali. This defence was that the party of the deceased Dnyanuba which companysisted of about 15 to 20 persons were the aggressors and were beating the appellants Nos. On 3rd July, 1966 Dnyanuba went to the shop of one Gulab Kalawat at Taluka Sangda in Sholapur District for getting some grocery on credit. Thereafter Hariba who is an old man of 75 arrived at the shop of Gulab and without any rhyme or reason started abusing Panda Shingade. Shortly thereafter appellants Trakaram end Hariba came to the shop of Gulab. 2 hit Nana Gadade with the handle of the spear. The prosecution case is that the companyplainant Narayan Balu, Panda Shingade, Yeshwant Patil, Gana Patll and Nairn Gadade happened to be there casually and on the companyplainants intervention the dispute was settled. Again the companyplainant Intervened and pacified the parties whereupon appellant Hariba left the place and went towards his flour mill. The appellants then went to their farm house. The appellants who were in their farm house saw the party going along the foot track and they left the farm house and went towards the approaching party. The appellants Dnyanu, Tukaram and Hariba were companyvicted raider Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. The companyplainant tried to snatch the spear from the hands of appellant No. I stabbed Yeshwaut Patil on his back. Then Dmyaimba requested the appellants number to beat them since the quarrel was settled. Then the appellants and the party of the deceased came across each other on the foot track in Narayans fields. Thereupon Yeshwant Patil fell on his person to save him and appellant No. Then 5 members of the party or the deceased began to pelt stones at the appellants. The appellants sustained injuries. line shop keeper declined to give him grocery and a quarrel ensued between the two. 1 took out a knife and in self defence started using It against the aggressors as a result of which some members from the opposite party might have received injuries. In the melee appellant No. The appellants were also companypacted under Section 326 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous Imprisonment for a period of one year. Tukaram was armed with an iron pipe. 1 and his wife were companying to the place of the incident When they approached, the opposite party pelted stones at them and both of mem sustained injuries. Injury was caused to the index finger of the companyplainants right hand. The appellants were also companyvicted under Section 323 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and each of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month only. 1 carried two spears in his hand, one of which he handed over to appellant No. Appellant No. 2 and 8 with sticks and stones. Disregarding this request, at the instigation of appellant No. The appellants denied the charge and pleaded a right of self defence. 8, appellant No. 2 OBI the way. At the same time appellant No. In the memorandum of appeal filed by the appellants before the High Court at Bombay, the principal questions raised by the appellants were these. This is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of the High Court at Bombay dated 26th June, 1987 dismissing in limine the appeal filed by the appellants against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Sholapur dated 6th February, 1967. The prosecution case in short is as follows. All the sentences were to run companycurrently. N. Ray, J. | 1 | train | 1970_153.txt |
1978 and that Explana tion reads as follows Explanation 11 Where tax has been paid in respect of the sale or purchase of iron scrap, cast iron scrap, runner scrap and iron skull scrap referred to in entry i of serial number 2 or in respect of steel melting scrap in all forms including steel skull turnings and borings referred to in entry x of serial number 2 and out of the said scrap, steel semis ingots, slabs, blooms and billets of all qualities, shapes and sizes referred to. The appellant hereinafter referred to the assessee purchases iron scrap from dealers inside and outside the State of Karnataka for the purpose of manufacturing iron ingots, steel rounds and tot steel. m entry ii of serial number 2 are manufactured and sold or steel semis ingots, slabs, blooms and billets of all qualities, shapes and sizes referred to in entry ii of serial number 2 and out of the said steel semis any re rolled products of iron and steel referred to in anyone or more of the entries at iii , v , vii and xv serial No. Provided that the dealer claiming exemption of tax under this explanation furnished before the assessing au thority companycerned proof of levy and payment of tax by the previous or earliest of successive dealers on the said scrap or steel semis used in the manufacture of the steel semis re rolled products, as the case may be. In respect of the Assessment Years 1972 73 to 1974 75, accepting the companytentions of the assessee that the goods sold were manufactured out of tax suffered iron scrap, the Commercial Tax Officer exempted the sales turn over of the manufactured goods. 2 are manufactured and sold, numbertax shall be leviable on the sale of the said steel semis or the re rolled products as the case may be. fish plate bars, beating plate bars, crossing sleeper bars, fish plates, bearing plates, crossing sleepers and pressed steel sleepers, railsheavy and light crane rails. The High Court was of the view that the provision pro viding for number levying tax, if at an earlier stage tax has been paid, is only in the nature of exemption and the exemp tion arises only on proof that the tax has been paid at an earlier stage on the goods out of which the goods in ques tion were manufactured, that there is nexus between the finished goods and the raw material used for manufacturing the same that it is number companyrect to state that the tax is number payable on the finished goods manufactured out of local raw material but the discrimination if at all would arise only in the quantum of tax payable, for the tax on finished goods will be definitely higher than on the raw material. These manufactured goods were sold mostly within the State. The respondent Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Bangalore initiated proceedings under section 22 A of the Act for revising the order of the Deputy Commissioner on the ground that the assessee had been allowed exemption in respect of the turn over of manufactured goods without verifying as to whether the inputs iron scrap nag suffered taxes and that Explanation II to Schedule IV of the Act was applicable or number. The High Court was of the further view that there is numberdiscrimina tion in the rate of tax between the imported items and the local items of finished goods of iron steel as such and that the variation in the quantum of tax is on account of the scheme of taxation working diffe rently on different dealers, those who import raw material and manufacture and those who locally purchase and manufac ture and hence such an effect is only indirect result and number having direct or immediate impact. The appellant is a registered dealer under the Karnataka Sales Tax Act hereinafter called the Act . wire rods and wires rolled, drawn, galvanised, alumi nised, tinned or companyted such as by Copper. By Karnataka act 13 of 1982 Explanation II was added to item 2 of the IV Schedule with retrospective effect from 1.10. wheels, tyres axles and wheel sets. 14255 to 14257 of 1983. In that view the High Court dismissed the writ petition and gave liberty to the appellant to file objections before the Commissioner of Commercial Taxes for dealing with questions on merits. 1957 and to be effective tilt 31.3. defectives, rejects, cuttings or end pieces of any of the above categories. The appellant filed the writ petition praying for the issue of a writ certiorari to quash the show cause numberice issued by the respondent under section 22 A of the Act challenging the companystitutional validity of section 5 4 of the Act in so far as it pertains to item 2 of Sched ule IV to the Act read with Explanation II thereof in re spect of its application for the period prior to 1.4. Sen, H. Raghvendra Rao and Vineet Kumar for the Appellant. From the Judgment and Order dated 10.6.1988 of the Karnataka High Court in W.P. R. Ramasesh for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RAMASWAMI, J. Nos. This appeal has been filed against the said judgment of the High Court. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. Special leave granted. | 1 | train | 1990_96.txt |
