text
stringlengths 11
401k
| label
int64 0
1
| split
stringclasses 3
values | name
stringlengths 10
16
|
|---|---|---|---|
, J.P. Nagar in Suit No. 44387 of 2007. The learned Civil Judge S.D , J.P. Nagar by order dated 9th January, 2006 allowed the application of the appellant plaintiffs and struck off the defence of the respondent. Against the said order, the respondent filed revision application in C.C R.No.1 of 2006 before the District Judge, J.P. Nagar in February, 2006. 17 of 1998 on 21st September, 1998 before Civil Judge S.D. The District Judge, J.P. Nagar by impugned order dated 31st May, 2007 dismissed the same and affirmed order dated 9th January, 2006 passed by the Trial Court. By the impugned judgment, the High Court exercised its revisional jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution of India and set aside the orders dated 31st May, 2007 and 9th January, 2006 passed by the District Judge, J.P. Nagar in S.C.C Revision No.1 of 2006 and Civil Judge, S.D. for eviction of the respondent defendant tenant from the suit premises, the shop located at Mohalla Raju Sarai Kanth Road, Amroha Distt.,
J.P. Nagar on the ground of arrears of rent and default. 17 of 1998 respectively. SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J. This appeal is preferred by the appellants against the judgment and order dated 17th September, 2007 passed by the learned Single Judge, High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. After long delay, the respondent filed his written objection on 3rd April, 1999 against which the appellant plaintiffs filed an application for striking off the defence on the ground that the respondent failed to deposit the rent, the damages due and the companyt of the suit inspite of order dated 16th December, 1998, the first date of hearing and also failed to deposit water tax and house tax and thereby number companyplied with the provisions under Order XV Rule 5 of the Code of Civil Procedure CPC for short . Thus, defence of the respondent which was struck off by the Courts below was restored by the High Court. The respondent thereafter filed a petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad registered as Civil Miscellaneous Writ Petition No. Inspite of receipt of numberice, the respondent did number choose to file written statement within the specified period. The learned Single Judge passed the following order Heard learned companynsel for the parties. The appellants filed Suit No. Leave granted.
| 1 |
train
|
2013_463.txt
|
4,00,000/ imposed under Section 112a by the Commissioner of Customs, Jawahar Customs House, Nhava Sheva reducing them to Rs. 42,84,000/ imposed under Section 125 by the Commissioner of Customs, Jawahar Customs House, Nhava Sheva and reducing it to Rs. C/1030/01 Mum and in reducing the redemption fine from Rs. 29,40,000/ to Rs. 42,84,000/ to Rs. 29,40,000/ Rs. 7,50,000/ and Rs. 7,00,000/ and penalty from Rs. 7,00,000/ and with penalties of Rs. 25,00,000/ and Rs. 4,00,000/ to Rs. 25,00,000/ and penalty imposed u s. 112a from Rs. 1.01 crores and Rs. C/1042/201 Mum by following its earlier orders in the case of Stonemann Marble Industries. Being aggrieved, the Revenue preferred an application under Section 130A of the Act, stating that the following questions of law arose out of the orders of the Tribunal Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in law reducing the redemption fine imposed under Section 125 of the Customs Act, 1962 from Rs.1.01 Crores to Rs. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in law in intervening with the redemption fines of Rs. The Tribunal, in each case, partly allowed the appeal, observing that the facts in each case were similar to those in M s. Stonemann Marble Industries Vs.
Commissioner of Customs Order No. By the impugned orders, the High Court has rejected the applications filed by the Revenue under Section 130A of the Customs Act, 1962 for short the Act on the ground that numberquestion of law arose from the orders of the Customs, Excise and Gold Control Appellate Tribunal for short the Tribunal . 7,50,000/ in Appeal No. The respondents importers were engaged in the business of import of rough marble blocks, classifiable under sub heading 2515.12 of the Customs Tariff Act, 1975, from various companyntries such as Italy, Iran, Turkey, Indonesia, Spain, China, Greece etc. CI/424 25/WZB/2002 dated 30th January, 2002 , and therefore, the redemption fine and penalty was reduced to 20 and 5 of the CIF value respectively. Nos.4371 4383 of 2004, as being illustrative, would suffice. As afore mentioned, the High Court has, vide the impugned orders, rejected the applications filed by the Revenue on the ground that numberquestion of law arose from the orders of the Tribunal. 2,00,000/ respectively without examining the facts of the case? 2,00,000/ in Appeal No. 1 The Commissioner of Customs or the other party may, within one hundred and eighty days of the date upon which he is served with numberice of an order under section 129B passed before the 1st day of July, 2003 number being an order relating, among other things, to the determination of any question having a relation to the rate of duty of customs or to the value of goods for purposes of assessment , by application in the prescribed form, accompanied, where the application is made by the other party, by a fee of two hundred rupees, apply to the High Court to direct the Appellate Tribunal to refer to the High Court any question of law arising from such order of the Tribunal. Hence, the present appeals by the Revenue. However, to appreciate the companytroversy involved, a brief reference to the facts in C.A. 15 16 of 2003.
| 0 |
train
|
2011_71.txt
|
as a result of the overturning of the petrol tanker the petrol companytained in it leaked out and companylected nearby. at about 7.15 a.m. an explosion took place in the said petrol tanker resulting in fire. according to the learned judges the companylision between the tanker and the other vehicle which occurred earlier and the escape of petrol from the tanker which ultimately resulted in explo sion and fire were number unconnected but related events. the learned judges have observed that the expression use of a motor vehicle companyers a very wide field a field more extensive than which might be called traffic use of the motor vehicle and that the use of a vehicle is number companyfined to the periods when it was in motion or was moving and that a vehicle would still be is use even when it was stationary the learned judges were of the view that merely because there was interval of about four and half hours between the companylision of the petrol tanker and the explosion and fire in the tanker it cannumber be necessarily inferred that there was numbercausal relation between earlier event and the later incident of explosion and fire and that the earlier companylision if number the cause was at least the main companytributory factor for the subsequent explosion and fire in the tanker in question inasmuch as the tanker was carrying petrol which was a highly companybustible and volatile material and after the companylision the petrol tanker had fallen on one of its sides on sloping ground resulting in escape of highly inflammable petrol and there was grave risk of explosion and fire from the petrol companying out of the tanker and the tanker was allowed to remain in such a dangerous companydition for hours without any effort being made to prevent such great hazard of fire and explo sion from petrol escaping from the tanker. the claims tribunal also observed that the villagers tried to take the benefit of the earlier accident and tried to pilfer petrol from the petrol tanker and while thus pilfering the petrol there was fric tion which caused ignition and explosion and since an out side agency was responsible for the explosion and fire which situation was created by the villagers themselves the explo sion companyld number be said to be an accident arising out of the use of the tanker. it appears that claim petitions were also filed by the legal representatives of other persons who had died as a result of the burn injuries sustained by them in the explosion and fire in the petrol tanker. petitioner number 1 is the owner of the said petrol tanker and petitioner number 2 the insurer of the same. a number of persons who had assembled near the petrol tanker sustained burn injuries and a few of them succumbed to the said injuries. the petrol tanker was proceeding from pune side to bangalore whereas the truck was companying from the opposite direction. as a result of the said companylision the petrol tanker went off the road and fell on its left side at a distance of about 20 feet from the highway. the claims tribunal was of the view that the explosion and the fire which took place after about four hours had numberconnection whatsoever with the accident which took place at 3 a.m. and that the explosion and the fire was altogether an independent accident. the claims tribunal decided all the claim petitions filed under section 92a of the act by a companymon order dated decem ber 2 1989 whereby the said petitions were dismissed on the ground that the explosion companyld number be said to be an acci dent arising out of the use of the petrol tanker and that the provisions of section 92a of the act were number attracted. 15000 as companypensation under section 92a of the act. the learned judges rejected the submission made on behalf of the petitioners that in the instant case the first information report recorded by the police and the panchanama indicated that the explosion and fire near the petrol tanker had been caused by careless act of throwing away of a match stick used for lighting a beedi or cigarette. the petitioners companytested the claim petitions filed by the respondent and other claimants under section 92a of the act and raised objection with regard to the jurisdiction of the claims tribunal to enter tain such petitions on the ground that explosion and fire resulting in injuries to the deceased companyld number be said to be an accident arising out of the use of a motor vehicle. the incidence of road accidents by motor vehicles has reached serious propor tions. 15000 as companypensation under section 92a of the act to the respondent. on october 29 1987 at about 3 a.m. there was a companyli sion between a petrol tanker bearing registration number mkl 7461 and a truck bearing registration number meh 4197 on the national highway number 4 near village kavatha in district satara maharashtra. while it was thus parked anumberher motor vehicle had companylided with appel lants motor car. the learned judges held that the papers and documents filed before the claims tribunal under rule 306b of the bombay motor vehicles rules 1959 did number establish that the fire was ignited by someone carelessly throwing a match stick. the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by c. agrawal j. the questions raised for companysideration in this petition for special leave to appeal involve the interpretation of the expression arising out of the use of a motor vehicle companytained in section 92a of the motor vehicles act 1939 hereinafter referred to as the act . the respondent as the legal representative of her deceased son filed a claim petition before the motor acci dent claims tribunal satara claims tribunal under section 110 of the act claiming rs.75000 as companypensation from the petitioners. the peti tioners filed a letters patent appeal against the said decision of the learned single judge which was dismissed by a division bench of the high companyrt by judgment dated august 16 1990.
the appellate bench of the high companyrt has affirmed the finding of the learned single judge that there was no evidence whatsoever that the person or persons in respect of whose deaths companypensation had been claimed under section 92a were themselves companymitting theft or pilferage of petrol at the time of their deaths and that these victims companyld have only been curious by standers at the site of the accident. during the last three years the number of road accidents per year on the average has been around 1.45 lakhs and of these the number of fatal accidents has been around 20000 per year. the victims of these accidents are generally pedestrians belonging to the less affluent sections of society. number 65 of 1990.
l. sanghi k.s.v. the purpose underlying the enactment of these provisions as indicated in the statement of objects and reasons appended to the bill was as follows there has been a rapid development of road transport during the past few years and large increase in the number of motor vehicles on the road. one of those who died as a result of such injuries was deepak uttam more. the respondent filed an appeal against the said order of the claims tribunal before the high companyrt. the respond ent is the mother of deepak uttam more. the car companyld number be mechanically propelled because the engine would number work. she also made a claim for payment of rs. puri and pramod dayal for the petitioners. civil appellate jurisdiction special leave petition civil number 14822 of 1990.
from the judgment and order dated 16.8.1990 of the bombay high companyrt in l.p.a. vaze and g.b. the said appeal was allowed by a learned single judge of the high companyrt by judgment dated february 5 1990.
he therefore directed payment of rs. on that date the appellant had cleaned the car sent the battery to be recharged and had replaced the old carburettor with a new one. murthy s.m. feeling aggrieved by the said decision of the appellate bench of the bombay high court the petitioner have filed this petition for special leave to appeal. ashok h. desai george kurian a.p. sathe for the respondent. a numberice for final disposal was issued on the petition and the learned companynsel for the parties have been heard at length.
| 0 |
test
|
1991_198.txt
|
Multiple companypound fracture in the left leg knee and in the ankle. 75,000/ towards pain and suffering due to fracture in his left leg and amputation of his right leg. Severe injury in the left hand palm Skin grafting done in the left leg vi. He sustained the following bodily injuries Amputation of the right leg leaving 10cms. It is also in the evidence on record that the claimant also suffered multiple companypound fracture in the left leg knee and in the ankle amongst other injuries. All together the Tribunal has awarded Rs.5,25,000/ with interest at the rate of 12 per annum. The Tribunal by its order awarded Rs.75,000/ for loss of marital alliance. The Tribunal further awarded Rs.1,00,000/ as companypensation for loss of earning power as against the claim of Rs.11,00,000/ . The Tribunal also awarded Rs. The Tribunal also awarded Rs.25,000/ towards inability to participate in family and social functions. Severe injury to the head leading to a state of unconsciousness. It is number disputed that at the time of accident the appellant was working as a mason and he was earning Rs.3,000/ per month. However, the High Court has reduced the rate of interest from 12 per annum to 9 per annum. The appellant, a boy when aged about 20 years met with a fatal vehicle accident on 26.06.1997. from the hip. O R D E R CIVIL APPEAL NOS.2204 2205 OF 2002 We have heard, Ms. Madhusmita Bora, learned companynsel for the appellant and Mr. T. Harish Kumar, learned companynsel for the respondent at length. On appeal being preferred by the appellant the High Court has enhanced to Rs.5,29,948/ .
| 1 |
train
|
2008_390.txt
|
The position prevalent pre AVS Committee recommendations, was that a Squadron Leader who did number make it to the next rank of Wing Commander in three chances admissible to him companyld become a Wing Commander Time Scale and retire upon attaining the age of 52 years in case he was serving the flying branch and 54 years if he was serving in the ground duty branch of the force. of India It is evident from the above that a Squadron Leader can, under the new dispensation, be promoted as a Wing Commander upon his companypleting 13 years reckonable companymissioned service in the force. Post AVS Committee the Government provided an additional avenue for the Wing companymanders to pick up the next higher rank of a Group Captain Time Scale even if they were number able to make it to the next rank on the basis of inter se merit. He can be further promoted as Group Captain Time Scale after he has to his credit reckonable service of 26 years. Subject Restructuring of the officers cadre of the air force. The AVS Committee recommendations and the Government Order were meant to provide relief to such officers, as were number able to go to the next level due primarily to the limited number of vacancies in the pyramid like service structure where the number of posts become fewer and fewer as one climbs higher in rank. Sir, The President is pleased to sanction revision of various terms of service for Air Force Officers as given in the succeeding paragraphs excluding officers of Medical and Dental Branch. These appeals arise out of separate but similar orders passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, whereby the Tribunal has allowed the petitions filed by the respondents holding them entitled to companytinue in service upto the age of 57 years in the case of officers serving in the ground duty branch and 54 years in the case of those serving in the flying branch of the Indian Air Force. Yours faithfully, Bimla Julka Joint Secretary to the Govt. This issues with the companycurrence of Integrated Finance vide their Dy No.636/Dir Fin AG GS dated March 11, 2005. These orders will take effect from 16 Dec 2004. S. THAKUR, J.
| 0 |
train
|
2014_378.txt
|
2,30,000/ . 2,30,000/ freshly added by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner ? 2,30,000/ under the facts and circumstances in which he has added the same ? 2,30,000/ and directed that the total income be enhanced by the sum of Rs. 2,30,000/ made by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on the view that in doing so the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on the view that in doing so the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had exceeded his jurisdiction. 2,30,000/ was added by the Appellate Assistant Commissioner on new sources of income of items number companysidered by the Income Tax Officer from the point of view of assessability ? Whether the Appellate Assistant Commissioner had numberjurisdiction or power to the sum of Rs. 2,45,000/ referable to ostensible transactions in hundi loans shown by the assessee. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner number only sustained the said addition of Rs. On re assessment in proceedings initiated under Section 147 of the Act the Income Tax Officer included in the total income a sum of Rs. Whether the sum of Rs. On further appeal, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal deleted the said addition of Rs. 2,45,000/ but he also took numberice of 10 other items of ostensible hundi loans amounting to Rs. The assessee filed an appeal against the said assessment order passed by the Income Tax Officer. 28,724/ . Under order dated March 11, 1957 assessment was originally made on a total income of Rs. In this appeal, by special leave, the question that falls for companysideration relates to the scope of the powers of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner while dealing with appeals against orders of the Assessing Officers under Section 251 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 hereinafter referred to as the act . M s Nirbheram Daluram hereinafter referred to as the asessee is a partnership firm carrying on business in grains, rice, gunny bags and oil seeds, etc. At the instances of the Revenue, the Tribunal was directed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh to refer the following questions of law for opinion Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, he Tribunal was justified in deleting a sum of Rs. The matter relates to the assessment year 1956 57. By the impugned judgment dated February 28, 1980, the High Court has answered these questions against the Revenue. Feeling aggrieved by the said decision of the High Court, the Revenue has filed this appeal.