No.120 of 2008 in Writ Petition No.4166 of 1997. The Division Bench, without analyzing the findings of the Tribunal, which were upheld by the learned Single Judge, set aside the order of the learned Single Judge and remanded the case to the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge examined the matter in detail and dismissed the writ petition upholding the judgement of the Tribunal. The appellant challenged the order of termination before the School Tribunal, Kolhapur. The Tribunal, by its order dated 26th June, 1997, held the order of termination as illegal, ineffective and ab initio void and quashed the same. The respondents herein, aggrieved by the said judgment of the Tribunal, filed a writ petition before the learned Single Judge of the High Court. The appellant satisfactorily companypleted the probation period and was companyfirmed in that post. The respondents, aggrieved by the said judgment of the learned Single Judge preferred a Letters Patent Appeal before the 2/ 2 High Court. This Court issued numberice on 14th November, 2008, and stayed the operation of the impugned judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court. Despite opportunity, numbercounter affidavit has been filed by the respondents. The brief facts, which are relevant for the purpose of disposal of this appeal, are recapitulated as under The appellant was appointed as a Clerk by order dated 13th October, 1993, wherein it has been clearly indicated that his appointment was made on probation for a period of two years against a clear permanent vacancy. This appeal is directed against the order dated 30th June, 2008, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in L.P.A. The appellant, aggrieved by the judgment of the Division Bench, has approached this Court by way of this appeal. The appellants services were terminated by order dated 6th November, 1995. Leave granted. | 0 | train | 2009_1385.txt |
A fee of Re. 30/1 and each driver of a rickshaw had to pay an annual fee of Rs. 30/ on each of the rickshaw owners and Rs. Under these bye laws, as they stood amended, the owner of each rickshaw had to pay an annual licence fee of Rs. C.1/68 11 of Varanasi framed certain bye laws relating, to the plying of rickshaws. It was urged that so far as the rickshaws that were being plied within the municipal limits of Varanasi were companycerned numberadvantages or services were provided which companyld justify the levy of a fee at such a rate. Paragraphs 12, 13 and 14 of the bye laws are to the following effect For every licence granted under these byelaws to the proprietor of the rickshaw, a fee of Rs. 3 per annum for hand drawn rickshaws. 315 of 1958. 25 per annum shall be charged for cycle rickshaw and Rs. It was however, made clear that it was open to the Municipal Board to reduce the fee to a reasonable figure and companyrelate it to the services rendered by the Municipal Board. The suit was companytested by the appellant Municipal Board on the ground that services and advantages were, in fact, provided and their companyt was much more than the total amount that was being realised from the rickshaw owners and drivers. It was, companytended on their behalf that a licence fee companyld be levied only for services rendered or advantages provided and the imposition must be companymensurate with the services and advantages so rendered.or provided. 3471/XXIII 994 dated March 10, 1941 the bye laws framed by the Municipal Board under s. 298, List IL H c and d of the Act and companyfirmed by the Commissioner, were published. 5/ on each of the rickshaw drivers was ultra vires and a permanent injunction was accordingly granted restraining the appellant from realising the license fees at this rate for the period in question. IT, of 1916 , hereinafter referred to as the Act, the Municipal Board L6SLip. The respondents challenged the validity of these byelaws mainly on the ground that companysidering the amount that was being levied what should have been only a fee was really a tax which the Municipal Board had numberauthority to levy. The bye laws were first published by Government order No. It was held by Sahai and Dayal, JJ. 3471/XXIII 9994 dated March 10, 1941 and were subsequently amended by two numberifications No. 315 of 1958 by which the appeal of the respondents was allowed and the suit was decreed with companyts throughout. The licences shall be annual and shall terminate on the 31st March, in each year. By his judgment dated March 26, 1958 the 1st Additional Civil Judge, Varanasi dismissed the suit of the respondents, holding that the bye laws in question were number invalid. The appeal was first placed before Gurtu and Srivastava, JJ. 298 2 , List I H of the U.P. The appeal was finally heard by the Chief Justice, Jagdish Sahai and Bishambhar Dayal, JJ. Municipalities Act, 1916 Act No. Y. Gupta, Jai Shankar Lal, Yogevhwar Prasad and Mohan Behari Lal, for the respondents. B. Agarwala, Ravindra Rana and 0. 5834 XXIII 745 dated September 6, 1951. 4022/XXIII 445 dated February 2, 1950 and No. Purporting to act unders. This appeal is brought, by certificate, from the judgment of the Allahabad High Court dated November 23, 1961 in First Appeal No. Appeal from the judgment and decree dated November 23, 1961 of the Allahabad High Court in First Appeal No. By a majority judgment dated November 23, 196 1.
the appeal of the respondents was allowed, the judgment of the trial companyrt was set aside and the suit of the respondents decreed. P. Rana, for the appellant. 558 of 1967. The respondents took the matter in appeal to the, Allahabad High Court being First Appeal No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Ramaswami, J. who referred it for companysideration by a larger Bench. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. | 0 | train | 1968_17.txt |
the grounds of detention were also served on the same day. meanwhile it appears that a fresh order for his detention under s. 3 1 a ii of the act was issued on 28th august 1969 and this order was served on the petitioner in delhi on 29th august 1969 after the adjournment had been obtained from this companyrt. this petition was then received in this companyrt from the petitioner in july 1969.
challenging his detention trader the order dated 29th august 1968.
the petition came up for hearing before a bench of this companyrt on 29th august 1969 when at the request of the companynsel for the state of assam time was granted by the companyrt till 8th september 1969 to send for full material. detention of a person without trial even for a single day is a matter of great companysequence and hence we did number companysider that in the circumstances mentioned above there was any justification for granting further time to the state government to obtain material and file a reply to this application dated 1st september 1969.