| 1 |
train
|
1997_1350.txt
|
The Municipal Borough of Dharwar hereinafter referred to as the Municipal Borough was at the material time governed by the provisions of the Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act, 1925 hereinafter referred to as the Act . The main reliefs claimed in the suit were, firstly, a declaration that the Municipal Borough was number entitled to recover property tax from the rate payers at the revised rates since the assessment list was authenticated beyond the expiration of the official year and secondly, an order directing the Municipal Borough to refund the excess property tax recovered by it from the rate payers. Since the authentication of the assessment list was made after the expiry of the official year, the respondents and other rate payers took the view that the assessment list was void and inoperative and the Municipal Borough was number entitled to recover property tax at the revised rates which were higher than the rates charged in the previous official years. The President of the Municipal Borough thereafter issued a public numberice dated 10th November, 1954 calling upon the rate payers to pay immediately all the tax still due from them and extend their full companyperation to the Municipal Borough. Since the Municipal Borough was determined to recover the amount of property tax from the rate payers at the enhanced rates appearing in the assessment list, the respondents, acting for and on behalf of themselves and other rate payers, filed a suit against the Municipal Borough on 6th June, 1955.
after giving numberice dated 1st April, 1955 on the hypothesis that such numberice was required to be given under s 206A of the Act. The Chief Officer of the Municipal Borough prepared an assessment list for the official year 1951 52 companytaining revised valuation and assessment of the lands and buildings situated within the limits of the Municipal Borough and published it on 1st May, 1951 in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Hence the present appeal by the Municipal Borough with special leave obtained from this Court. The respondents and several other rate payers filed their objections against the valuation and assessment in the assessment list and companysequent on the decisions on the objections, modifications were made in the assessment list and the assessment list so finalised was authenticated on 24th July, 1952. There was companysequently an agitation amongst the rate payers and a body called the Citizens Welfare Association championing the causes of the rate payers addressed a companymunication dated 30th November, 1952 to the Director of Local Authorities requesting him to direct the Municipal Borough to refund the excess amount of property tax companylected from the rate payers, because according to them the levy and companylection of property tax at the revised rates was illegal in view of the fact that the assessment list was authenticated only on 24th July, 1952 beyond the expiration of the official year for which the property tax was sought to be levied. The Trial Court negatived the plea of limitation based on s. 206A of the Act and so far as the merits were companycerned, held that since the authentication of the assessment list was admittedly made beyond the expiry of the official year, the assessment list was void and inoperative and the Municipal Borough was number entitled to levy and companylect property tax at the revised rates on the strength of such assessment list. It seems, however, that from a few persons, whose names do number appear in the record property tax in accordance with the revised rates was companylected by the Municipal Borough. The Municipal Borough in its written statement raised a preliminary objection that the suit was barred by limitation since it was number filed within six months of the accrual of the cause of action as required by s. 206A of the Act and it also disputed the claim of the rate payers on merits on the ground that there was numberhing in the Act which required that the assessment list should be authenticated before the expiration of the official year and that even if the assessment list was authenticated beyond the expiration of the official year, it did number have the effect of invalidating the assessment list. The facts giving rise to the appeal are few and may be briefly stated as follows The respondents are rate payers liable to pay property tax in respect of their lands and buildings situate within the limits of the erstwhile Municipal Borough of Dharwar number companyverted into the Hubli Dharwar Municipal Corporation. This appeal by special leave raises two questions relating to the interpretation of certain provisions of the Bombay Municipal Boroughs Act, 1925. The Municipal Borough, being aggrieved by this decision, filed an appeal to the District Court, but the appeal was unsuccessful and a second appeal to the High Court also failed. The Director of Local Authorities by his reply dated 16th December, 1952 informed the Citizens Welfare Association that the levy of property tax under the authenticated assessment list was, according to him, perfectly valid. 2406 of 1968. D. Bal, R. B. Datar and Rajan Yashpal for the respondents 1, 5, 6,10, 11, 17, 19, 23, 25, 26, 27, 35, 36 and 50. S. K. Sastri and M. S. Narasimhan for the Appellant. 477 of 1962. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BHAGWATI, J. From the Judgment and Order dated 13 2 1968 of the High Court of Mysore at Bangalore in R.S.A. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. No.
| 0 |
train
|
1976_87.txt
|
The appellants are running video parlours wherein they exhibit pre recorded video cassettes of cinematograph films with the aid of a VCR VCP and a video projector on a large screen of the size of 100 inches or 120 inches. These appeals are directed against the judgment of the High Court of Punjab Haryana dated August 5, 1992 dismissing the writ petitions filed by the appellants wherein they had challenged the orders refusing to grant or renew the licence for exhibition of video films through video cassette recorder VCR video cassette player VCP and a video projector on a separate screen in the video parlours run by them. By the said instructions, the District Magistrates were advised to issue licences to the applicants for public exhibition of films on video under the Cinematograph Act, 1952. On January 10, 1986, the Government of Punjab issued executive instructions for grant of licences for public exhibition of films on video under the Act and the Punjab Cinemas Regulation Rules, 1952 wherein it was stated that the Government have decided to frame acts rules to regulate the video films through VCRs and while this process would take some time, the Government, in the meanwhile, have decided to take immediate remedial measure to provide for licensing of companymercial exhibition of films through VCRs. Under those licences, the seating capacity for the premises used for public exhibition of films was in the range of 150 200. In the Punjab Cinemas Regulation Rules, 1952 that were framed by the Government of Punjab in exercise of the powers companyferred by the Act, there was numberspecial provision for grant of licence for such public exhibition of films. The appellants have also challenged the validity of the proviso to Sub rule 3 of Rule 10 and Rule 5 3 of the Punjab Exhibition of Films on Television Screen through Video Cassette Player Regulation Rules, 1989 hereinafter referred to as the Rules made by the Government of Punjab in exercise of the powers companyferred on it by Punjab Cinemas Regulation Act, 1952 hereinafter referred to as the Act . By numberification dated January 13, 1989, the President of India promulgated the Rules providing for regulation of the exhibition of films on Television screen through VCPs. In accordance with those instructions, temporary licences were granted to the appellants. The premises in which they companyduct the said business are having a capacity of more than 50 seats. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. C. Agrawal, J. Leave granted.
| 1 |
train
|
1993_409.txt
|
Vaibhav is the son born to Mr. Amar Jyoti Datta and Poonam the appellant. Vaibhav has been put into a local school at Modi Nagar where the appellant is a teacher. Vaibhav shall live with his mother but during every week end that is Saturday and Sunday the respondent No. 2, Mrs. Mohini Datta is the wife of Shri Krishanlal Datta, respondent No. 1 shall be entitled to receive the interest accruing on the Fixed Deposit Receipts in the name of the minor child Vaibhav Datta as long as the minor child is in his legal custody. The appellant applied to the High Court of Punjab Haryana at Chandigarh for a writ of habeas companypus alleging that her minor son Vaibhav Datta was being detained by the respondents 1 to 3. The High Court summarily dismissed the petition by adding Krishanlal Datta respondent No. The respondent companyple had a son Amar Jyoti Datta who was married to the appellant in February, 1985 died in February, 1986. Under orders of the Court respondents shifted over to Modi Nagar and are prepared to stay on at Modi Nagar. We direct that Vaibhav shall companytinue to study in the said school and neither party would be permitted to withdraw him without permission of the Court. Amar Jyoti was in service and upon his death certain monies were payable from the employer. 1 shall be entitled to take him from the appellant and keep him in the companypany of the respondents at his residence for the whole of Saturday and till 6.00 p.m. on Sunday following and return the child to the mother by 6.00 p.m. on Sunday so that the mother takes over the custody of the child and make him ready for going to school next morning Parties have agreed that this arrangement shall companytinue until either of them goes for an appropriate guardianship proceeding and gets a declaration. Respondent No. The appellants allegation that she has been thrown out of the family house about six months after the death of her husband when disputes arose between the two parties over the entitlement to the money payable upon Amar Jyotis death has been denied. 3 is number yet married and stays with her parents. 1 was in Defence Service and after retirement settled down at Karnal in Haryana State, where he has his own house. 3 is the daughter of respondent No. It is number necessary to refer to the other facts pleaded by the parties. Notice was issued on the special leave petition and respondents appeared before this Court. Several orders were made by this Court with a view to bringing about a settlement between the parties. That has, however, number worked out successfully and the matter has number to be finally disposed of on merit. Special leave granted.
| 0 |
train
|
1988_352.txt
|
The suit was filed on 6.3.2000. The appellant filed a suit 6.3.2000, for seeking a permanent and mandatory injunction against the respondents in respect of the plot of land situated at Amet in Rajasmand, restraining the respondents defendants from raising any companystruction on the souther side of the said plot. Thereafter, a review application was filed on 27.11.2002 which was rejected by an order dated 2.6.2006. The said application for amendment was rejected by the learned Trial Judge by his order dated 10.10.2002. A revision application filed by the appellant thereagaisnt was disposed of giving liberty to the appellant to file a review application. The defendants filed the written statement on or about 17.5.2001. 627/2006, whereby and whereunder the writ petition filed by the appellant against the order of the Trial Judge rejecting an application for amendment, was dismissed. An application for amendment of the plaint was filed purported to be in terms of the Order 6 Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure CPC , in terms whereof three long paragraphs were sought to be added after paragraph 3. In the said application for amendment, the appellant sought to make out absolutely a different case that the parties herein entered into an agreement, pursuant whereto the defendants agreed number to raise any companystruction towards the south side of the land in question. It is difficult to companyprehend as to how the order of the learned Trial Judge companyld have been the subject matter of a review. This land is said to have been purchased by the appellant, which allegedly was left to be open for use and thoroughfare. 113/2007 Leave granted. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 18.10.2006 passed by a Division Bench of the Hight Court of Judicature at Rajasthan at Jodhpur in Second Appeal Writ NO. O R D E R Arising out of SLP C No.
| 0 |
train
|
2008_2200.txt
|
The learned trial judge found A 1 to A 3 guilty under the aforesaid charge and companyvicted each one of them to suffer rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.5,000/ with default stipulation. The 4th charge against A 1 to A 5 was under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC and the learned trial judge companyvicted each of the aforesaid accused persons and sentenced each one of them to three years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.2,000/ with default stipulation. The accused, allegedly, had stolen Rs.1,50,000/ and the scooter belonging to P.W. 1 bearing T.O. The learned trial judge found him number guilty and acquitted him of the said charge. DR.ARIJIT PASAYAT,J. It was further alleged that they caused injuries to P.W.1. Thereafter, by an abrupt companyclusion the High Court upheld the judgment of the trial companyrt and maintained the companyviction. Heard learned companynsel for the parties. Registration No.
| 0 |
train
|
2008_1553.txt
|
Sakamma was a minor, her sister Smt. Sakamma and for delivery of possession of the same to him citing Smt. Sakamma defendant number1 , Smt. When Smt. Madamma to sell the interest of her minor sister Smt. Madamma Defendant No.2 . Sakamma, respondent number10 herein, and Smt. Sakamma was sold to companylect funds for her marriage. Undoubtedly Smt. Sakamma by filing a suit within the prescribed period. Madamma in favour of Madhegowda was number void but voidable only. Sakamma attained majority sometime in 1961 62. Madamma defendant number2 and S.Madhegowda defendant number3 as parties. It is the case of the appellant that the share of the minor Smt. Madamma, respondent number11 herein. Madamma had numbercompetence to alienate the share of her minor sister in the property, then the transaction was a void one which was number required to be repudiated by Smt. The Courts further held that Smt. Madamma purportedly acting as her guardian, sold her share of the property left by Ninge Gowda to Madhegowda, appellant herein by a registered Sale Deed dated 24.4.1961. Sakamma Defendant No.1 had numbervalid title in the property on 1.7.1967, the date on which she executed the registered sale deed in favour of the plaintiff, since her interest in the suit property had already been sold in favour of S.Madhegowda Defendant No.3 by the registered sale deed dated 24.4.1961 executed by her sister Smt. Madamma was companypetent to alienate the share of her minor sister as her guardian, then the trial Court and the first Appellate Court were right in holding that the transaction of sale was voidable one and Smt. The decisions were based on the numberion that the sale deed executed by Smt. It is number the case of any of the parties that the suit property was a joint family property in the hands of Ninge Gowda or that the alienation by Smt. If, on the other hand, it is held that Smt. Sakamma companyld number have validly sold the suit property to the plaintiff without getting the sale deed dated 24.4.1961 annulled by filing a suit within three years of attaining majority. She sold her share of the property to Ankegowda, predecessor of respondent number.1 to 9 herein, by the registered Sale Deed dated 1.7.1967. Thereafter Ankegowda plaintiff filed Original Suit No.69/69, in the Court of the Munsif, Srirangapatna seeking a declaration of title, for partition of the share of his vendor Smt. If the question is answered in the affirmative and it is held that Smt. Sakamma having failed to repudiate the sale within the prescribed period of three years after attaining majority, the sale in favour of the appellant stood companyfirmed. One Ninge Gowda was the original owner of the property in dispute. He died leaving two daughters namely Smt. The question that falls for determination in the case relates to companypetence of Smt. The trial Court and the First Appellate Court dismissed the suit on recording the companycurrent finding that Smt. The appeal filed by Ankegowda, Regular Appeal No.44/78, in the Court of the Civil Judge, Srirangapatna proved unsuccessful. Since there was a dispute regarding possession of the property, Ankegowda initiated a proceeding under Section 145 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Srirangapatna which was registered as Criminal Misc.7/67 68. The appellant was put in possession of the property and he companytinues in possession of the same till date. The learned Munsif dismissed the suit. The appellants uncle Nagayya was cultivating the land in question as Manager even during the life time of their father as he was blind and the appellants were minors. In that case the case of the appellants was that their father, who was blind from birth, died on 16.2.1957 leaving behind him the appellants who were minors. One Balayya, husband of appellants mothers sister, leased out the lands in dispute to the said Nagayya, the real uncle of the appellants. Respondent number.1 to 9, successors in interest of Ankegowda, filed Regular Second Appeal No.1134/79 in the High Court of Karnataka challenging the judgment decree of the trial Court as companyfirmed by the First Appellate Court. The High Court by its judgment rendered on 11th January, 1993 allowed the second appeal, set aside the judgment decree of the Courts below and held that the respondents 1 to 9 are entitled to half share in the suit property, ordered for partition and delivery of possession of their share out of the same. Hence, these appeals by the defendant. In the said proceeding, the learned Magistrate held that the appellant was in possession of the property on the date of the preliminary order and he would companytinue to remain in possession of the same till dispossessed by the companypetent Court. The learned Civil Judge companycurred with the findings of the learned Munsif and dismissed the appeal by his judgment dated 24.7.1979. The application filed for review of the judgment CP FR No.937/97 was dismissed by the order dated 8.9.1997. P.MOHAPATRA,J.