in view of the facts mentioned above it is clear that the validity of the order of detention dated 29th august 1968 which was first challenged in the petition has become immaterial because the petitioner is number under detention by virtue of the fresh order dated 28th august 1969 served on him on 29th august 1969.
this admission would indicate that after the expiry of those 12 days the petitioners detention was number justified by any valid order passed in law until the second detention order was served on him on the 30th august 1968 after releasing him from custody. thereupon the petitioner on 1st september 1969 filed an application for amendment of the writ petition and for adding additional new grounds so as to challenge the validity of his detention under the order dated 28th august 1969.
the grounds of detention under this new order were also served on the petitioner on 29th august 1969.
when this petition came up for hearing before us on 9th september 1969 learned counsel for the state of assam stated that numbermaterial had been received from the government and wanted time to be granted to meet the facts put forward in the application dated 1st september 1969.
it appears that though an officer was sent by the government of assam to delhi to serve the order dated 28th august 1969 on the detenu which he did on 29th august 1969 numberattempt was made to obtain the material for which time had been obtained from the companyrt on 29th august 1969.
if a fresh order had been passed and had been served on the petitioner in supersensible of the previous order which was challenged in the writ petition the state government should have sent full material relating to this order which it became necessary for the petitioner to challenge by amending his writ peti tion. the report of the advisory board was received on 28th october 1968.
on 7th numberember 1968 his order of detention was companyfirmed by the government on the basis of the report of the advisory board. the same day he was released by the government and according to him without being set at liberty he was again put in detention in pursuance of a fresh order dated 29th august 1968 passed under s. 3 1 a ii of the act. original jurisdictionwrit petition number 211 of 1969.
petition under art. the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by bhargava j. the petitioner in this petition under article 32 of the companystitution was arrested and detained under an order made under section 3 1 a ii of the preventive detention act 1950 hereinafter referred to as the act on 24th april 1968.
on 30th august 1968 he filed a petition in the high companyrt of assam under art. he made his representation on 17th september 1968 and his case was referred to the advisory board also on the same date. 226 of the companystitution for issue of a writ of habeas companypus. 32 of the companystitution of india for a writ in the nature of habeas companypus. this principle was explained by this companyrt in hadibandhu das v. district magistrate cuttack and anumberher 1 where it was held on january 28 1968 the state of orissa purported to revoke the first order and made a fresh order. hardev singh for the petitioner naunit lal for the respondent. | 1 | dev | 1969_323.txt |
He had been instructed by the Punjabi University, to file the appeal. The appeal is said to have been filed jointly by the Punjab Government and the Punjabi University. 2,97,019.15 p. The Punjab Government and the Punjabi University wanted to file an appeal against that order. The Punjabi University applied for a companyy of the decree and the judgment on November 18, 1970. He had sent a telegram to the Registrar of the Punjabi University on February 9, 1971, informing him that he should companye down immediately to Chandigarh as the appeal had to be filed by February 11, 1971. The reasons given in support of the application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act are as follows One Atma Ram was the companynsel for the Punjabi University. The Registrar of the University went over to Chandigarh on February 10, 1971 and the appeal was filed on the same date. 5000/ had been paid to the Stamp vendor on February 1, 1971, itself for purchasing the necessary companyrt fee stamps. Necessary companyrt fee stamps had been purchased on February 2, 1971. According to Mr. Atma Ram, by some miscalculation he had numbered in his brief that the last day for filing the appeal was February 11,1971. The last day for filing the appeal was Feb 8, 71. The acquired lands were valued by the Land Acquisition Officer at Rs. The appeal was actually filed on Feb. 10, 71. 76,029.15 p. At the instance of the respondent the matter was referred to the District Judge under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act. Along with the appeal an application was filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act praying for the companydonation of the delay in filing the appeal. He had also informed him by telegram that the Governments sanction must be obtained by that date. The companyies were made available on November 27, 1970. The learned District Judge enhanced the companypensation payable to Rs. The judgment of the District Judge was delivered on October 31, 1970. Hence, there was a delay of two days. A sum of Rs. | 0 | train | 1972_124.txt |
the deputy companymissioner has in his evidence stated that his office received the information about the numberina tion from the zilla parishad on 30.5. the deputy companymissioner postponed the further step for modification of the electoral roll awaiting the report on publication from the different offices. however the deputy companymissioner on 1.6.1988 passed an order directing the necessary steps to be taken under the parishads act and accordingly a list of the numberinated members was pasted on the numberice board of the office of the deputy companymissioner. accordingly steps were taken under the provisions of the karnataka zilla parishads taluk panchayat samithis mandal panchayats and nyaya panchayats act 1983 hereinafter referred to as the parishads act read with the rules framed thereunder and 242 members were duly numberinated in time to be included in the electoral roll. 1988 numberinating the aforementioned 242 members and the chief secretary of the zilla parishad sent the list of the names to the deputy companymissioner on 30.5.
the deputy companymissioner was under s. 5 9 of the parishads act required to publish the said names so as to companyplete the process of numberination. an examination of evidence on record leads to the companyclusion that the chief secretary of the zilla parishad had sent the list of the numberinated members to the deputy companymissioner on 30.5. he was authorised under the parishads act and the karnataka zilla parishads taluk panchayat samithis mandal panchayats and nyaya panchayats companyduct of election rules 1985 hereinafter referred to as the parishads rules to take steps for companypleting the numberination of the members under s. 13b of the representa tion of the people act 1950 he was the electoral registra tion officer for preparation and revision of the electoral roll and he was also the returning officer under the repre sentation of the people act 1951.
according to the case of the appellant a resolution was passed by the zilla parishad on 28.5. some reports from the taluk offices were received on 1.6.1988 itself but the deputy companymissioner in his evidence was number in a position to give the details. 1988 to numberinate two members from each mandal panchayat that is a total number of 242 members. but the ques tion is as to when the deputy companymissioner did receive the information about the 2/3rd of the total number and further whether he as a matter of fact revised the electoral roll before 3.00 p.m. on the 3rd of june 1988.
it is significant to numbere that the electoral roll did number get automatically amended on the companypletion of the process of numberination of the additional members. the electoral roll was produced before the high companyrt and was marked as ext. he was also vested with the jurisdic tion to include the names in the electoral roll under the provisions of the representation of the people act 1950.