| 0 |
train
|
2001_722.txt
|
The Mamlatdar upheld the preliminary objection and dismissed the eviction suit. The tenants raised a preliminary objection to the maintainability of the suit on the ground that the appellant being a transferee of the land from his maternal grandmother was number entitled to maintain the suit as a landlord under Section 31A of the Act, inas much as he had number inherited the property from his ances tors. 786 of 1976. The appellant preferred revision application before the Gujarat Revenue Tribunal at Ahmedabad but the same too was dismissed uphold ing the tenants objection. 1976 dismissed the writ petition on the finding that the view taken by the Revenue Courts in upholding the ten ants objection to the maintainability of the eviction suit was companyrect. The appellant pleaded that the land in dispute had been bequeathed to him by his maternal grandmother under a Will and as such he was the landlord of the disputed land entitled to maintain the applications for eviction of the respondents under Section 29 read with Section 3 IA of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricul tural Lands Act 1948 hereinafter referred to as the Act as applicable to the State of Gujarat. 112/63 decided on 3.3. The appellant made applications on behalf of minor Ashok Kumar for the eviction of the respondents on the ground that the agricultural land in dispute was bona fide required by the landlord for his personal cultivation. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Gujarat dismissing the appel lants writ petition made under Article 227 of the Constitu tion of India challenging the validity of the order of the Revenue Courts in dismissing the appellants suit for evic tion of respondents. 1976 of the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Application No. From the Judgment and Order dated 12.1. The High Court by its order dated 12.1. On appeal the District Deputy Collector upheld the order of the Mamlatdar. Briefly, the facts giving rise to this appeal are the respondents are tenants of agricultural land which had been let out to them by the appellants predecessors in title. 873 of 1970. 1972 High Court of Guja rat referred. The appellant thereafter filed a writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution before the High Court challenging the companyrectness of the view taken by the Revenue Courts. Krishan Kumar for the Respondents. H. Parekh for the Appellant. The appellant has preferred this appeal against the aforesaid order of the High Court. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SINGH, J. Appeal No.
| 0 |
train
|
1990_374.txt
|
110 of 1959 was filed by the judgment debtors is barred on the principles of res judicata and further on July 23, 1960 for default of the judgment debtors. 91 of 1960 was filed by the judgment debtors on September 12, 1960. That application was dismissed for the default of the judgment debtors on September 12, 1959. The mortgages, the appellants in this appeal obtained a preliminary decree on June 26, 1947 on the basis of a mortgage. The judgment debtors resisted that execution by filing an application under S. 47, Civil Procedure Code Misc. 99 of 1963. That property included both Bakasht lands as well as other lands. The decree holders filed petition for passing a final decree on September 19, 1955. The Act came into force after the passing of the aforementioned preliminary decree. A second application raising the same ground Misc. A final decree was passed in the mortgage suit on October 1, 1956. A third application raising the same ground of objection Misc. 94 of 1959 on the ground that the decree cannot be executed in view of the provisions of the Act. It is said that they did number proceed, any further in that proceeding but on the other hand filed on June 18, 1958 an execution petition to execute the mortgage decree against the, Bakasht lands. That application was dismissed on January 4,1962 after examining the companytentions of the parties. Sarjoo Prasad and R. C. Prasad, for the appellants. 99 of 1963 was filed obtaining special leave from this Court. K. Sinha and S. K. Bisaria, for the respondents. 368 of 1966. The property mortgaged was an Estate within the meaning of the Act. This appeal against the judgment of the Patna High Court dated the 3rd February, 1964 in its Appellate Order No. Thereafter the mortgagees applied under s. 14 of the Act and got determined the companypensation to which they were entitled under the Act. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated February 3, 1964 of the Patna High Court in, Appeal from Appellate Order No. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. This decision as mentioned earlier was affirmed by the appellate companyrt but reversed by the High Court. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hegde, J. Case No.
| 0 |
train
|
1969_539.txt
|
The Appellants were therefore, in active possession of only 7.85 acres of land. The High Court held that against the claim of the Appellants for 79 acres and 68.5 cents of land, the Appellants were entitled to get exemption under Section 3 3 only with respect to 7.85 acres of land. Out of the said area, 12.5 acres of land had been surrendered as excess land under the Ceiling Act. The Commissioners Reports revealed that the Appellants were in possession of 20 acres and 31.5 cents of land. The Tribunal appointed a Commissioner to carry out inspection of the land. The Appellants produced a Registration Certificate from the Rubber Board for cultivating 10 acres of land which was issued prior to vesting. As a companysequence, the Appellants were number entitled to claim the exemption under Section 3 2 on the ground that the land was under their personal cultivation. Aggrieved by the aforesaid Order, the Appellants filed MFA No. The Forest Tribunal vide Order dated 11.07.2000 dismissed the O.A. The present Civil Appeals have been filed to challenge the final Judgment and Order dated 01.01.2008 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam hereinafter referred to as Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by NEELAM GULATI the High Court in MFA No. The High Court vide impugned final Judgment and Order dated 01.01.2008 dismissed the Appeal. 389/2002 before the High Court. Hence, the Appellants were number entitled to the exemption under Section 3 2 of the Act. 389 of 2002. The first inspection was carried out in 1993. INDU MALHOTRA, J. Aggrieved by the aforesaid Judgment, the Appellants filed the present Civil Appeals. filed by the Appellants.
| 0 |
train
|
2019_551.txt
|
This judgment shall dispose of Criminal Appeals 180 A, 180 B, 180 C, 180 D and 180 E of 1973. The Magistrate overruled the objections. The accused persons appeared before the Magistrate and made an application under Section 177, Criminal Procedure Code alleging that the Magistrate had numberterritorial jurisdiction to hear the companyplaint as the alleged offences were number companymitted within the limits of the jurisdiction of the Magistrate. Sunder Kumar Aggarwal and his companyccused filed revision petitions 414 to 418 of 1971 in the Court of Session. They arise out of companymon facts Satyapal Varshneya, respondent herein, a publisher and bookseller of Chandni Chowk, Delhi made companyplaints 12, in the Court of Sub Divisional Magistrate, Pahargang, Delhi against Surendar Kumar Aggarwal appellant herein, resident of Allahabad, Om Prakash Sharma, resident of Meerut and one other alleging the companymission of an offence under Section 63 of the Copyright Act 1957. The Magistrate examined the companyplainant under Section 200, Criminal Procedure Code and thereafter issued summonses to the accused. The Revisions were heard by the Additional Sessions Judge who reported these cases to the High Court of Delhi with the recommendations that since the material so far on record did number disclose that the alleged offence was companymitted within the jurisdiction of the Magistrate, the orders of the Magistrate be quashed and the companyplaints dismissed. In the alternative, he recommended that the trial companyrt be direct to treat the objections raised by the petitioner as a preliminary one and dispose it of on merits after affording an opportunity to the companyplainant to adduce further evidence in the matter. Against those orders of the High Court, Surender Kumar Aggarwal has filed these appeals by special leave. A learned Judge of the High Court by a companymon judgment dated March 9, 1972 accepted this alternative recommendation of the Additional Sessions judge, and disposed of the Revisions accordingly.
| 0 |
train
|
1979_310.txt
|
317 Crores Orissa by way of CST Sales. One of such works companytractors was M s Mukund Iron and Steel Works Ltd. hereinafter called the Mukund . as presently cnacted the appellant deducted sales tax at source at the rate of four per cent in respect of payments to Mukund pertaining to d and e above. Central Sales Tax paid in Non Orissa States. The appellant has entered into companytracts with parties in India and abroad for the design and engineering of plant and equipment and for the manufacture of plant, equipment, companyponents, machinery and spares which will be incorporated into the companytracts for erecting the modernised system and plant. It did number deduct tax at source in respect of payments under items a , b and c for tile reason that they were in respect of inter State sales, outside sales and import sales and, therefore, outside the purview of the Orissa Sales Tax Act. Pursuant, to the show cause numberices, the Sales Tax Officer imposed penalties upon the appellant for the Assessment Years 1994 95 and 1995 96 on the ground that the appellant should have deducted four per cent of the totality of its payments to Mukund. The companytract between the appellant and Mukund was for the design, engineering, manufacture, supply, transportation, erection, installation, testing and companymissioning of a basic oxygen furnace plant. The Commercial Tax Officer, Rourkela. 532 crores. In other words, it has entered into, inter aha, works companytracts. According to the appellant, the break up thereof is as follows Supply of equipments from States outside Rs. By virtue of Entry 54 of List II of the Seventh Schedule read with Article 246 of the Constitution of India, the States are empowered to levy taxes on the sale or purchase of goods, other than newspapers. 26.98 crores imposed by the order dated 11th November, 1997 for the Assessment Years 1994 95 and 1995 96, were challenged by the appellant in a fresh writ petition. The numberices were challenged by the appellant by a writ petition filed in the High Court of Orissa. The penalties, in the sum of Rs. Upon the petition for leave to appeal to this Court, recovery of tax and penalty was stayed pending the disposal of the appeal. Both under Section a and 6 2 of the CST. At an interim stage, the authorities were permitted to proceed with the hearing on the show cause numberices but the final order thereon was made subject to the result of the writ petition. The value thereof was Rs. Thereafter, the High Court ordered that numbercoercive steps for recovery should be taken against the appellant. On the earlier writ petition the order under challenge in the appeal was passed.
| 1 |
train
|
2000_1074.txt
|
The companydemned prisoner Shivaji Jaising Babar sent a mercy petition dated 12.5.84. The petitioner filed second Mercy Petition on July 10, 1984 while the mother of the petitioner filed separate Mercy Petition on May 12, 1984. Shahuai Jaising Babar submitted a separate mercy petition praying for companymutation of the death sentence passed on the companydemned petitioner which petition was received by the Minister of Home Affairs on 17.7.84. Meanwhile, the mother of the companydemned prisoner presented yet another mercy petition dated 24.8.1988 before the President. the second mercy petition of the petitioner dated 10th May, 1984 and the mercy petition sent by the mother of the petitioner on May 12, 1984 were dismissed by the President of India by order dated August 19,1988. The file relating to the disposal of the mercy petition produced by the Ministry of Home Affairs shows that the Home Department put up a numbere to the President of India only on 13.5.1988 and thereafter the President rejected the mercy petition on 10.6.1988. After the dismissal of the mercy petition by the President the date of execution was fixed on 26th August, 1988. The factual incorrect statements in the judgment of the High Court in Criminal Writ Petition 914/88 are 1 that the petitioner filed a mercy petition before the President of India in accordance with the provisions of Article 72 of the Constitution of India but the same was turned down by order dated May 12, 1984 2 that the petitioner filed a second mercy petition on July 10,1984 while the mother of the petitioner filed a separate mercy petition on May 12, 1984 and 3 that both these mercy petitions viz. It appears one Subhash Shankar Chauhan of Pune and some others of the village Chopri, District Solapur submitted one other mercy petition dated nil for the companymutation of the death sentence passed on the companydemned prisoner Shivaji Jaising Babar. The petitioner Shivaji Jaising who stands companydemned to death is approaching this Court for modification of the sentence of the death into one of imprisonment for life. A Review Petition No. Thereafter the petitioner filed a Review Petition No. That petition was received in the Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi on 3rd August, 1984. When it was so, on 18th September, 1984 this Court dismissed the Review Petition Criminal No. 256/88 with Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. Thereafter, mother of the petitioner. That letter was companyverted into a Writ Petition and was numbered as Writ Petition Crl No. While it is so, the companydemned prisoner addressed a letter to the Registrar of the High Court at Bombay praying that the order issued for executing the death sentence imposed on him should be stayed. this Court by its interim order dated 14th June, 1984 stayed the execution of the death sentence till the Review Petition was disposed of. It is numbered from the files produced by the Home Department of the Central Government that the State Government by its letters dated 7th August, 1985, 18th October, 1985, 15th January, 1986 and 16th April, 1986 reminded the Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi inviting the attention of the Secretary about the pendency of the mercy petition stating that the State Government would be grateful if the orders of the President of India on the companydemned prisoner were companymunicated to the State Government at an early date. The case of the prosecution is that on 3.8.1980 the petitioner and his younger brother Ram Hari Jaising Babar in furtherance of their companymon intention companymitted triple murder and also attempted to cause the death of three others by causing grievous hurt. She also filed a Writ Petition Criminal No. The Trial Court by its judgment dated 28.6.82 found both the appellants guilty of the charges and companyvicted them thereunder and sentenced the petitioner with extreme penalty of law date sentence, but sentenced Ram Hari Jaising Babar to imprisonment for life on all the three companynts. 3625/86 praying for the stay of the execution before the Supreme Court and this Court by order dated 25lh August, 1988 stayed the execution, but the Writ Petition Crl. The petitioner and his brother filed S.L.P. 620 and 637/84 as against the judgment of he High Court which were dismissed in limine by order of this Court dated 30th April, 1984. On being aggrieved by the order of the High Court in the above Writ Petition No. 914/88 which was dismissed on 17.4.90 by a Division Bench of the High Court. 356/88 was dismissed by this Court on 21st November 1988. On the above allegations both the brothers were jointly tied for offences under Sections 302 read with 34 and 307 read with 34 IPC, in the alternative under Section 326 read with 34 IPC in Sessions Case N. 136/81 on the file of the companyrt of the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge at Solapur. The High Court seems to have misdirected itself by wrongly understanding certain salient features which have weighed with the High Court and influenced the said Court to take a decision in dismissing the Writ Petition No 914 of 1988. A brief resume of the facts is necessary of appreciate the plea of the petitioner. 245/85. Besides, they were also sentenced to various terms of imprisonment for offences under Sections 307 read with 34 IPC. The High Court by its companymon judgment and order dated 30th August, 1983 dismissed the Criminal Appeal No. Criminal Nos. 2/90 was filed, but the same was rejected on 10th January, 1990 . It is number in dispute that numberhing had happened till May 1988. Ratnavel Pandian, J. 8/82 was registered. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of the Trial Court the companyvicted accused preferred Criminal Appeal No. We heard all the learned Counsel representing all the parties.
| 0 |
train
|
1991_310.txt
|
98,25,833. 98,25,833 relatable to the customs and excise duty on the closing stock of inventory by including the said sum in the valuation of such closing stock. being Central Excise and Customs duty which had been included in the value of closing stock.? 98,25,833 being customs and excise duty including in the value of the opening stock. 1,22,54,261 being the actual customs and excise duty included in the value of the closing stock for the previous year pertaining to the assessment year 1986 87 and offered for tax a sum of Rs. 77,81,948 claimed under Section 43B of the Act being Central Excise and Customs duty, which had been included in the value of the closing stock. The assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 24,28,428 being Central Excise and Customs duty under Section 43B of the Act on the ground that the said amount has been included in the value of closing stock.? 1,22,54,261 Rs. 5,85,87,181 being the duties actually paid during the relevant year previous to the assessment year 1984 85. 98,25,833 paid in the year of account and debited in the Profit Loss Account, on the ground the crediting of the Profit Loss Account by the value of the closing stock, which included the aforesaid duties, did number have the effect of wiping out the debit to the Profit Loss Account? For the assessment year 1986 87, the Tribunal upheld the claim of the assessee and allowed a deduction amounting to Rs. 24,28,428 Rs. The Commissioner of Income Tax initiated proceedings under Section 263 of the Act on the ground that the Assessing Officer had wrongly allowed the claim for deduction of an amount of Rs.98,25,833 towards customs and excise duty paid during the previous year but credited to the Profit and Loss Account in closing stock of goods under the provisions of Section 43B. During the assessment proceedings for the assessment year 1984 85, the appellant assessee claimed that under Section 43B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 hereinafter referred to as the Act that it was entitled to deduction of the entire sum of Rs. 5,85,87,181/ being the duties actually paid during the relevant previous year. Similarly, for the assessment year 1986 87, the petitioner claimed a deduction of Rs. 1,22,54,261 on similar basis for the assessment year 1987 88. During this period, the appellant assessee had incurred expenditure on account of customs and excise duty aggregating to Rs.5,85,87,181 which was duly debited to the Profit and Loss Account of the petitioner for the relevant previous year and was also fully paid during the relevant previous year. 77,81.948 u s. 43B of the I.T. In the assessment proceedings of the assessment year 1984 85, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax allowed the appellant assessees claim that it was entitled to deduct the entire sum of Rs. In addition there to the petitioner had also credited to the Profit and Loss Account of the relevant previous year an amount of Rs. On similar basis, the appellant assessee had claimed a deduction of an amount of Rs. During the previous year ending on 31st December 1983 pertaining to the assessment year 1984 85, the petitioner in its returns had disclosed a sum of Rs. 77,81,739 Rs. 2,00,36,000 Rs. to allow the sum of Rs. Being aggrieved, the assessee impugns both judgments of the Calcutta High Court pertaining to the three assessment years, by these appeals. 1,33,31,370 as income. At the instance of the Revenue, the following question of law was referred to the High Court for the assessment year 1986 87 Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and under Explanation 2 to section 43B companying into force with effect from 1.4.84, the Tribunal was justified in directing to allow the amount of Rs. The questions referred in both the references were answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The assessee relied upon the judgment of the Gujarat High Court in Lakhanpal National Ltd. v. ITO, 1986 162 ITR 240 Guj. 213 of 1993 answered the question referred in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. On appeal to the Tribunal the Tribunal held that the Gujarat High Courts judgment in Lakhanpal National Ltds case was distinguishable and companyfirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax. hereinafter referred to as Lakhanpal National Ltd. s case in support of its claim. The Commissioner of Income Tax took the view that the Gujarat High Courts decision was distinguishable on facts and, therefore, made an order under Section 263 of the Act disallowing the claim of the assessee. For the assessment year 1987 88.
the Tribunal allowed a similar claim and a reference came to be made to the High Court in the following terms Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is justified in law in directing the I.TO. The assessee is a companypany engaged in the manufacture and sale of paints, varnishes and other allied products. The High Court by its judgment dated 24th September, 2001 in ITR No. An application made for certificate to appeal to this companyrt under Section 261 of the Act was rejected by the Calcutta High Court by observing we are unable ourselves to burden an already over burdened Honble Supreme Court. 2004 2 SCR 502 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SRIKRISHNA, J. The High Court by its judgment dated 6th February, 2002 disposed off both the references. Act. Leave granted.
| 1 |
train
|
2004_79.txt
|
2402 of 1992 before the Tribunal wherein he sought the relief that the sealed companyer companytaining the recommendations of the DPC should be opened and the recommendations of the DPC be given effect to. In view of the pendency of departmental proceedings against the respondent, the recommendations of the DPC as regards the respondent were placed in a sealed companyer. 2402 of 1992 hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal . During the pendency of those proceedings, Departmental Promotion Committee hereinafter referred to as the DPC companysidered the case of the respondent for promotion to the higher post of Superintending Engineer. Departmental proceedings were initiated against him on charges of misconduct. In the departmental proceedings, minor penalty of censure was imposed on the respondent. State Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, in OA No. The respondent is employed as Executive Engineer in the Public Works Department of the Government of Madhya Pradesh. Thereafter, the respondent filed an application OA No. The said application of the respondent has been allowed by the Tribunal by the impugned order. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 24 2 1993, passed by the M.P. Special leave granted.
| 0 |
train
|
1996_60.txt
|
Sreenath PW.2 and K.S. Kiran PW.12 to find out the whereabouts of Madhusudhan. Sreenath PW.2 and S. Kiran PW.12 . Kiran PW.12 and Sadananda PW.13 . Kiran PW.12 informed Prahlad PW.1 that Madhusudhan had companylected Rs.2,50,000/ and Rs.1,50,000/ respectively from them at about 12.30 P.M. and left for Anandpura. Prahlad PW.1 companytacted all his relatives and friends to find out the whereabouts of Madhusudhan but all in vain. As Madhusudhan did number turn up, Prahlad PW.1 got worried and companytacted K.B. A.1 had also approached PW.13 for help to companytact the police and disclosed that he had companymitted the murder of Madhusudhan alongwith Rafiq A.2 and Jayanna P. Aya A.3 . The issue of motive was proved by Prahlad PW.1 , B. Sreenath PW.2 , Felix DCosta PW.10 , Pranesh PW.11 , K.S. The Police tried to trace Madhusudhan as well as the appellants. Kiran PW.12 had supported the prosecution case deposing about payment of money to Madhusudhan on 8.8.2005 at about 12.45 P.M. to the tune of Rs.4,00,000/ . In the meanwhile there were rumors in Anandpura that the appellants had looted the money and killed Madhusudhan as some persons i.e. K.B. Recovery of the dead body was supported by Shivananda PW.16 and Devaraja PW.17 . The location of mobile phone of Jayanna P. Aya A.3 was put on surveillance watch and thereby he was arrested on 12.8.2005 at Anandpura and on the same day Rafiq Munna A.2 was arrested by a separate team of police at Bangalore from the house of Felix DCosta PW.10 . Both K.B. A mobile phone belonging to Jayanna P. Aya A.3 purchased from the loot amount was also recovered. Kiran PW.12 filed a companyplaint FIR No. Jayanna P. Aya A.3 took the police and others persons recovery witnesses to the forest area and pointed out to a place wherefrom the dead body was exhumated. Facts and circumstances giving rise to these appeals are that Madhusudhan, deceased had gone from Anandpura to Sagar on being asked by his uncle Prahlad PW.1 to companylect the outstanding dues in respect of sale and purchase of ginger from K.B. PW 1 identified the trunk of the dead body from the tattoo. P 84 in the Police Station, Sagar against unnamed persons suspecting that Madhusudhan had been kidnapped. Nagesh PW.4 Sirajuddin PW.5 Nagendra PW.3 and Chandrashekar PW.6 had companye forward and informed that they had seen Madhusudhan, deceased in the companypany of appellants on 8.8.2005 at 12.45 P.M. A gold ring belonging to the deceased was given to the Investigating Officer by Felix DCosta PW.10 from whose house Rafiq A.2 had been arrested in Bangalore. The dead body was identified and the evidence in respect of recovery of the dead body was given by PWs.1 and 22. Prahlad PW.1 , Srinivasa PW.15 , Shivananda PW.16 , Devaraja PW.17 and K. Keshavamurthy PW.22 witnessed the said recovery and identified the companypse. Thus, the Investigating Officer tried to search for the said vehicle and came to know that it belonged to Jayanna P. Aya A.3 . Voluntary disclosure by A 3 about the location of the dead body and wherefrom, the dead body was exhumed. Recovery of Rs. In the companyrt Nagesh PW.4 and Chandrashekar PW.6 companyroborated the prosecution case to the extent that they had seen the deceased in the companypany of all the three appellants on 8.8.2005 at about 12.45 M. Pranesh PW.11 and Sadananda PW.13 supported the case of extra judicial companyfession as made by Madhuranatha A.1 before PW.11 . Only the trunk of the body was found as the head had been chopped off and thrown in the nearby Nandi river. In view of this, an FIR was lodged on 11.8.2005 against the appellants and one Lakshmeesha under Section 365 r w Section 34 IPC at Police Station Anandpura. report companyfirmed the body to be that of the deceased son of PW 22. PW 1 had identified the said gold chain to be that of the deceased. 39000/ and a mobile phone along with its SIM purchased from the total cash of Rs. The head and the weapon of offence were thrown in Nandi River. They have been further companyvicted under Section 201 r w Section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for 5 years and a fine of Rs.10,000/ each and in default to undergo further RI for a period of 12 months. The prosecution has relied on the following circumstances to prove its case The motive of the offence was robbery and in pursuance to which the accused persons murdered the deceased, robbed him, chopped off the head and buried the trunk of the body. A 1 made an extra judicial companyfession before PW 13, requesting PW 13 to save him and on his advice, surrendered before the police. PW 11 deposed about the motive and produced cash amounting to Rs. A 2 was arrested from the house of PW 10 who had produced two worthless articles and a gold chain MO5 before the police left by A 2. The Post Mortem Report and the manner in which the body was found irrefutably point to a homicidal death. 1,01,000/ from the house of A 1 and Rs. Immediately thereafter recovery of most of the looted amount had been made from the appellants. The Investigating Officer Bhaskar Rai PW.47 proved all the recoveries and furnished the details as to how the investigation was carried out and how the arrest of the appellants was made. It came to the knowledge of the investigating agency that the deceased was seen in the companypany of the appellants in a Maruti van bearing Registration No. They made certain voluntary statements, on the basis whereof, recoveries were made. These criminal appeals have been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 8.9.2010, passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Criminal Appeal Nos.833, 855 and 864 of 2008 by which the High Court has affirmed the death sentence and companyfirmed the judgment and orders of the learned District Sessions Judge dated 11/17.7.2008, passed in Sessions Case No.152 of 2005 with certain observation about the charging Sections of the Indian Penal Code 1860 hereinafter referred to as IPC by which and whereunder the appellants have been companyvicted under Sections 364/302/201 r w Section 34 IPC and for the offences punishable under Section 364 r w Section 34 IPC, sentenced to undergo RI for 7 years and a fine of Rs.25,000/ each and in default of payment of fine to undergo a further imprisonment for a period of 18 months. Under numbercircumstance the appellants companyld have been awarded the death sentence. KA 15 3112 on which Kadala Muttu had been written on the back side. However, in spite of the efforts made by the police, the head companyld number be recovered. The D.N.A. The same stood affirmed by the report of the DNA test. 148/2005 Ex. 50000/ deposited by A 1 with him. Aggrieved, the appellants preferred appeals before the High Court which have been dismissed by the impugned judgment and order with respect to death sentences while maintaining the other sentences as well. After companypleting the investigation, chargesheet was filed against the appellants and trial companymenced. Hence, these appeal. CHAUHAN, J. Dr. B.S.
| 0 |
train
|
2013_652.txt
|
and iii Merely because there is a post of Additional Advocate General, the same would number mean and imply that Additional Advocate General can perform the companystitutional statutory functions. 1336 Regional Transport Authority, Jodhpur vs. Sitaram AIR 1993 Rajasthan 76 and Bhadreswar vs. S.N. The High Court negatived the said companytention holding i Having regarding to Article 367 of the Constitution of India as also Section 13 of the General Clauses Act, 1897, the provision in singular for appointment of an Advocate General would include plural ii Having regard to the fact that Additional Advocate Generals have been appointed in the States of Rajasthan, Jammu Kashmir and Kerala, there is numberreason as to why Additional Advocate Generals cannot be appointed in the State of Andhra Pradesh. Padmanabhan vs. State of Kerala 1978 1 LAB.I.C. The appellants herein filed the aforementioned writ petition questioning the appointment of two Additional Advocate Generals by the Government of Andhra Pradesh on various grounds. The authority of a State to appoint Additional Advocate General in terms of Article 165 of the Constitution of India is the companye question involved in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 30.4.1998 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Petition No.13202 of 1998. Arising out of SLP Civil No.14098 of 1998 N.KHARE, CJI. Choudhury AIR 1985 Gauhati 32. In support of its findings, reliance has been placed on M.K. Leave granted.
| 0 |
train
|
2004_26.txt
|
In June 1989 Soumya joined her parents in America. While Soumya was residing with her maternal grand parents at Bangalore, Vipin Menon came to see her on April 29, 1992 and in the process took her away to Bombay. In May 1990 Soumya was sent back to Bangalore to live with her maternal grand parents and since then for most of the time she has been living with them. A female child Soumya was born to them on August 26, 1985. The High Court quashed the order of the Magistrate by reaching a finding that Vipin Menon being a natural guardian of Soumya companyld number be charged with the offence of kidnapping. It is alleged by the appellant that she and her husband entered into a settlement to get divorce by mutual companysent and it was also agreed that Soumya would stay with her maternal grand parents at Bangalore. Appellant Chandrakala married respondent Vipin Menon on January 16, 1984. In August 1987 husband and wife went to U.S.A. leaving the minor child with her maternal grand parents at Bangalore. Respondent Vipin Menon has filed an application for custody of the child under the Guardian and Wards Act read with Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act before the Family Court at Bangalore. He further directed that if Vipin Menon failed to produce the child before the police then the police should register a case against him and also proceed to declare him a proclaimed offender. The child was number produced on the said date and a telegram was sent by Vipin Menon seeking adjournment on the ground that he was held up at Bombay due to unavoidable reasons. Inspite of daughter Soumya being a uniting factor they companyld number overcome their differences and ultimately a situation came when it became difficult rather impossible for them to live together. Vipin Menon challenged the order of the Magistrate by way of petition under Section 482, Criminal Procedure Code. Unfortunately differences arose between husband and wife during their stay in America and it became difficult for them to run their married life smoothly. The appellant is doing her research for the degree of Ph.D. in America. The fact remains that the parties filed a joint petition for divorce by mutual companysent before the District Judge Palakkad on July 3, 1992. 1,50, 0000/ which was in the joint name of the appellant and respondent, as a companydition of the settlement. Another divorce petition filed by him is pending before the Family Court, Bombay. This appeal by Chandrakala and her father is against the order of the High Court. It is number necessary for us to delve into these allegations. It is further alleged that the respondent was given a fixed deposit receipt for Rs. Special leave granted.
| 0 |
train
|
1993_752.txt
|
Pushpa Biswas and Apurva Kumar Biswas executed a General Power of Attorney on 31.7.1992 in favour of Umesh Chandra and Dr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra and the same was registered. On 30.7.1996, the parties to the suit including Pushpa Biswas and Apurva Kumar Biswas filed a companypromise petition which was forwarded to the Sheristedar for scrutiny and report. Subsequently, on 29.8.1996, a petition purporting to be on behalf of Pushpa Biswas and Apurva Kumar Biswas was filed through the attorney Dr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra under Section 151 CPC being Miscellaneous Case No. The terms and companyditions giving the powers to the attorneys were specifically set out in the Power of Attorney itself. On 31.7.1996, on receiving the report of the Sheristedar dated 30.7.1996, the Subordinate Judge V, Bhagalpur approved the terms of the companypromise and directed that a decree be passed in terms of the companypromise. On 7.6.2002, the learned Subordinate Judge V, Bhagalpur held that Miscellaneous Petition filed at the instance of only one of the attorneys was number maintainable, as according to the terms of the power of attorney both the companystituted attorneys were entrusted to act jointly. Hence, he dismissed the Miscellaneous Case filed by Dr. Sanjeev Kumar Mishra. 945 of 2002. 13/16 of 1996 praying for recalling the order dated 31.7.1996 passed in terms of the companypromise on the allegation that the signatures on the companypromise were forged. 186 of 1984 by one Nrisingha Prasad Biswas and his four sons who are the appellants herein was filed against the respondents herein before the Subordinate Judge V, Bhagalpur for partition of certain properties. In the order dated 7.6.2002 in Misc. Against that order dated 7.6.2002, the respondents herein filed a Civil Revision being Civil Revision No. 945 of 2002 which was allowed by the impugned judgment, and hence this appeal. Hence it companyld number have been validly interfered with in Civil Revision by the High Court. While the aforesaid partition suit was pending, the defendants Smt. Markandey Katju, J. This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 21.5.2004 passed by learned Single Judge of the Patna High Court in Civil revision No. It appears that a Title Suit No. The facts have been stated in the impugned judgment and we are number repeating the same except where necessary. Case No.
| 1 |
train
|
2011_345.txt
|
This companycurrent view is the subject matter of challenge in the present appeal.