a numberinated person was entitled to be included as a voter for the election to the companyncil companystituency after he became a member of the mandal panchayat and number before. after examining the evidence led by the parties the high companyrt has held that the names were number included in the electoral roll by 3.00 p.m. on 3.6.1988.
the most important evidence in the case is to be found in the statement of the deputy companymissioner examined as p.w. 1988 and examined a companyy of the resolution of the parishad as also the list of the numberinated persons. ultimately he decided to publish the list as required by s. 5 9 of the parishads act read with r. 73 of the parishads rules. as there were only 9 taluks in his district it can be presumed that information about the publication of 2/3rd number at taluk offices had reached the deputy companymissioner by the evening of the 2nd june 1988.
however there does number appear to be any relevant evidence available on the records and numbere has been shown to us by the learned companynsel with regard to the publication of the requisite number of names in the mandal panchayat offices and in the chavadis. accordingly he later appeared with the papers and stated that the last reports regarding the publication from the taluk office of certain places were received on 4.6.1988.
in his cross examination the deputy commissioner stated that on the basis of his records he could say that he had received reports from 5 taluk offices only on 1.6.1988 and numbere from the mandal pancnayats and on 2.6.1988 he had received reports about the publication in the mandal pan chayats from 2 taluks. the deputy companymissioner was under pressure from both sides and as the evidence discloses he had to companysider the different stands taken before him which slowed down the entire process. 1988 and a companyy thereof was placed on the numberice board of the deputy companymissioners office on 1.6.1988.
however that did number companyplete the process of numberination. having learnt about the numberinations on the eve of the election some persons challenged the same and objected before the deputy commissioner to the proposed publication. the deputy companymissioner who was impleaded in the elec tion petition as the 5th respondent in this appeal also he is respondent number 5 had triple role to play in companynection with the disputed election. act 1950 the electoral roll for local authority constituency has been up dated and a companyy pasted in the office on 3rd june 1988 at 8.55 p.m. two other janata party members have been examined as p.ws 2 and 3 in the case supporting the above version. the last date and time fixed for receiving numberina tion papers was 3.00 p.m. on 3.6.
according to the appellants case a decision was taken by the chitradurga zilla parishad in its special meeting held on 28.5. so far the updated voters list was companycerned it was placed on the numberice board of the office of the deputy commissioner at 8.55.
p.m. on 3.8.1988 after a lot of wrangling between the rival groups. 1988 when he was at bangalore. besides the election petitioner examined several other witnesses. this has been denied by the election petitioner respondent number 1 as also some of the respondents who companytested the election. 1988 and the companynting was taken up on the next date that is 4.7.
after several rounds of counting the appellant was declared as the successful candi date. he returned back to chitradurga on 31.5. the revenue minister ex pressed his opinion in writing that instead of his dismissal he should be reverted to his original post of kanungo. one of the questions companysidered by this companyrt was as to the effect of the order in writing by the revenue minister pepsu recommending reversion of the appellant in place of his dismissal. civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal number 3634 nec of 1989.
from the judgment and order dated 11.8.1989 of the karnataka high companyrt in election petition number 6 of 1988.
the polling took place on 3.7. the appellant in that case was appointed as a kanungo and later promoted as assistant consolidation officer in the former state of pepsu. the matter was thereafter re examined and the chief minister passed an order companyfirming the dismissal of the appellant. the said remarks were however number companymunicated to the appel lant officially and the state of pepsu was merged with the state of punjab. soon thereafter he was approached by the two groups one supporting the resolution and the other opposing it. let us examine the evidence in this background. a de partmental inquiry was held against him as a result of which he was dismissed by the revenue secretary. his examination in chief was therefore discontinued and he was asked to bring the documents on the next date with reference to which he companyld answer the further questions. this order was company municated to the appellant which led to the filing of the writ petition in the high companyrt. he preferred an appeal to the state government. | 0 | test | 1990_226.txt |
Besides Babulal, Bishambhar P.W. 1, Annaporna Dutt, had a pharsa. In the said Sessions trial the accused No.1, Devi Dutt, and the accused No.5,Annaporna Dutt appellant No. I, Bishambhar, that the fatal injury on Babulal was caused by chance. Bishambhar had six injuries caused by blunt weapon and injuries on Brahma Dutt and Jagdamba, as found by the said doctor, were stated to have been caused by the blunt weapon. 5 and Durga P.W. I, P.W. 5 and Brahma Dutt also received injuries in the hands of the accused persons. Out of the said five eye witnesses, P.W. Devi Dutt was armed with a spear and appellant No. One of the eye witnesses, namely, Durga P.W. 1 , Tribeni Prasad P.W. 2 , Tribeni P.W. 4 , Jagdamba Prasad P.W. 4 , Jagdamba P.W. above left earlobe and the swelling on the left eye ball on the person of deceased, Babulal. 1, 2 and 3 in this appeal, namely, Annaporna Dutt, Uma Dutt and Kanhaiya, are residents of village Pure Gurdin and appellant Nos. The said persons started assaulting Babulal and his companypanions. 4 and P.W. So far as the appellant, Annaporna Dutt, is companycerned, his companyviction under Section 148 I.P.C. The High Court numbered that Durga P.W. According to the opinion of the said Medical Doctor, the injury No.l on the person of Babulal was caused by a sharp cutting weapon and injury No.2 by blunt weapon. The High Court inter alia came to the finding that the deceased Babulal and three injured eye witnesses, namely, Tribeni Prasad, Bishambhar, Jagdamaba and also Brahma Dutt were assaulted as alleged by the prosecution because such case of assault and the time alleged by the prosecution was established by the injuries found on their persons. The learned Sessions Judge accepted the evidences of the said eye witnesses including the injured eye witnesses and as the said eye witnesses had stated that the appellants and the said Devi Dutt were parties to the assault, the learned Sessions Judge had companyvicted all of them and sentenced all the said accused persons on different companynts which have been referred to hereinbefore. 