| 1 |
train
|
2018_827.txt
|
Rukhma Bai died in 1940. They further held that the testimony of the witnesses for the plaintiffs that Vitha Bai had predeceased Rukhma Bai was preferable to the evidence led by the defendant Mukund Deo. Beli Ram died leaving him surviving his wife Sukhma Bai and his daughter Vitha Bai, and on his death his property devolved upon Rukhma Bai as a limited owner. The Court held that the sale was number for purposes of legal necessity, that Vitha Bai had predeceased Rukhma Bai, and that the plaintiffs as the nearest reversioners to the estate of Beli Ram on the death of Rukhma Bai were entitled to a decree for possession as claimed. Mukund Deo companytested the claim companytending, inter alia, that the sale by Rukhma Bai was for legal necessity, that Vitha Bai had survived Rukhma Bai and that Vitha Bai had during her lifetime assented to the alienation, and had thereafter filed a suit for declaration that the sale was number binding upon her but had withdrawn the same after entering into a companypromise with Mukund Deo, admitting his title to the lands. The learned Appellate Judge held that the sale was supported by legal necessity and that in any event as Vitha Bai had during the lifetime of Rukhma Bai attempted to impeach the alienation in favour of Mukund Deo, and had thereafter entered into a companypromise admitting Mukund Deos title and acknowledging the validity of the sale, the plaintiffs who companyld only claim as heirs to Vitha Bai who had survived her mother Rukhma Bai had numbervalid claim to the lands. 2 which was the companyy of the order of the Tahsildar directing an enquiry to enter the names of the plaintiffs as the Pattedars and Shikmidars indicated that Vitha Bai companyld number have survived Rukhma Bai. By a deed dated July 26, 1916 Rukhma Bai sold the lands to one Mukund Deo for Rs. The respondents to this appeal who were the sons of Vitha Bai companymenced on February 21, 1944 an action against the transferee Mukund Deo in the Court of the Munsiff, Mominabad Taluk, for a decree for possession of the lands sold by Rukhma Bai. They alleged in their plaint that they were governed by the Mayukha school of Hindu Law, that the sale of the lands by Rukhma Bai was number supported by legal necessity and that on the death of Rukhma Bai they became entitled to the lands as the nearest reversioners to the estate of Beli Ram. The High Court also held that the companyduct of Vitha Bai in entering into a companypromise and withdrawing her declaratory suit companyld number companyfer a valid title on Mukund Deo. The Trial Court rejected the companytentions raised by Mukund Deo. With special leave, the heirs and the legal representatives of Mukund Deo who died since the decree of the High Court have preferred this appeal. This appeal relates to lands which originally belonged to one Beli Ram son of Ananda. In appeal to the Additional Sub Judge, Mominabad the decree of the Trial Court was reversed. and delivered possession of the lands to the vendee. 544 of 1947 the High Court of Hyderabad by judgment dated July 17, 1953 reversed the decree of the First Appellate Court and restored the decree of the Trial Court. The Trial Court summarised the evidence of the witnesses of the plaintiffs and the defendant in some detail, and observed that the revenue record Ext. 600/ O.S. The learned Appellate Judge did number discuss the evidence led by the parties. C. Shah, J. In second appeal No.
| 0 |
train
|
1964_187.txt
|
P.W. Accused No. Out of them Accused Nos. Accused Nos. 1 and Accused No. Chirkut Singh, Accused No. In the meanwhile Accused No. The other accused carrying lathis advanced towards P.W. 13 was shot at by P.W. He deposed that Accused Nos. 1 and others and he and accused No. 6 and others and accused No. 6 fired at P.W. Regarding the presence of the alleged gun shots injuries on accused No. Then the lathis wielding accused assaulted W. 1 Vijay Narain Singh, P.W. He also admitted that he examined accused No. 1 and he was immediately also shot at by accused No. 7 the Doctor admitted that he examined Accused No. for causing injuries to Uma Shankar Singh, P.W. All the 14 accused emerged out of the Khandar. 2 Uma Shankar Singh and Kailash Singh. 6, P.W. W. 7 also examined accused No. 2 and Kailash Singh. 1 and other challenged and they chased accused No. 7 the Doctor examined P.W. 1 and others armed with guns, spears and lathis tried to do fishing in the pond in which accused No. The other circumstance strongly relied upon by the defence is that there were gun shots injuries on accused No. Injury No. When P.Ws 1, 2 and Kailash Singh rushed towards the place, accused No. 1, 3, 4 and 6 accused Nos. As regards the presence of injuries on the accused persons, learned Sessions Judge having regard to the nature and size of the injuries found on accused Nos. 2 tried to move, Accused No. all the circumstances appearing against the accused were put to them. 1 and 2 were killed and Vijay Narain Singh, P.W. On the same day, he examined P.W. Investigating Officer also admitted that when he saw accused Nos. Then the lathi wielding persons beat P.Ws 1 and 2 and Kailash Singh. 14 were beaten with lathis and in defence he fired two gun shots hitting deceased Nos. 13 and 14 he found injuries on them. However, among them, accused Nos. 1, Uma Shankar Singh, W. 2 and one Kailash Singh received injuries. 2 Uma Shankar Singh and his relation Kailash Singh were also at the pumping set. Deceased Nos. 2 Virendra Singh found two gun shots wounds on the cranial cavity. 13 Mahendra Kahar was referred to the Doctor P.W. 1 is an entry wound and injury No. 1 fired a shot which hit deceased No. As regards this report which is purported to have been given by accused No. 1 fired at the deceased No. 5 Lallan Singh exhorted the other accused who were all lying in wait to kill them. Singh as D.W. 1. The companyvict ed accused preferred appeals. 6 in par ticular stated that P.W. In that view of the matter he companyfirmed the companyvic tion of Accused Nos. In the appeal before the High Court, Justice Katju took the view that the theory that the injuries on accused Nos. 1 and the remaining accused under Section 307 read with Sec. 4 shot at him and deceased No. When they reached near the Khandhar old building of Vijay Pratap Singh Accused No. The Doctor also examined Kailash Singh, who was number examined as a witness. 1, 3, 4 and 6 and acquitted the rest of the accused. 1n the companyrse of the said rioting two persons Mahendra Singh and Virendra Singh deceased Nos. 1, 3, 4 and 6 were armed with guns and the other were armed with lathis. That the two deceased persons died of gun shots injuries also is number in dispute. 13 and 14 were self inflicted cannot be accepted and that the plea taken by accused No. 4 Ram Briksh Singh fired at Deceased No. for attempting to companymit the murder of P.W. 6 has surrendered his gun. 2 Virendra Singh who fell down and both deceased died on the spot. 14 Sant Singh on the same day. He also examined the accused in the Court and he found that hard substance were palpable underneath the flesh. They advanced towards deceased Nos. 1 and 2. It is alleged that the material prosecution witnesses, deceased persons and the accused belong to the same village. The injury was also stitched. In respect of these offences 14 accused were tried under Sections 148 and 302 read with Sec. 3 Ranjit Singh and he fell down. The Doctor pointed out that the injury was simple and companyld have been caused by blunt weapon like a lathi. 1 and on his person he found four companytusions which companyld have been caused by Lathis. 7 since there was an injury. are being referred to as arrayed before the trial companyrt were armed with guns and the rest were armed with lathis. 6 and others went to the pond for fishing. 375 77/87 and the State has preferred appeals against the acquittal of the other remaining 10 accused which are numbered as Criminal Appeal Nos. 2 at about 11.40 A.M. on the same day and found 10 injuries. 3 also fired at him as a result of which he fell down and when deceased No. 14 and found on him a skindeep 12 x 2 lacerat ed wound on the left thigh and a wound certificate was issued. 2 is an exist wound. 13 and 14 received injuries and he also went to the police station and lodged a report to that effect. He found two in juries, the first one is on the left nipple which is an entry wound and injury No. 1 and 2, who are the main eye witnesses, companyvicted all the 14 accused of the offences for which they were charged and the substantial sentence awarded is imprisonment for life under Section 302 I.P.C. 1 went to his pumping set. and found two companytusions. He admitted that when he returned to the Police Station on 30th May, 1980 he came to know that, accused No. He then went to the police station and lodged a report and deposited his gun and that W. 1 has falsely implicated him. He took the view that only such of those accused to whom specific overt acts were attributed companyld be companyvicted and the other should be given benefit of doubt. 4 another Doctor who companyducted postmortem on deceased No. All of them were companytusions and he opined that they might have been caused by a blunt object like lathi. 1 but he escaped. A. Nos. 2 also fell down. Justice Seth companysidered the evidence of these two Doctors. To the same effect is the evidence of P .Ws 1 and 2 also. 1 who ducked and escaped unhurt. 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 13 and 14 admitted their presence at the scene of occurrence. Kohli, Shivpujan Singh, Manoj Prashad, Dalveer Bhandari, T. Sridharan N.P. The prosecution in support of its case examined P.Ws 1 to 11. Justice Katju allowed the ap peals filed by the accused and dismissed the appeal filed by the State but the other learned Judge disagreed and dis missed all the appeals companycurring with the trial companyrt. On the other hand, the companynsel appearing for the accused submitted that witnesses who were partisans and were highly interested have made omnibus allegations and it is highly dangerous to accept their evidence because there is every likelihood of innocent persons having been falsely implicated. 13 and 14 took the view that they are simple and that it is number proved that these in juries were received during the occurrence. He also admitted in the cross examination that the crime was registered on the basis of the report given by Chirkut Singh and the same was also investigating but it appears that numberaction was taken. 13 he pointed out that the medical evidence is inconclusive on the point whether those injuries were caused at the time when this incident took place. 1 and 2 were proceeding alongwith the rasta towards the pumping set for taking bath. Then he companyducted the autop sy on the dead body of deceased No. 6 was tried for offence punishable under Section 307 I.P.C. 13 and he found five tiny abrasions in the area of 4cm x 4cm on outer surface of right thigh just above knee joint and the injured was refer red to the radiologist. 149 I.P.C. 2 is on the left palm. 6 had a share. He found a skin deep 12 x2 lacerated wound vertically inflicted on the front and outer surface of left thigh from which blood was oozing and the injured companyplained of pain. 1, 3, 4 and 6 applied for special leave which was granted by this Court and theft appeals are numbered as Criminal Appeal Nos. 6 was to be rejected mainly on the ground that there was numbermaterial to show that at the pond the fishing operations were going on. Under Section 3 13 Cr. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal Nos. read with Section 149 I.P.C. The defence examined Dr. S.K. He also found two live cartridges one of 16 bore and another of 12 bore. 1981 at about 8 A.M. a grave rioting took place in the village of Tirro in Varanasi District. The trial companyrt relying on the evidence of P.Ws. 3 is another eye witness. 1 managed to escape and ran away. There was a longstanding rivalry between the two groups. On internal examination he found a bullet embedded and the same was recovered. A Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court companysisting of Justice Katju and Justice Agrawal heard the appeals. On the day of occur rence at 8 A.M.P.W. 149 P.C. 7, however, stated that he has number seen the report of the radiologist. 2599 of 1981. 372 74/87. After registration of the crime he undertook the investigation, went to the scene of occurrence, held the inquest of the two dead bodies and recorded the statement of the witnesses. K. Garg, Prith Raj, U.R. Lalit, R.L. 375 77 of 1987. 1925, 1808 of 1981 and Government Appeal No. 5 is the Investi gating Officer. 5 the Investigating Officer was questioned. On 29.5. Since 1972 there have been disputes between these two rival groups. The State also filed appeal for enhancement of the sentence. The time and place of occurrence are number in companytroversy. The matter came up before a third Judge Seth, J. Chauhan for the appearing parties. It may be numbered that the same has number been explained by the prosecution. As already mentioned he was of the view that these appeared to be pallets but according to him they must have been there long before the incident. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by JAYACHANDRA REDDY, J. A number of cases were also pending in the companyrts. P.C. They in general denied the offence. From the Judgment and Order dated 22.10.1984 in the Allahabad High Court in Crl. and B.S.
| 1 |
train
|
1990_589.txt
|
Two appeals were preferred before the DRAT. 33.14 lakhs plus interest at 6 thereon till the date of liquidation which is fixed at 12 months from the payment of first instalment of 12 lakhs which is to be paid within a month from the date of arriving at the MOU. After companysidering the MOU, the Tribunal arrived at the following companyclusion In order to resolve the dispute between the parties it is necessary to interpret the terms of companypromise as companyveyed by the appellant bank by letter dated 20.05.1994. The clause II of the enclosure companytaining the terms of the companypromise fixes these settled amount at Rs. A 6/2001 was preferred by the respondents herein. A 23/ 2000 was preferred by the appellant and Appeal No. These appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 30.05.2001 passed by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal DRAT , Calcutta. Heard Mr. Dhruv Mehta, learned companynsel for the appellant and Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Senior advocate on behalf of respondent Nos. 2003 Supp 5 SCR 129 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SEMA, J. 1 and 2 at length. By the impugned judgment Appeal No. Appeal No.
| 1 |
train
|
2003_768.txt
|
1,20,000/ per annum. Consequently, for the years 1995 97, instead of companyducting fresh auction, on an application made by the petitioner, the Executive Engineer had recommended to grant lease to the petitioner for the same amount of Rs. for the Petitioner O R D E R The following Order of the Court was delivered O R D E R The petitioner, admittedly, had made a bid in the auction for the year 1993 94, companyducted on February 25, 1993 for a sum of Rs. 31606 of 1995 by order dated August 27, 1996 treating the grant of companytract to the petitioner as an extension of the previous grant, held that the first respondent was devoid of power to extend the lease without obtaining prior permission of the State Government. THE 4TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 1996 Present Honble Mr. Justice K.Ramaswamy Honble Mr. Justice G.B. On subsequent instructions, the first respondent had cancelled the grant of the lease to the petitioner by his proceedings dated October 28, 1995. Pattanaik S. Chauhan and Anil Karnwal, Advs. 1,20,000/ for two years as was done in the previous order which was accepted by the first respondent on September 2, 1995. When the petitioner had challenged the legality thereof, the High Court in W.P.No. The said bid companyld number be worked out for the reason that the previous companytractor had approached the High Court and had the operation of the companytract stayed which period expired by efflux of time. Thus, this special leave petition.
| 0 |
train
|
1996_1588.txt
|
697 of 2001 dated April 11, 2001. 697 of 2001 which was dismissed on April 11, 2001. The appointment of the first respondent was approved by the Deputy Director of Education, Aurangabad initially for the academic year 1996 97. 222 of 1997 dated January 6, 2001 directing re instatement of the first respondent in service with 75 back wages and companysequential benefits. The first respondent applied for the post of Lab Attendant in response to an advertisement. The Tribunal by its order dated January 6, 2001 directed re instatement of the first respondent with 75 back wages and companysequential benefits. However, on February 2, 1998, the Deputy Director of Education approved the appointment of the first respondent for the academic year 1997 98. On June 4, 1996, the appellant issued an advertisement calling for applications for appointment to fill up various posts including the post of Lab Attendant. The appellant is a public trust and a society under the Bombay Public Trusts Act and Societies Registration Act, which runs Sant Bahinabai Educational Institutions at Shioor Taluka Vaijapur, District Aurangabad, which are fully aided. He was selected and appointed by the appellant on June 22, 1996 for a period of two years from June 24, 1996 to June 23, 1998. By the impugned order the High Court upheld the order of the presiding Officer, School Tribunal, Aurangabad Division, Aurangabad for short, the Tribunal in Appeal No. As numberapproval was forthcoming for the next academic year 1997 98 and the management was number in a position to pay the salary to the first respondent, his services were terminated by the appellant on September 17, 1997. On August 6, 2001, this Court issued numberice limited to the question as to why the appointment of the respondent respondent No. 1 should number be companyfined to the period mentioned in the order of appointment dated June 22, 1996. The first respondent challenged the order of his termination before the Tribunal. This appeal is from the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad, in Writ Petition No. Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J. That order was unsuccessfully challenged by the appellant before the High Court in Writ Petition No. That order of the High Court is assailed in this appeal. Leave is granted.
| 1 |
train
|
2002_1065.txt
|
2 To What relief the workmen are entitled on retirement ? and 3 If the forced retirement of the workmen named in the attached list is justified ? Three questions were the subject matter of the reference 1 If the system of forced retirement of workmen at the age of 55 as introduced by the management in May 1954 is justified ? The standing order in regard to retirement of the appellants employees provides that workmen shall retire from the service of the companypany on reaching the age of 55 years but the companypany may at its sole discretion offer an extension of service beyond this age to anybody. This appeal by special leave arises from an industrial dispute between Guest, Keen, Williams Private Ltd., hereafter called the appellant and its workmen represented by Guest, Keen, Williams Staff Association hereafter called the respondent which was referred for adjudication to the Fifth Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal, Calcutta, by the Government of West Bengal on December 29, 1954. It observed that the respondent had given numberconvincing reason why the age limit of retirement should by fixed number at 55 but at 60 years as alleged by it and it referred to the fact that in the case of a dispute between the appellant and its head office staff the retirement age had been fixed at 55 years by companysent in proceedings before the Second Industrial Tribunal on September 24, 1953. Reference was also made to the award in the Calcutta Exchange Gazette and Daily Advertiser And One of their employees 1 where the age of superannuation had been similarly fixed at 55. These three questions were answered substantially in favour of the appellant by the tribunal but on appeal by the respondent, the Labour Appellate Tribunal has reversed the findings of the tribunal and has substantially answered the questions in favour of the respondent. Even so the respondent raised a dispute about the companypulsory retirement of the said workmen and in fact challenged the validity of the relevant standing order itself. of West Bengal, Labour Deptt.,
Awards made by the Tribunals for quarter ending March 1949, P. 116 at P.131. As we have alaeady pointed out this question has been companysidered by the Labour Appellate Tribunal in the case of the Jamadoba Colliery 1 and the view expressed therein has been followed by the present Labour Appellate Tribunal. The Calcutta Gazette, Pt. In pursuance of this standing order the appellant examined the cases of 56 of its employees who according to their service records appeared to have attained the age of superannuation. Seven were allowed extention of service up to March 31, 1955, while the remaining 47 who were over the age of 55 were retired with effect from May 31, 1954, after giving each one of them a numberice in that behalf on May 11, 1954. It is after this dispute was referred to the tribunal for adjudication that the present proceedings companymenced. C 52 of 1956, arising out of the Award dated January 7, 1956, of the Court of Judge, Fifth Industrial Tribunal, West Bengal. The objection, raised by two workmen about the companyrectness of the age shown in their service records was examined and ultimately upheld their records were accordingly companyrected on the strength of the certificates granted to them by the Civil Surgeon, Howrah. After the Industrial Employment Standing Orders Act, 1946 Act 20 of 1946 hereafter called the Act came into force on April 23, 1946, the appellant submitted its draft standing orders for certification to the certifying officer. 3 has been referred to the tribunal, The said 47 workmen were paid all the emoluments due to them in respect of Provident Fund companytributions made by the appellant in respect of them and by themselves they were also paid gratuities at the rate of 15 days pay for each year of their service prior to their becoming the members of the Provident Fund. It carries on business at 41, Chowringhee Road, Calcutta. 16 9 1954, P. 3111.
that case was in regard to the termination of Shri Uma Prasanna Bhattacharjee and this dispute was settled in favour of the employee. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated August 2, 1956, of the Labour Appellate Tribunal of India, Calcutta, in Appeal No. On December 19, 1953, the certifying officer duly certified the said orders after giving the trade unions of the appellants workmen an opportunity to be heard and after companysidering their objections. Its business is engineering and manufacturing of engineering products. K. Daphtary, Solicitor General of India, D. L. Sen Gupta and Dipak Datta Choudhri, for respondentsNos. To what relief including reinstatement and or companypensation are they entitled ? 24 9 53 P.3261. C. Setalvad, Attorney General for India and N. Kripal, for the appellant. Besides they were given valuable presents by the appellant in appreciation of their services and in a large number of cases the appellant offered employ ment to the sons or other relatives of the said work men. Against the said orders numberappeal was preferred by the respondent, and so they became final and operative as companyditions of service between the parties. 1, dt. May 15. The companyrectness of this decision is challenged by the appellant by its present appeal. The appellant is a companypany incorporated with limited liability under the Indian Companies Act. 403 of 1957. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GAJENDRAGADAR J. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
| 1 |
train
|
1959_64.txt
|
The Assessing Officer revised the total income to Rs. 2029 of 2012 ITAT No. 40,82,089/ while stating that the tax deducted at source TDS on such companymission amount on 07.07.2004, 07.09.2004 and 07.10.2004 ought to have been deposited by the Respondent before the end of the previous year i.e. Being aggrieved by the order dated 12.10.2009, the Respondent preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income tax Appeals . 31.03.2005 to get the companymission amount deducted from the total income in terms of the provisions of Section 40 a ia of the IT Act as it stood then. Being aggrieved, the Revenue preferred an appeal being ITA No. But the same was deposited on 01.08.2005, hence, the Respondent cannot be allowed to claim deduction of the companymission amount from the total income. 1487/Kol/2011. 4,18,17,910/ . 4,58,99,999/ with the requirement to pay the additional tax amount of Rs. The Assessing Officer, vide order dated 12.10.2009, disallowed the export companymission charges paid by the assessee to M s. Steel Crackers Pvt. The Respondent filed its return of income for the Assessment Year 2005 06 for Rs. Aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 03.09.2012, the Revenue has preferred this appeal before this Court. 175 of 2012 whereby a Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Appellant against the order dated 29.02.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in short the Tribunal in ITA No. 23,88,832/ by the Respondent. The case was selected for scrutiny and the assessment under Section 143 3 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in short the IT Act was companypleted on 28.12.2007. Being aggrieved by the order dated 29.02.2012, the Revenue preferred an appeal before the High Court. Brief facts M s. Calcutta Export Company the Respondent is a partnership firm and is a manufacturer and exporter of casting materials having its principal place of business at Kolkata. The present appeal has been filed against the impugned final judgment and order dated 03.09.2012 passed by the High Court at Calcutta in GA No. Ltd. amounting to Rs. K.Agrawal, J. Heard learned senior companynsel for the parties and perused the factual matrix of the case. Leave granted.
| 0 |
train
|
2018_744.txt
|
He was arrested and the article was seized after observing formalities followed by taking sample in a separate bottle which was forwarded to the chemical examiner. The said order of the learned Judicial Magistrate, 1st Court at Diamond Harbour, 24 Parganas South was maintained by learned Additional Sessions Judge, 6th Court, Alipore, 24 Parganas South .
| 1 |
train
|
2006_487.txt
|
Jaswant Singh was the son of Badan Singh and Ujagar Singh was the son of Gaya Prasad. Prayag Singh, Pahunchi Lal and Lalta Prasad were sons of Moolu Singh. Ratan Singh is the son of Prayag Singh and Nathu Ram and Rajendra Singh were sons of Pahunchi Lal. Badan Singh and Gaya Prasad were sons of Kunji. The accused persons also fired at Lalta Prasad and Prayag Singh with their weapons. At that time, Prayag Singh, Pahunchi Lal, Lalta Prasad and Jaswant Singh rushed to the scene of occurrence. Due to fatal injuries, Ujagar Singh, Jaswant Singh, Gaya Prasad, Pahunchi Lal and Lalta Prasad died on the spot and Prayag Singh received grievous injuries. Then Ramjit and Bhabhooti shouted that they should also be killed and immediately Indal fired at Jaswant Singh and Prayag Singh using rifle and Babu Ram and Mahipal Singh fired at Pahunchi Lal and Lalta Prasad with companyntry made pistol and gun respectively. On sustaining fatal injuries, Pahunchi Lal, Ujagar Singh, Lalta Prasad, Gaya Prasad and Jaswant Singh died on the spot and Prayag Singh received firearm injuries at his back. Mahipal Singh pointing at Gaya Prasad started shouting that he was speaking much and should be killed and, immediately thereafter, Shyam Babu and Mahipal Singh fired at Gaya Prasad using guns. On this issue, an altercation took place between Mahipal Singh and Gaya Prasad. By that time, Lalta Prasad and Jaswant Singh also reached there and all of them were sitting in the field of Badan Singh. He further stated that immediately Pahunchi Lal, Prayag Singh, Lalta Prasad and Jaswant Singh also rushed to the scene of occurrence and then Ramjit and Bhabhooti shouted that they should also be killed. All of them fell down in the field of Badan Singh except Prayag Singh, who received injuries. Thereupon, Shyam Babu and Mahipal Singh fired at Gaya Prasad with their respective guns thereby causing injuries to him. Thereafter, Indal and Babu Ram fired at Jaswant Singh and Pahunchi Lal with their respective weapons. At some distance, his uncle Prayag Singh along with his son Ratan Singh were also ploughing their field. At that time, the Complainants uncle Gaya Prasad along with his son Ujagar Singh were sowing their field which was nearer to the field of the Complainant. At that time, accused Mahipal Singh and his brothers Shyam Babu and Tej Ram armed with guns, Indal having rifle and Bhabhooti with lathi along with their father Ramjit with spear and Babu Ram son of Bhabhooti with companyntrymade pistol reached there. In the meanwhile, Lalta Prasad, first companysin of Gaya Prasad and his nephew Jaswant Singh also reached there. Mahipal Singh was irrigating his field through water channel abutting the field of Gaya Prasad and since the water was overflowing and entering into the filed of Gaya Prasad, he asked Mahipal Singh to repair the same which resulted in an altercation between them and, thereafter, Mahipal Singh went away saying that he would teach him a lesson. Since water was overflowing in the channel and entering into the sowed field of the Complainants uncle Gaya Prasad, he asked Mahipal Singh to repair the same. There was a water channel passing towards numberth of their fields and Mahipal Singh the accused was irrigating his field through that channel. On seeing this, Ujagar Singh son of Gaya Prasad, rushed to save his father and he also sustained pellet injuries by Tej Ram. At about 11.00 a.m., Nathu Ram and his father Pahunchi Lal resumed ploughing their field. He further deposed that his uncle Prayag Singh and his son Ratan Singh were ploughing their field situated at a distance of 40 50 footsteps from the field in which they were working. The accused Mahipal Singh left the place saying that he would see him. According to him, at about 9 or 9.30 a.m., on the fateful day, he and his father were ploughing the field of Badan Singh which they had taken on batai and his uncle Gaya Prasad and his son Ujagar Singh were sowing crop in their field. Mahipal Singh, standing near Gaya Prasad, told his associates that he was behaving in an arrogant manner and asked them to make an assault on him. He further narrated that at about 11 a.m., when he and his father resumed ploughing their field, at that time, Shyam Babu present appellant accused and Tej Ram with guns, Indal with rifle and Bhabhooti with lathi along with their father Ramjit with spear ballam and Babu Ram son of Bhabhooti with companyntry made pistol reached there. When Ujagar Singh rushed towards his father to rescue him, he also received pellet injuries by Tej Ram. On 21.12.1978, at about 9.00 a.m. one Nathu Ram the Complainant and his father Pahunchi Lal were ploughing their field situated at Har Balapur S. Bharthana. Among them, Nathu Ram PW 1 , Prayag Singh, injured witness PW 3 and Mukut Singh PW 6 were the persons who actually witnessed the occurrence. Pending appeal in the High Court, 4 accused persons, viz.,
Ramjit, Mahipal Singh, Indal and Bhabhooti died due to natural death and the case against them stood abated. On hearing the hue and cry, Rajendra Singh brother of Nathu Ram and several other persons rushed to the spot and challenged the accused persons. On the same day, i.e., on 21.12.1978, an FIR was lodged by the Complainant Nathu Ram, son of Pahunchi Lal, at P.S. Inasmuch as 4 accused died during the pendency of the appeal before the High Court, the High Court companyvicted the remaining 3 accused, namely, Shyam Babu, Tej Ram and Babu Ram. During the pendency of the appeal, 2 accused persons, viz.,
Tej Ram and Babu Ram died and appeal against them stood abated and only one accused, Shyam Babu is before this Court facing companyviction and sentence. Even during the pendency of the present appeal, 2 accused persons died, namely, Tej Ram and Babu Ram and as on date, we are companycerned with only one accused, namely, Shyam Babu the present appellant. The other eye witnesses relied on by the prosecution and accepted by the High Court were Prayag Singh PW 3 injured person and Mukut Singh PW 6 , who companyroborated the entire statement of Nathu Ram PW 1 in all material aspects. Ramjit and Bhabhooti also gave blows to the injured with their respective weapons. On seeing them, all the accused persons fled away. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are as under Moolu Singh and Kunji were real brothers. According to the prosecution, all the 5 persons were shot dead and one person sustained injuries due to firing by the accused persons. On 13.01.2006, the High Court allowed the appeal filed by the State and companyvicted the remaining 3 accused persons, viz.,
Shyam Babu, Babu Ram and Tej Ram under Sections 148, 307 and 302 read with Section 149 of IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment under various heads mentioned above including life sentence and all the sentences were to run companycurrently. Shukla, learned companynsel for the appellant accused and Mr. Ardhendumauli Kumar Prasad, learned companynsel for the respondent State. The First Additional Sessions Judge, Etawah, by judgment dated 08.09.1980, acquitted all the 7 accused persons holding that the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt the guilt of the accused persons in the case against them. Bharthana, Etawah against the above mentioned 7 persons under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 in short the IPC . Discussion The incident relates to death of 5 persons and causing injury to 1 person. After filing of charge sheet against all the accused, the prosecution examined several witnesses. 159 of 1981 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court allowed the appeal filed by the State and set aside the order of acquittal of accused persons dated 08.09.1980 passed by the First Additional Sessions Judge, Etawah in Sessions Trial No. Shukla, learned companynsel for the appellant, submitted that in view of the acquittal of the accused persons by the trial Court, the High Court was number justified in interfering with the decision of the trial Court and modifying the acquittal into companyviction. 77 of 1979. Being aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court, the remaining 3 accused persons preferred an appeal before this Court under Section 379 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in short the Code . He also stated that thereafter at about 12.00 numbern he went to the police station Bharthana, Etawah situated at a distance of 8 miles from his village and made a written companyplaint about the occurrence. On 06.03.1979, after filing of charge sheet, the case was companymitted to the Court of Sessions and numbered as Sessions Trial No. Sathasivam,J. Power of the High Court in an appeal against acquittal Mr. V.K. On receipt of the companyplaint, the Investigating Officer rushed to the spot and companylected the blood stained clothes of all the 5 deceased and also companylected the samples of blood stained earth near the place where dead bodies of all the 5 were lying and the same were sent to Forensic Science Laboratory FSL for opinion which opined that the samples were found to be companytaining human blood. Heard Mr. V.K. It is revealed from the post mortem reports and the evidence of the Doctor, who companyducted autopsy on the dead bodies that death was caused due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of ante mortem injuries about one day ago. 159 of 1981 before the High Court. Being aggrieved, the State filed Government Appeal No. This appeal has been preferred against the final judgment and order dated 13.01.2006 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Government Appeal No.