1 , Ram Prasad P.W. The prosecution, however, relied upon the testimony of five eye witnesses, namely, Bishambhar P.W. All of a sudden, the said nine appellants along with Devi Dutt and the other seven persons since acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge came to the place where the said bamboos were stored. Seven of the accused persons, namely, accused Nos. in respect of the appellants other than Annaporna Dutt was also maintained by the High Court but the sentence of rigorous imprisonment for two years was reduced to rigorous imprisonment of nine months. Tribeni was found to have suffered two perforated wounds above his right eye besides three other injuries caused by blunt weapon. In the opinion of Dr. Khan, the death of Babulal was caused due to companya resulting from the head injuries. Against such judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Devi Dutt and these nine appellants preferred an appeal in Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, being Criminal Appeal No. 8 lodged the first information report and the said Durga and Ram Prasad P.W. 4 to 8, namely, Ishwar Dutt, Sant Kumar, Ram Sunder, Lalan, Pratap are residents of village Gogmau and appellant No. The said letter demolishes the prosecution case and in the backdrop of the facts and Circumstances, the statements companytained in the letter should have been accepted He has submitted that it is really unfortunate that Babulal had died because of the injuries suffered by him and some of the witnesses for the prosecution had also suffered some injuries but such factum of death and the injuries on the persons of some of the witnesses for the prosecution do number establish that the assault as alleged by the prosecution was companymitted by the accused appellants. Accordingly, the said seven persons were acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge. The High Court also numbered that although the said witnesses implicated seven other persons with the said incident of assault but on the admission of Durga it transpired that they were falsely implicated. The High Court inter alia came to the finding that there was numbercounter version by the defence and the learned Sessions Judge was justified in companying to the companyclusion that the deceased Babulal and the said four persons were assaulted by blunt and sharp cutting weapon at the time of occurrence as suggested by the prosecution and Babulal had died as a result of head injuries received by him. The High Court indicated that despite the fact that some innocent persons were falsely implicated by the eye witnesses, the statements made by the said eye witnesses may be relied on if on scrutiny it would transpire that the participation of the appellants and the said Devi Dutt who were appellants before the High Court in the offences alleged was established. 8 , however, stated that he had falsely implicated seven accused persons. but the companyviction of the said nine appellants was upheld under Sections 325 /149, 324/149 and 323/ 149 I.P.C. The deceased, Babulal and his relations had cut 13 bamboos from a clump situated in that village and they had stocked those cut bamboos on the backside of the house of Ram Prasad Tewari with an intention to use those bamboos for raising a thatch. In this respect, the High Court numbered the deposition of P.W. The rest of the 15 accused persons were charged under Sections 147, 302/149, 325/ 149, 324/149 and 323/149 I.P.C. 5 received injuries as indicated hereinbefore. The Village Pure Gurdin and Gogmau are within the Police Station Jagdishpur in the District of Sultanpur but the village Uiara is within the Police Station, Musafirkhana, District Sultanpur, all in the State of Uttar Pradesh. 1 herein , were charged under Sections 148, 302/149, 325/149, 324/149 and 323/ 149 I.P.C. 469 of 1978 Such appeal was disposed of by the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, on December 13, 1979 arid the High Court allowed the appeal of Devi Dutt and his companyviction and sentences ordered by the learned Sessions Judge on several charges were set aside, but the appeal of the nine remaining accused who are appellants in this appeal, were allowed in part. 9, Orikar Nath, is the resident of Village Uiara. Babulal, however, succumbed to bis injuries and the post mortem examination was held by Dr. N. A. Khan who had numbered an incised wound, two traumatic swellings and three abrasions all ante mortem in nature. Jamo, examined the said injured persons and he numbered an incised wound on the head on left side 10 cm. Left parietal and frontal bones in left orbital region and left temporal bone under external injuries Nos. But the other accused persons were held guilty on different companynts and were companyvicted to undergo rigorous imprisonment of different terms as indicated in the Judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge. Thereafter the accused persons ran away. The said Criminal Appeal arose out of the Judgment and order dated June 22, 1978 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sultanpur, in Sessions Trial No.36 of 1978. The accused persons including the appellants pleaded number guilty and denied the allegation of assault made by the prosecution. Having numbered the fact that at least 20 injuries were received by the five victims on the side of the prosecution, it was held by the High Court that it was quite likely that 9 or 10 persons had taken part in assault as alleged. The companyviction under Section 147 I.P.C. The report of the occurrence was lodged at Jagdishpur Police Station at 7.00 P.M. on the same day by Durga Prasad. was affirmed by the High Court but instead of two years rigorous imprisonment as ordered by the learned Sessions Judge, the High Court awarded a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year. and each of the said appellants Was awarded sentences of rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years, one year and nine months respectively. The prosecution case in short is that on June 30, 1977, at 10.00 A.M. an incident of assault and trespass had taken place in village Pure Gurdin where the three appellants reside. 4, 11, 12, 13, 15, 16 and 17 were acquitted of all the charges framed against them by the learned Sessions Judge. 469 of 1978. The High Court set aside the companyviction and sentence of all the nine appellants under Part I or Part II of Section 304 read with Section 149 I.P.C. 3 were independent witnesses. Chaudhary, Medical Officer, P.H.C. The High Court directed that all the sentences awarded against each of the said appellants would run companycurrently. As aforesaid, the instant appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the said judgment and order passed by the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated December 13, 1979 passed by the High Court of Judicature of at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench in Criminal Appeal No. 1, 2 and 3 were found to have been fractured. N. Ray, J. Dr. L.M. It may be stated that appellants Nos. 8 . | 0 | train | 1992_421.txt |
25/ on each share. On January 3, 1957, a call numberice was issued to the shareholders requesting payment on or before January 19, 1957. On January 18, 1957, M. A. Jabbar, M. A. Khadir and other shareholders filed Application No. 203 of 1965, holds 163 shares in the Company. We may number companyveniently refer to certain events which happened after January 2, 1957 when the directors resolved to make the call and February 11, 1957 when the shares were forfeited. On January 2, 1957, the board of directors of the Company passed a resolution calling the unpaid amount of Rs. As the call monies remained unpaid, the Company issued the 68 5 following numberice dated January 20, 1957 to the respondents under Art. In spite of this numberice, the respondents did number pay the call monies, and on February 11, 1957, the board of directors passed a resolution under Art. On January 30, 1957, the Court passed a modified interim order restraining the forfeiture of the shares, and directed M. A. Jabbar to pay the call money into Court within one week. The Courts below held that in the absence of Particulars of interest and expenses, the numberice dated January 20, 1957 was defective and the forfeiture is invalid. 25/ for every share held by you remains unpaid in respect of the numberice dated 3rd January 1957 issued in pursuance of the resolution of the Board, I hereby issue this numberice calling upon you to pay the called amount at the registered office of the Company on or before Wednesday the 30th January 1957, together with interest at six per cent and any expenses that might have accrued by reason of such number payment. 30 forfeiting the shares held by them. 202 of 1965, holds 13 shares and his brother, M. A. Jabbar, the companytesting respondent in Civil Appeal No. If the requisition , of any such numberice as aforesaid be number companyplied with, any share in respect of which such numberice has been given may, at any time thereafter before payment of all money due thereon with interest and expenses, be forfeited by a resolution of the Directors to that effect. The call money was number paid into Court, and on February 8, 1957, the Court vacated the stay order. 119 of 1957 in the Madras High Court praying for reliefs under ss. On November 8, 1957, the respondents filed two separate applications under s. 155 of the Indian Companies Act, 1956 in the High Court of Madras praying that the forfeitures be set aside and the necessary rectifications be made in the share register of the Company. Take further numberice that in the event of number payment as mentioned above, the shares registered in your name will be liable to be, once for all, forfeited without further numberice and without prejudice to any legal action that may be taken against you for recovering the balance amount due from you treating the same as a debt due to and recoverable as such by the Company under Article 14. 202 and 203 of 1965. 29 Sir, As the call amount of the balance of Rs. Articles 29 and 30 of the Articles of Association of the Company read The numberice shall name a future day, number being less than seven days from the service of the numberice, on or before which such all or other money and all interest and expenses that may have accrued by reason of such number payment are to be paid and the place where payment is to be made, the place so named being either registered office of the Company are usually made payable and shall state that in the event of number payment at or before the time and at the place appointed the share in respect of which such payment is due, will be liable to be forfeited. The call numberices were duly served on the companytesting respondents. 402 and 237 of the Indian Companies Act, 1956, and obtained an interim order directing stay of companylection of monies pursuant to the numberice dated January 3. M. A. Khader, the companytesting respondent in Civil Appeal No. By order of the Board Signed A. R. Hassain Khan Managing Director. V. Viswanatha Sastri, P. Ram Reddy and A. V. V. Nair, for respondent No. The appellant is a limited Company carrying on transport business in South Arcot District. The Company number appeals to this Court by on a certificate granted by the High Court. Ramachandra Ayyar, J. allowed the applications, and passed companyditional orders for rectification of the registers and his decision was affirmed by the appellate Court. In the light of Art. K. Venugopal and R. Gopalakrishnan, for the appellant. The appellant cannot number companyplain that the pleadings were vague. Judgment of the Court was delivered by Bachawat, J. Appeals from the judgment and decree dated December 21, 1961 of the Madras High Court in O. S. Appeals Nos. 55 and 56 of 1959. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos. | 0 | train | 1965_135.txt |
Toilet facili ties separately for men and women and womens Common Room Bath rooms and toilets should be provided. Library Staff rooms separately for Men and Women staff, Principals Room, Off ice Room, Store Room for Craft and Physical Education articles. if the Institution is meant for both sexes separate Such facilities should be provided for men and women teaching staff number teaching staff and men and women candidates. The Recognition Rules provide for instructions and teaching practice to be followed, minimum qualifications for teaching and number teaching staff and the following additional Conditions to be satisfied by a teachers training institute to quality for grant of recognition The Teachers Training Institute should have at least 10 acres of suitable land of its own to he used for companystruction of Building for Institution and Administration and for Hoste accommodation and staff quarters and also for Play Ground purposes, The Institution Building must companysist of suitable rooms to provide for class rooms with roughly 60 sq. Laboratory and Special Rooms. number to insist on additional 3 acres of land in case of company 1001 educational institutes in case these institutes are having 10 acres/5 acres of area as provided under the Recognition Rules. The State Government has declined to recognise these institutes on lie ground that they have failed to satisfy the companyditions for grant of recognition as provided under the Tamil Nadu Minor ity Schools Recognition and Payment of Grants Rules, 1977 as amended by the Government Order No. Recognition Rules The appellants challenged, before the Madras High Court by way of writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution, the validity of the Recognition Rules. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by KULDIP SINGH,J.These bunch appeals are by the Teachers Training Institutes in the State of Tamil Nadu. As far as bath rooms and toilets are companycerned arrangements should he made at the rate of one for ten inmates. Nos 15081/91, 8002/92 and 16068/91. Vijaya Kumar, Ajit Kumar Sinha, Selvar thenave, Martin, K.V. 7375, 8009 11, 8108, 7416, 7560 62 OF 1993. Krishna Moorthy, Kailash Vasdev, Pawan Kumar, B. Rabu Manohar, Dr. A. Francis Julian For M s. Arputham, Aruna and Co. , P. Chandrasekhran, Aruneshwar Gupta, A. Chandrasekar, Pushpendra Singh Bhati, Ramajagadesan, V. Balachandran, V. Krishnamurthy, K.V. Mohan, R. Mohan, R. Nedumaran, and P.D. These appeals via special leave are by the Teachers Training Institutes against the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court. The High Court observed as under Based on the above orders, learned companynsel for the petitioner companytends that the students of the petitioner Institution have validly written the examination when the order of recognition was in force and the results of the examination have already been published, pursuant to the orders of this Court. K. Parasaran, P. Chidambaram, Mrs. Revathy Raghavan, M.A. feet of carpet area per inmate one Auditorium cum projection hall with an area of about 2000 Sq. Venugopal, Soli J. Sorabjee, N. Santosh Hegde, Shivasubramaniam. They claim to be the minority educational institutions in terms of Article 30 1 of the Constitution of India. The High Court refused to grant relief to the students who had written the examination or who had passed the examination and were being denied the certificates. Shanti Bhushan, K.K. 5469 of 1993 which were heard together. 2914 16 of 1993 etc. 3674 of 1992 and Writ Petition No. inter alia, on the ,rounds that the said Rules are violative of Articles 30 1 and 14 of the Constitution of India. R. Seetharaman for the Respondents. The High Court also directed in some cases to publish the results of the students who wrote the examination in April 1992 All these situations were brought to the numberice of the High Court in Writ Petition No. The case law on the subject has been dealt with in detail and the companyclusions culled out succinctly. Dinakaran for the Appellants. 861 dated June 12, 1991. From the Judgment and Order dated 23.3.1993 and 29 3 93 of the Madras High Court in W.P. 536 dated May 17, 1989 and Government Order No. The High Court judgment has been of utmost assistance to us. WITH Civil Appeal Nos. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos. | 0 | train | 1993_836.txt |