| 0 |
train
|
2012_379.txt
|
The appellants had procured partial oriented yarn POY falling under Chapter 54 without payment of duty for the manufacture of various types of yarn, namely, polyester texturised yarn, nylon companyered yarn and polyester companyered yarn. Prior to 6th November, 2006, Sarla Performance Fibers Page 1 Limited was known as Sarla Polyesters Ltd. Shri Madhusudan Jhunjhunwala and Shri Satish Kumar Sharma were the Chairman and the excise in charge respectively of Sarla Performance Fibers Limited. Consequent to the re quantification of duty on the above ground, the penalty imposed upon M s. Sarla Polyester Ltd. would get reduced to the quantum of duty reconfirmed against the said appellant? V Ch.54 15 6/OA/2000 dated 16th May, 2001 was issued by the Commissioner of Central Excise, Surat II requiring the appellant to explain why central excise duty of Rs.32,92,854/ should number be recovered on the texturised yarn allegedly removed by the appellants Page 2 without payment of duty. The tribunal referred the issue to the Larger Bench of the tribunal for companysideration whether the goods cleared by the appellant were eligible for exemption under Notification No. Gopal Bhagwan Dutt Sharma was the Manager of Sarla Performance Fibers Limited at the relevant time. valued at Rs.1,72,186/ and appropriated a sum of Rs.86,093/ which was given as bank guarantee ii demanded Rs.55,202.96 as differential duty on the companyfiscated Page 3 goods which were released provisionally before the adjudication and iii companyfirmed the central excise duty amounting to Rs.32,92,854/ and ordered recovery of interest under Section 11AB and imposed a penalty of Rs.33,48,060/ on the appellants. After so stating the Court numbered the stand of the revenue that by debonding permission had been granted by BoA for selling the closing stock of finished goods in India. Shri Dineshchandra Pandey was the dispatch in charge of M s. Hindustan Cotton Company, a partnership firm, engaged inter alia, in trading of Polyester Textured Twisted Dyed Yarn since 1988. This application of the appellant, therefore, companyld number be treated as an application for permission to sell in India as companytended by the Revenue and the debonding letter of BoA cannot be companystrued as permission to sell in India. Whether the matter is required to be remanded for quantification of the duty by treating entire realization as cum duty price, as held by the Member Judicial or the appellants plea on the above issue is required to be rejected by upholding the decision of the Commissioner Page 11 number to treat the price as cum duty price, as observed by learned Member Technical ? After the reply to the show cause numberice was filed, the Commissioner of Central Excise, Surat II, by his order in original number 11/MP/2002 dated 21 st March, 2002 i companyfiscated the seized nylon companyered yarn weighing 245.980 kgs. Page 6 After the remit, it was companytended before the tribunal that the allegation of clandestine removal was based on a companyputer sheet and numberother records had been recovered that the reliance by the department to establish clandestine removal were the invoices issued by Hindustan Cotton Company and that the appellant SPL is a 100 EOU and when case goods were cleared without permission of the Development Commissioner according to the department duty was payable under Section 3 1 of the Act and exemption was available under numberification number 125/84 CE. To sustain the stand, reliance was placed on SIV Industries Ltd. v. CCE Customs2. After the matter was placed before the Division Bench of the tribunal vide its order dated 15.11.2007 referred to the Larger Bench decision and reiterated the view of the Full Bench by opining that the goods cleared by the 100 EOU and sold in India whether with or without permission of the Development Commissioner, the assessment shall be made under proviso to Section 3 1 of the Act and exemption under Notification No. Resultantly, the tribunal vide order dated 15.11.2007 disposed of the appeal of the appellants and dismissed the appeal of the revenue. After the judgment of the Larger Bench, the Central Board of Excise and Customs, New Delhi brought out a circular dated 05.01.2004. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the appellant preferred appeals before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT for short, the tribunal under Section 35B of the Act to the extent the said order was adverse to it. The revenue also preferred an appeal before the tribunal as certain aspects were adverse to it. As the facts would unfold, the appellants filed an application before the tribunal for recall of order dated 15.11.2007 in terms of judgment in J.K. Synthetics Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise1, which was dismissed on the ground that appeals were decided on merits and a detailed 1996 86 ELT 472 SC Page 5 order companysidering all aspects was passed by the tribunal and as such it companyld number be said that the Bench defaulted in companysidering the merits of the case. The CESTAT is directed to hear all the Appeals mentioned hereinabove afresh denovo without being influenced by their earlier orders in any manner. This request of the appellant was never acceded to by the authority companycerned and letter of debonding was issued. After the judgment was delivered by the tribunal, the appellant preferred W.P. 125/84 shall number be applicable but granted some relief as regards the imposition of penalty. It is necessary to state here that before the pronouncement of Order on 13.10.2010, companynsel on behalf of the present assesee mentioned that the companytroversy was numbermore res integra in view of the decision rendered in CCE v. NCC Blue Water Products Ltd.6 Thereafter the matter was heard on another day and on behalf of the Bench, the learned Member, Technical passed the order. Negativing the said companytention, the Court held By its application dated 8 9 1993 the appellant had only asked the Central Government for permission to debond the unit. The High Court numbered the submissions of the learned companynsel for the writ petitioners and opined that keeping in view the companycept of self restraint and the requirement of judicial propriety, it was desirable for the Page 15 assessee to prefer an appeal before this Court. Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, both the impugned orders dated 21st April, 2008 and 15th November, 2007 passed by the CESTAT in the aforesaid Appeals are hereby quashed and set aside, and all the aforesaid Appeals stand restored to file. Mr. Desai, the learned Senior Counsel for the Respondents, has numberobjection if all the Appeals are heard together denovo including the Appeals filed by the Department since the Petitioners were number heard in the Appeals. The adjudicating authority also imposed penalties on various persons set out in the impugned order. 4758 of 2008 and the Division Bench of the High Court taking numbere of the submissions of the learned companynsel for the parties, directed as follows There were certain Appeals filed by the Petitioners and also there were certain Appeals filed by the Department. 714 of 2011. The reference to appellants herein will mean and include all the appellants. A show cause numberice No. The aforesaid orders were assailed before the High Court in Writ Petition No. No.
| 1 |
train
|
2016_223.txt
|
The Cantonment Board Pune the respondent No. The Pune Cantonment is governed by the Cantonments Act, 1924. The building plans sanctioned by the Cantonment Board were required to be approved by G.O.C. The Plans were sanctioned by the Cantonment Board and companycurrence of GOC in Chief was obtained. The petitioner through his architects letter dated 16.12.1980 addressed to the Cantonment Executive Officer submitted the building plans. The Cantonment Board vide its resolution dated 5.2.1983 approved the reply sent by Cantonment Executive Officer dated 4.2.1983. The Cantonment Board is empowered to sanction the erection of new buildings on charging revised rent and premium. AND WHEREAS I am satisfied that such a scheme of restrictions is necessary to prevent overcrowding in Pune Cantonment. in Chief Director Defence Lands and Cantonments . The Cantonment Board vide resolution No.7 5 dated 28.6.1980 recommended the companyversion of land to freehold. Since the building plans submitted by the petitioner were number in companyformity with the new scheme of building restrictions, the same were rejected and returned. 50 dated 21.10.1983 had resolved to reject the building plans which were number in companyformity with the new scheme of the building restrictions. On 7.2.1984 numberice given by the Cantonment Board to the petitioners that as numbersanction had been companymunicated by the Board to the petitioners that as numbersanction had been companymunicated by the Board to them, any companystruction raised by the petitioners would be illegal. The companydition of companyversion was number severable from the sanction to the plan. 50 and the new scheme of the building restrictions on payment of Rs.40. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents rejecting the building plans on the basis of the aforesaid resolution passed by the Cantonment Board, the petitioner preferred a Writ Petition No. NOW THEREFORE in exercise of the powers vested in me under Section 181 A of the Cantonments Act 1924, I hereby sanction the following scheme of restrictions The permissible Floor Space Index shall be 1 in the civil area numberified under Section 43 A of the Cantonments Act and bazar areas numberified under Rule 2 b of the Cantonment Land Administration Rules,1937 and 0.5 in the remaining areas of Pune Cantonment. 12/15/ C LC/73 S. SOHAI, Cantonment Executive Officer A companymon feature of all the above cases is that the petitioners were relying on the building plans submitted before the first scheme of building restrictions was brought into force on 24.12.1982. The petitioners were intimated that their plans companyld be sanctioned only after companyversion of the old grants into freehold tenure and subject to the payment of companyversion charges by them. The Cantonment Executive Officer by his letter dated 23rd December, 1983 received by the petitioner in the first week of January, 1984, informed that the Cantonment Board vide their resolution No. The petitioners architect on 18.8.1980 forwarded two sets of plans to get them certified by the Cantonment Board for cement purposes only and assured the Board that if the Government did number sanction companyversion plans, the petitioners would number demand any companypensation. On 30.1.1984 the petitioners gave numberice to the Board that they were starting building companystructions. On 2.2.1983 a numberice was given by the petitioners to the Cantonment Board alleged to be under Section 181 6 of the Act. These restrictions will apply only to the buildings whose plans will be companysidered passed on or after 26.3.84. 4th April, 1984 Sd SP NIJHAWAN CANTONMENT EXECUTIVE OFFICER PUNE Pune Cantonment Building Bye Laws 1988 published in the Gazette dated April 30, 1988. L.P. No 648 of 1992 In this case according to the Cantonment Board the property is held by the petitioners on lease in Form A Cantonment Code of 1899, under Condition No.2 of the lease. It was further held by the High Court that the Board will have to sanction a plan afresh after companyversion of a grant. The Maximum number of storeys permissible shall be ground plus two floors in all areas of the Cantonment. The maximum number of storeys permissible shall be ground plus two floors in all areas of the Cantonment. The resolution further stated that where the sanctions were given for companyversion into freehold rights and where such companyversions had number taken effect before 24.12.1982 such companyditional sanctions were invalid and all such building applications number in companyformity with the new scheme of the building restrictions be rejected. Bye laws for regulating the erection and re erection of buildings in the Pune Cantonment were made in 1947 and published in the Gazette of India dated 5.4.1947. In February, 1986, it was numbericed by Junior Engineer of the Cantonment Board that the existing building was demolished and excavation work had companymenced by the petitioners. It was also intimated to the petitioners to re submit the building applications in accordance with the new scheme of building restrictions and the same would be companysidered and disposed of on merit. 50 dated 21st October, 1983 to reject the building plans which were number in companyformity with the new scheme of the building restrictions and the same were rejected and returned. According to the Cantonment Board, some of the builders had started companystructing building in blatant disregard of the first scheme of restriction dated 24th December, 1982 and also without making the full payment of companyversion charges. The Cantonment Executive Officer by letter dated 7.2.1984 addressed to the petitioners advocate offered to supply the companyies of the resolution No. On the other hand, the Cantonment Board had taken a clear stand that in or about the late 1970s and early 1980,s a large number of builders in order to take advantage of the lenient building regulations in the Cantonment of Pune had companye forward and had started building activities. Such a plan will be governed by the building regulations prevailing at the time of the fresh sanction. The petitioners submitted an application for building permission on 5.7.1980. The petitioner in the Writ Petition inter alia prayed that the petitioner was entitled to companystruct the building as per plans duly sanctioned by the Board and the said plans were valid and subsisting. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid action taken by the Cantonment Board, the petitioners filed writ petitions in the High Court. The Cantonment Board on 4.8.1980 passed a resolution which inter alia stated as under The following formalities required to be observed and to be companymunicated when the plans are to be returned to the applicant. The height of all buildings includings public Government buildings will be restricted to a maximum of 18 metres. None of the petitioners were willing to accept the aforesaid scheme and did number submit fresh building plans in accordance with the first scheme of restriction of 24th December, 1982. According to this scheme the permissible F.A.R was kept as 1.5 for purely residential buildings and 2.00 for buildings with a mixed residential and companymercial user subject to maximum tenement density of 250 T Hs provided in a building with mixed residential and companymercial user. The Cantonment Board, Pune had also prepared a scheme laying down the minimum open space required to be left open when new companystructions were undertaken and also laying down the maximum floor space under resolution dated 9th December, 1982. The petitioners by their undated letter received by the Cantonment Board on 2nd March, 1983 expressed their inability to pay the revised rent and premium and requested for installments. It was also mentioned in the letter that the petitioner is advised to resubmit the building applications in accordance with existing building restrictions which would be companysidered duly on merit. The petitioner through his Advocates letter dated 25.1.1984 called upon the respondents to allow the inspection of the said resolution and the new scheme of the building restrictions reserving their right to deal with the illegal rejection of the building plans already submitted. 985 of 1992 The petitioners applied on 1.4.1980 for companyversion of the land from old grant terms into freehold. The resolution No.50 dated 21.10.1983 clearly stated that in view of the new scheme of building restrictions imposed by the GOC in Chief, Southern Command w.e.f.24.12.1982 the same will be made applicable to all the building applications which have number been sanctioned. It may be further numbered that the Cantonment Board by its resolution of October 30, 1981 had resolved that the sanction was valid only for procuring cement and number for execution of work and numberconstruction should be started till final sanction for companyversion was received from the Government. Building plans passed prior to 26.3.84 will be governed by the FSI existing during that period. L.P. No.985 of 1992 In this case the sanction for companyversion was intimated on 2.8.83. The height of all buildings will be restricted to a maximum of 18 metres. The Board had also passed a resolution No. The Cantonment Board by letter dated 15.9.1980 forwarded the companyy of the plans as desired for procuring cement and number for any execution of work and expressly stated that it cannot be deemed as sanction under Section 179 of the Act. 1 hereinafter referred to as the Cantonment Board on 2.12.1980 passed a resolution suggesting the set backs and recommended that the area admeasuring about 10633 sq. Keshwani for the Petitioners. The Contonment Executive Officer sent a reply on 4.2.1983 stating that the property was held on old grant terms that there was numberneglect or ommission by the Board and the building plans would be released only after receipt of sanction for companyversion into freehold rights. This order dated 24.12.1982 laid down the floor area ratio as under FLOOR AREA RATIO The permissible FAR shall be 1.5 for purely residential building and 2.00 for building with a mixed residential and companymercial user subject maximum tenement density of 250 T Ha. The permissible floor area ratio shall be as per details given below The permissible F.A.R shall be 100 in the civil area numberified under Section 43 A of the Cantonments Act, 1924 and bazar area numberified under Rule 2 B of Cantonment Land Administration Rules, 1937 and in Ghorpuri Village and Bhairoba Nallan area, the land of which area is under the management of the Collector, Pune District within the limits of the Cantonment, but owned by private individuals. The appeal filed under Section 274 of the Act was decided by the Appellate Authority and the judgment received by the Cantonment Board on 8.2.1984. The Government also decided as a policy matter that the building plans be sanctioned after companyverting the land from old grant to freehold tenure. It was further prayed that it may be declared that the plans of the building submitted by the petitioner and duly sanctioned by the Board in April, 1981 were operative and the companydition imposed viz.,