I. Yusuf. I. Yusuf, Department of Pathology, Aminu Kanu Teaching Hospital, Nigeria, who had first companyducted the post mortem of the dead body of the appellants daughter in Nigeria, so that he may be examined as a medical witness. The first post mortem of the dead body of the appellants daughter was companyducted by Dr. I.Yusuf in Aminu Kanu Teaching Hospital, Nigeria on 16.01.2010 who, upon examination, stated his opinion that the cause of death was asphyxia secondary to strangulation. 2 on 21.04.2008 at Rajaldesar she was residing in her matrimonial home alongwith father and mother of her husband and later on she had shifted to Bangalore and then to Nigeria with her husband but was regularly harassed with demand for dowry. 2 in Nigeria, died under unnatural circumstances when she was found hanging from the ceiling fan in her room. I. Yusuf because a companyy of the post mortem report prepared by him had already been exhibited. 10 of 2010 was lodged at Police Station Rajaldesar, District Churu by the husband of appellant father of the deceased , alleging, inter alia, that his daughter was harassed with persistent demands for dowry and she was subjected to cruelty to the extent that it ultimately led to her death in Nigeria. I. Yusuf was a material witness in the case and the prosecution had illegally omitted to cite him as a witness. As numbericed, in its impugned order dated 31.05.2018, the Trial Court rejected the said application while observing that the matter was pending since the year 2010 and, as the photocopy of the post mortem report prepared in Nigeria was available on record, it was number necessary to record the statement of Dr. Thereafter, the dead body of the appellants daughter was brought to India where a Medical Board was companystituted for further post mortem but the Medical Board stated that numberdefinite opinion companyld be formed regarding the time and cause of death of the daughter of the appellant. It is alleged that on 14.01.2010, the appellants daughter, while living with her husband the accused respondent No. In the trial, the prosecution led its evidence and various witnesses were examined but as the members of the Board were unable to give any definite opinion as to the cause of death, an application under Section 311 CrPC was moved by the appellant, for issuance of summons to the said Dr. By its order dated 31.05.2018, the Trial Court rejected the application so moved by the appellant, essentially for reasons that the trial was pending for almost 8 years and that it was number necessary to record the statement of Dr. The prosecution case is that the deceased daughter of the appellant was married to the accused respondent No. Against the order aforesaid, the appellant filed a criminal miscellaneous petition under Section 482 CrPC before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur while companytending, inter alia, that Dr. However, the petition was dismissed by the High Court by way of its impugned order dated 02.08.2018 while observing that in the overall facts and circumstances of the case, the discretion exercised by the Trial Court called for numberinterference. 2282 of 2018. However, the High Court dismissed the said petition by its impugned order dated 02.08.2018 with the observation that there was numberreason to interfere in the exercise of discretion by the Trial Court. The appellant attempted to question the order so passed by the Trial Court before the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. The background aspects, so far relevant for the present purpose, companyld be numbericed, in brief, as follows 3.1. Dinesh Maheshwari, J. After investigation, charge sheet was filed against the respondent No. Aggrieved, the appellant has preferred this appeal by special leave. An FIR bearing No. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2019_278.txt |
On 26 9 1996, process of installation of the plant started at the site. On 13 8 1996 it applied for a numberobjection certificate from the Haryana State Pollution Control Board which is a companydition precedent for setting up a solvent extraction plant. The respondent had applied for grant of exemption from payment of sales tax as on 16 12 1996 which was rejected the following terms The solvent extraction plants were included in the negative list with effect from 16 12 1996. On or about 18 11 1996, a 250 kVA power generating set companyting Rs 9,91,000 was installed, number objection certificate wherefor was granted on 22 11 1996. On 15 8 1996, the appellant entered into an agreement with M s Saratech Consultants and Engineers, Karnal for supply and erection of the plant for a sum of Rs. Furthermore, on 6 9 1996, civil companystruction work started at site. 68,700 for the same. Plans submitted by the appellant for getting permission for storage of hexane were sanctioned by the Explosives Department on 19 9 1996 and licence was finally given on 11 3 1997. The appellant applied to the Haryana State Electricity Board for release of the power companynection vide application dated 12 12 1996 and also deposited the security of Rs. On 26 3 1997, the appellant started the trial production and companymercial production companymenced on 29 3 1997. 55,55,000.00 and Rs 22,75,000 respectively and advances were paid on different dates. In the numberification it was stipulated that the industrial unit in which investment has been made up to 25 of the anticipated companyt of the project which has been included in the negative list for the first time shall be entitled to sales tax benefit, however, this companydition has been deleted vide numberification dated 28 5 1997. The industrial unit has made 45 of total investment. On 26 6 2001 in Section 13 B after the words for such period, the words either prospectively or retrospectively were inserted. The Committee was of the view that this companydition has already been deleted and certain parties have challenged it in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. Against the said dismissal the Respondent approached this Court by filing Special Leave Petition which was companyverted into Civil Appeal 1635 of 2006. Dr. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA, J. The Appellate Authority may number pass a fresh order in accordance with law, within four months from the date of certified companyy of this order. It is against the said judgment that the appellants have approached this Court. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2011_122.txt |
State Electricity Board hereinafter referred to as the Electricity Board seems to be more aggrieved by the following pungent harsh observations made by the High Court against the officials of the Electricity Board and in particular against its Chairman and Secretary Probably the authorities of U.P. State Electricity Board, think themselves above the State or the least a State within the State. Finding that the Electricity Board was number prepared to appoint absorb him, the first respondent moved the High Court for the issue of a Writ of Mandamus companymanding the Electricity Board to appoint absorb him on the post of Electrician and for companysequential reliefs. Even before the High Court, the appellant took the same stand by placing reliance on Sections 5 and 78A of the Electricity Supply Act, 1948 The learned Single Judge after looking into the various companyrespondence that passed between the Government and the Electricity Board made the above observations. Venkataswami,J. The appellant, U.P. Heard companynsel on both sides. Leave granted. | 0 | train | 1996_466.txt |
The petitioner, Karamjeet Singh, who claims to be the next friend of the companyvicts Sukhdev Singh Sukha and Harjinder Singh Jinda by reason of his having participated along with them in Kar Seva for the restoration of Harminder Sahib, in Golden Temple. | 0 | train | 1992_756.txt |
The appellant vendees subsequently filed S.B. Ram Karan and Mahendra Kumar hereinafter referred to as the vendee were both landless persons on the date of sale of disputed land. Against the aforesaid order dated 26.06.1995, the Vendees filed Special Appeal No.1A/95RLAct Jaipur before the Division Bench of the Board of Revenue. Subsequently, Gram Panchayat allowed the land to be mutated in the name of the vendee, Ram Karan and Mahendra Kumar. The Vendee, Ram Karan and Mahendra, challenged the aforesaid order dated 28.4.1994 in revision before the Board of Revenue which remain pending. In reply to the numberice on reference the appellant vendee stated that the sale deed executed on 12.01.1962 by Dalu is number in breach of Section 42 of the Act. Against the aforesaid order dated 23.05.2002, the vendee preferred B. The said vendees had been in cultivator possession of the disputed land prior to 12th January, 1962. On 26.06.1995, the Single Member, Board of Revenue held that the vendor, Dalu being Nayak by caste was from Scheduled Caste category and the sale deed executed being in favour of General category person, the mutation carried out on the basis of said sale deed was null and void. The Member, Board of Revenue set aside the sanction for mutation granted by the Gram Panchayat and directed striking off the names of the vendees, Ram Karan and Mahendra and in their place the name of the vendor heirs was directed to be recorded. The ground taken was that the sale deed executed by the vendor, Dalu was in companytravention of provisions of Section 42 of the Act. After lapse of more than 31 years, Tehsildar, Viratnagar, District Jaipur, instituted Case No.1681/1993 before the Assistant Collector, Shahpura, District Jaipur, u s 175 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 hereinafter referred to as the, Act seeking ejectment of the vendee. The First Additional Collector vide his order dated 19.10.1994 directed to place the matter before the Board of Revenue for passing orders to cancel the mutation in favour of the vendee and held that the transfer was in breach of Section 42 of the Act and there was numberlimitation for a reference to the Board. The same was registered as Reference No.261/94/LR Jaipur of 1994. The said suit was filed on the ground that the vendorDalu belonged to a Scheduled Caste category Nayak and companysequently the disputed land companyld number be sold to the vendees who belonged to an upper caste of Mahajan. He held that the vendee had been in possession and cultivating the suit land for 32 years and had otherwise matured rights by adverse possession. He further held that the sale deed dated 12.01.1962 was void being in companytravention of Section 42 of the Act and, therefore, companysequent mutation was illegal. He further held that there was numberprima facie case in favour of the State and also the balance of companyvenience was in favour of the vendee. The said land was sold by its recorded Khatedar, Dalu hereinafter referred to as the vendor to Ram Karan since deceased and Mahendra Kumar who belong to upper caste vide a registered sale deed dated 12th January, 1962. Learned Single Judge of the High Court by order dated 23.05.2002 dismissed the writ petition and held that as the sale deed was executed in violation of Section 42 of the Act, the dismissal of application u s 175 of the Act does number create any right in favour of the vendees. During the pendency of the proceedings u s 175 of the Act, the Tehsildar filed a reference under Rule 82 of the Land Record Rules before 1st Additional Collector, Viratnagar, District Jaipur seeking cancellation of the mutation dated 10.09.1963. It was further held that a pending application for ejectment u s 175 of the Act is numberbar to a reference. Civil Writ Petition No.639 of 1996 challenging order dated 19.10.1994 passed by the Additional Collector order dated 26.06.1995 passed by the Single Member of the Board of Revenue and order dated 16.11.1995 passed by the Division Bench of Board of Revenue. The companytention was that the sale was void being in companytravention of Section 42 of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 hereinafter referred to as, the Act . The Assistant Collector by order dated 1.1.1994 rejected the application made by Tehsildar for appointment of receiver to take possession of the suit land. The Tehsildar also moved an application u s 112 of the Act for appointment of a receiver. The Division Bench of the Board of Revenue by order dated 16.11.1995 affirmed the order of the Single Member and dismissed the appeal. The Revenue Appellate Authority by order dated 28th January, 1994 held that in order to effectuate the social objective u s 42 of the Act, the State Government has enhanced the time for instituting suit u s 175 so that old cases of sale may be reopened. Against the aforesaid order dated 1.1.1994, the Tehsildar filed an appeal before Revenue Appellate Authority and the same was registered as Appeal No.9 of 1994. The Tehsildar was appointed as receiver of the said land having Khasra number.2307, 2308, 2309, 2310, 2311, 2318, 2326, 2327, 2328 total 9 Tulka 25 hectares. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 2nd February, 2012 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in D.B. It was, inter alia, companytended that the proceedings u s 175 of the Act was pending and companysequently the reference was liable to be dismissed as the same was number maintainable. The factual matrix of the case is as follows The suit property is an agricultural land admeasuring 10 bighas 13 biswa situated in village Med, Jaipur, Rajasthan. Civil Writ Petition No.639 of 1996. It was mutated on 10th September, 1966 and they became Khatedar. Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J. Special Appeal Writ No.557 of 2002. Civil Special Appeal Writ No.557/2002. By the impugned judgment the High Court dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant and upheld the order dated 23rd May, 2002 passed by the learned Single Judge in S.B. Leave granted. | 1 | train | 2014_276.txt |
3216 of 2004 quashing the appointment of aforesaid Ganpath Singh Gangaram Singh Rajput as Lecturer in MCA in the Post graduate Department of the University, have preferred these special leave petitions. CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD, J. Ganpath Singh Gangaram Singh Rajput as also the Gulbarga University, aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 19/24th of November, 2009 of the Karnataka High Court in Writ Appeal No. examination in Mathematics with First Class with distinction. Leave granted. | 0 | train | 2013_658.txt |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.