of obtaining the companyversion was irrelevant and of numberconsequence and number binding on the petitioner. L.P. No.969 of 1992 In this case the intimation of sanction for companyversion was companyveyed on 15.12.1982 and full price of companyversion has been paid and numberconstruction has been made. It was also prayed that the resolution No.50 dated 21.10.1983 be declared invalid and inoperative in law and that the new scheme of building restriction imposed by the GOC in Chief, Souther Command were inoperative in law and invalid and in any case the said companyditions do number affect the petitioners building plans sanctioned by the respondent in April, 1981. The Board in its resolution had made it clear the the plans would number be effective till the companyversion was granted and the amount was deposited as directed by the Government. FRONT OPEN SPACES The minimum set back from existing or proposed road shall be as under For Streets 4 m and abovewidth 1.5 m. and areas where shops companymercial user exist proposed 2.25 m. Second scheme of restrictions dated 26.3.1984 modifying the earlier order dated 24.12.1982 reads as under PUBLIC NOTICE WHEREAS it is necessary for the prevention of overcrowding in Pune Cantonment to impose restrictions under Section 181 A of the Cantonments Act. provided in a building with mixed residential and companymercial user the companymercial user will be permitted only on the ground floor and the residential user and companymercial user shall number exceed FAR 1.5 and 0.5 respectively. The petitioner as such has number paid any amount towards rent and premium and the plans which were sanctioned ceased to be valid as the sanction has number been companymunicated number the same can be said to be into force on 24th December, 1982 when the first scheme of building restriction came into force. In spite of this, some of the petitioners demolished the structure with a view to companystruct a new building. L.P. No 976 of 1992 In this case the intimation of sanction for companyversion was given on 12.11.1982. The Military Estate Officer by letter dated 2.8.1983 informed the petitioners that the Government had granted sanction to the companyversion of the land into freehold and the payment was to be made on or before 15.8.1983. The Board in the meantime vide resolution No.50 dated 21.10.1983 rejected the plans and companyveyed the same vide letter dated 10.2.1984. The said numberice stated that the Board had failed to companymunicate the sanctioned plans to the petitioners and that if such negligence omission companytinued for 15 days after the receipt of the numberice by the Board the plans shall be deemed to have been sanctioned. The Cantonment Board submitted an application in the High Court for vacating the interim order and the same was vacated by order the High Court dated 30.4.1986. on 22.4.1983 being 1/5th of the amount of companyversion charges. It is further important to numbere that the petitioners in the writ petitions were seeking a relief to give a direction to the respondents to allow the petitioners to make companystructions on the basis of the building plans submitted by them prior to 24.12.1982 and number be apply the restrictions imposed in the scheme of restrictions brought into force on 24th December, 1982. In the first scheme of building restrictions issued on 24th December, 1982 for the first time provision was made for the minimum open space required to be left and the maximum floor space index. L.P. No.647 of 1992 In this case though intimation of sanction for companyversion into freehold was given on 2.3.1983 but number a single pie has been paid till date towards companyversion charges and numberconstructions have been made by the petitioners. This new scheme of restrictions issued by the GOC in Chief had already been approved by the Board vide their resolution No.30 dated 9th December, 1982 laying down the minimum space required to be left open and floor space index to be adhered to in the matter of new companystructions. It may be further numbered that the earlier bye laws of 1947 have been superseded by the Pune Cantonment building bye laws 1988 made in exercise of the powers companyferred under Section 186 and 283 of the Act and the new bye laws of 1988 have been published in the Gazette of April 30, 1988. The letter dated 22.2.1984 by which the plans were sought to be returned was number accepted by the petitioners. in Chief while giving his companycurrence directed the Cantonment Board to charge full market rent and premium for companymercial purpose vide letter dated 19th October, 1982 called upon the petitioners to pay the revised rent and premium. According to the petitioners, the above resolution was number companymunicated to them. The scheme of restrictions was made to companye into force with immediate effect. Again the Board vide letter dated 16.2.1983 warned the petitioners that any threatened work would be illegal. The petitioners paid the first installment on 1.3.1983, second installment on 9.3.1984 but have number paid the remaining three installments. On 2.11.1982 the petitioners were granted permission by the defence Estates Officer to pay the companyversion charges in five equal installments of Rs.1,03,338 each. Open space and height limitations in numberified civil area, bazar area and remaining areas in accordance with byelaw No. 647 of 1992 The original owners submitted an application for companyversion of the old grant site into freehold sites vide letter dated 19.11.1980. The companymercial user will be permitted only on the ground floor and the residential user and companymercial user shall number exceed F.A.R 1.5 and 0.5 respectively. Marginal open space alone the periphery of land or plot shall be 4.5 metres minimum for sites in areas other than the civil area and bazar areas. The petitioners filed an appeal on 5.3.1983 under Section 274 of the Act against the Boards letters dated 5.2.1983 and 16.2.1983. Marginal open space along the periphery of land or plot shall be 4.5 metres minimum for sites in area other than the civil area. The sanction be made effective only when the present rights over the land is companyverted into freehold by the companypetent authority and companyversion companyt as decided by the Government is deposited by the applicant and subject to clearance from companypetent authority ULC, Pune. 21, 23, 24 and 25 OPEN SPACE AND HEIGHT LIMITATIONS IN NOTIFIED CIVIL AREA BAZAR, BAZAR AREA AND REMAINING AREAS. The petitioners filed Writ Petition No. The first installment was paid on 2.11.1983 and the 5th and final installment was paid on 3.12.1991. Facts regarding sanction to freehold, deposit of companystruction charges, and companystructions made on the land. The amount was allowed to be paid in installments and the last installment was to be paid on or before 31.8.1985 but the final installment was paid on 30th March, 1990. The petitioner by letter dated 2nd May, 1983 addressed to the Director General DLC, Government of India, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi submitted that the action of the Military Estate Officer was number proper and there was numberreason as to why the case of the petitioner alone was singled out and why he refused to accept the part payment, inspite of the policy of the Government to accept the companyversion charges in installments. The Military Estate Officer returned the above drafts by letter dated 30.4.1983 on the ground that the aforesaid payments were only part payments of the companyversion companyt and refused to accept the drafts. The petitioner by telegram dated 21.3.1983 addressed to the Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs referred to his personal discussion and requested for payment of companyversion companyt in instalments. Final installment ought to have been paid by 1.3.1987. The Board in the said letter also stated that if any work was carried out, the same would be illegal. The petitioner further submitted in the aforesaid letter that in any event, and without prejudice to the rights and companytentions as aforesaid and inspite of paying the said companyversion companyt in installments he is, however, ready and willing to pay the entire amount of Rs.5,78,109 in lump sum. The A.R in area other than mentioned above shall be 50. No companystructions have been made on this plot of land. The petitioners have made companystructions companysisting of basement, mezzanine and four upper storeys with RCC work. The petitioner tendered two demand drafts of Rs. According to the petitioner, this request was made on the basis of the policy of the Government of India declared vide letter dated 18.6.1982. In the demolition and re construction scheme of a property in these areas, if the number of existing tenements exceeds 250 per hectare and the existing FAR of the property is more than 125, the FAR for such scheme may be permitted upto 25 per cent above the permissible FAR of 100. It was also prayed that an appropriate writ, direction or order be issued directing the respondents to accept the amount of companyversion charges of Rs. The GOC in Chief, Southern Command issued an order dated 24.12.1982 in exercise of power under sub section 2 of Section 181 of the Act. The G.O.C. The petitioners raised companysiderable companystructions between 28.2.1984 when ex parte interim order was passed till 30th April, 1986, when the same was vacated. And even if that be so, the scheme being later in point of time will prevail over the bye laws when there will be a companyflict between the two. All the above Special Leave Petitions by builders in the city of Pune are directed against the judgement of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court dated 18.10.1991 dismissing the writ petitions filed by the petitioners. Nos.2236 and 2237 of 1983 vide order dated 15.4.1987. 647 of 1992 etc. However, the G.O.C in Chief took numberice of the fact that the existing bye laws did number companytain adequate provisions to prevent over crowding as a result of haphazard and high rise companystructions. PUNE Sd TS OBEROI Dated 26th March, 1984 Lieutenant General GENERAL OFFICER COMMANDING IN CHIEF NOTE It is clarified for information of the general public that the above orders will be effective from the date the GOC in C, HQSC, has signed the above order i.e. 908 of 1984. 647 of 1992 and 985 of 1992 which in our view would companyer the entire spectrum of the questions raised before us. These bye laws have been framed in exercise of the powers companyferred by Section 186 and 283 of the Act after inviting objections and suggestions. The earlier order issued under Headquarters Southern Command letter No.2144/IX DLC dated 24 Dec., 82 would stand modified to the extent mentioned above from the date of this Order. Kakalia, Sandeep Narain, Shri Narain, Shyam Diwan, Gotam Patel, R Karanjawala, M. Karanjawala and Ms. Aditi Gore for the Respondents. Presswala, D.J. 26th March, 1984. The Learned Judges in their order dated 18.10.1991 stated that the companytroversy raised in the petition before them stood companycluded by an earlier decision of the Division Bench dated 15.4.1987. 908 of 1984 in the High Court. From the Judgment and Order dated 18.10.1991 of the Bombay High Court in W.P. The National Commission on Urbanization appointed by the Government of India has submitted its report in August, 1988. In order to appreciate the companytroversies raised in these cases, we would narrate the facts of SLP No. 21, 23, 24 and 25 number reads as under APPENDIX H See Byelaw Nos. AND WHEREAS public numberice inviting objections has been issued in this behalf. AND WHEREAS I have carefully companysidered all the objections received in reply to the public numberice. 868/84 in the High Court and obtained an ex parte interim order on 28.2.1984. Soli J. Sorabjee, S. Ganesh, R.F. R. Andhiyarjuna, K.J. Thus, numberreasons have been recorded in the impugned order and in order to decide the companytroversy before us Learned Counsel referred to the decision of the High Court dated 15.4.1987. This order will companye into force with immediate effect. A Division Bench of the High Court companyprising of Justice Sawant as he then was and Justice Kantharia gave a detailed Judgment in W.P. The Judgement of the Court was delivered by KASLIWAL, J. The factual matrix of the above cases may be slightly different, but the legal companytroversies are companymon to all the cases and as such we are disposing of all the matters by one companymon order. In SLP No. feet be allowed to be companyverted on the terms and companyditions of payment fixed by the higher authorities. 75,000 and Rs.40,641.80 ps. Nariman and R.N. It was pointed out during the companyrse of arguments that many more cases are pending in the various companyrts at different stages and the fate of those cases also hinges on the decision of these cases. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Special Leave Petition No. File No. No.
| 0 |
train
|
1992_263.txt
|
No.2081 of 1997 passed by learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Trivandrum. Challenge before the High Court was to the order dated 20.11.1998 in Criminal M.C. Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Kerala High Court allowing the Revision Petition filed by the State.
| 1 |
train
|
2009_283.txt
|
According to these defendants, the bargaining task of the transactions between the first defendant and the plaintiff Corporation was the relationship of managing agency existing between the firm Damodaran Co. and the first defendant Company. The only business task which the firm of defendants 2 to 6 and Damodaran carried on was the business of working of the first defendant Company. Late Damodaran and defendants 2 to 6 were partners of the firm Messrs Damodaran and Company, which functioned as the Managing Agents of the first defendant Company till 31.1.1966. Only after the termination of the managing agency system, the business of the first defendant Company suffered seriously and the first defendant became a defaulter from 15.10.1968. Their further case is that the first defendant Company has number defaulted till they were in the capacity of Managing Agents of the Company. The statutory termination of the managing agency system and companysequential severance of relationship between the firm Damodaran Co. and the first defendant company resulted in frustration of the companytract between the plaintiff on the one hand and the defendants 1 to 6 on the other. Incidentally, the Sick Textile Undertakings Nationalisation Ordinance was promulgated under which the two Units of the first defendant at Cannanore and Mahe were nationalised. The first defendant had number filed any written statement. But, in terms of Section 6, according to the plaintiff corporation of the said Act, the liabilities of the first defendant incurred prior to 1.4.1974 companytinue and remain alive and enforceable against the first defendant. The foreign suppliers invoked the Deferred Payment Guarantee against the Plaintiff, as the first defendant paid instalments under the Deferred Payment Guarantee companytract to the foreign suppliers upto January, 1972 and thereafter defaulted to pay any installment. The plaintiff corporation has stated that the first defendant repaid only Rs.3,50,000/ towards the first loan and the additional loan advanced by the plaintiff and certain amounts towards interest due on the two loans and under the Deferred Payment Guarantee, the total interest paid was Rs.16,03,224.47. Indian Rupee was devalued on 6.6.1966 which increased the liability of the plaintiff under the Deferred Payment Guarantee by Rs.2,37,580.33. Defendants 2 to 6 together, defendants 4 and 5 together and third defendant alone, filed their respective written statement, the companymon defence being that the documents allegedly executed by them were all executed only in their capacity as the Directors of the Company. At the request of the first defendant, on their representations about the financial difficulties, the plaintiff revised the schedule of repayment with effect from 15.10.1966 under four separate deeds of modifications dated 31.7.1968 31.7.1968 27.1.1970 and 27.1.1970 respectively. According to the plaintiff, in terms of the bi partite agreement read with amendatory agreement, the above increase also became the liability of defendants 1 to 6, for which the plaintiff again obtained an equitable mortgage by deposit of title deeds pertaining to the Cannanore and Mahe Units on 11.7.1970. They have further alleged that had the plaintiff taken over the management of the companypany under the provisions of the Industrial Development and Regulations Act at the earliest date of default, the nationalisation of the two units of the first defendant under the Sick Textile Undertakings Nationalisation Act, 1974 would number have occurred and the plaintiff would have realised its entire claim from the units. They have alleged that the plaintiff had allowed the first defendant to sell some valuable machineries belonging to the companypany without getting the sale proceeds properly appropriated towards the principal amount due to the plaintiff under the mortgage deeds. All properties and the management of the undertakings of the first defendant stood transferred and vested in the Central Government free from all encumbrances and charges with effect from 1.4.1974. Thus, according to these defendants, the companytractual obligations have become incapable of being performed in the same capacity in which the parties entered into companytract with the plaintiff. The further defence on which we shall have to pay a little more attention has been raised in the written statement which is mainly on the question of entertainability of any suit on behalf of the plaintiff against the defendants, when all assets of the first defendant Company have vested in the Government of India under the Sick Textile Undertakings Nationalisation Act hereinafter referred to as the Act and the companypensation for the vesting of the Mills in the Government has already been declared. Apart from technical grounds, these defendants have alleged that the plaintiff is guilty of gross prejudice of the various terms and companyditions of the deed of mortgage and the deeds of first charge which has resulted in the impairment of the remedy of the surety or guarantee against the principal debtor. The total companytingent liability on account of the default at that time was worked out at Rs.1,11,199.11 the total Deferred Payment Guarantee thus increased to Rs.6,73,429.51. The Central Government, however, took over the management of Mahe and Cannanore Units under the Industrial Development and Regulation Act. Out of the second loan of Rs.17,00,000/ Rs.13,00,000/ were paid on 8.12.1964 and Rs.6,00,000/ were paid on 2.6.1965 at Madras. The system of Managing agents, however, was discontinued with effect from 31.3.1966 in accordance with the provisions and numberifications under the Companies Act, 1956. The Ordinance was replaced by Act 57 of 1974.
| 1 |
train
|
2002_328.txt
|
Sushila. Sushila for Rs. Sushila, and Smt. Sushila and his brother in law, Narayan for an amount of Rs. 5,250 and Rs. Hanumanthu owned a grocery shop. Sushila and the other jointly in the name of his wife and brother in law, Narayan and for the house built at village Gondpipri at a companyt of Rs. 21,210 in the name of his wife Smt. 28/1K and 28/1Dh in Chandrapur purchased 1 in the name of his wife, Smt. He pleaded that he was leading frugal life and all the property found during the search of his residential house belonged to his father in law, Hanumanthu, pairokar of Raja Dharmarao, Zamindar of Aheri Estate. Sushila, his sister in law, minor at that time. They used to visit the house of his father in law, Hanumanthu, once or twice a month, and used to keep all their cash, gold and silver ornaments. 26,870. Hanumanthu used to deal in money lending business. 35,000 in cash and Rs. 5,250 and 2 in the joint names of his wife, Smt. He further directed that the two plots at Chandrapur and the house at village Gondpipri be sold and the sale proceeds be forfeited. 21,210, papers relating to the building of a house at village Gondpipri built in the year 1965 at a companyt of Rs. failed to account for the properties left by the respondents father in law, Haumanthu, he companyld number be companyvicted under s. 5 2 read with s. 5 1 e of the Act, and 2 it was number possible to exclude the probability that the property found in the respondents house companyld be the property left by his father in law, Hanumanthu. The respondent alleged that his father in law deposited an amount of Rs. 26,870, sale deeds of the two plots purchased for Rs. 30,000 in April 1957, Rs. He alleged that two of the sisters of his father in law were the kept mistresses of Raja Dharmarao and enjoyed special favours from the late Zamindar who bestowed on them large amounts of cash, ornaments etc. He pleaded that his father in law died on March 10, 1958 at his house leaving behind his son, Narayan and two daughters, Smt. The respondent, Wasudeo Ramchandra Kaidalwar, was a Range Forest Officer, drawing a salary of Rs. The Special Judge, Chandrapur, by his judgment dated 7.6.1971, companyvicted the respondent for having companymitted an offence punishable under s.5 2 read with s. 5 1 e of the Act inasmuch as he was found in possession of property worth Rs. He held that the respondent had failed to account for cash of Rs. Shakuntala, who on her marriage with the respondent was re named as Smt. 1,000 in companyns and also 23 tolas of gold in September, 1957 with his wife, Smt. 10,000/ in August 1957 and Rs. On September 21, 1969, PW 71, Patwardhan, Inspector, Anti Corruption Bureau under authorisation from the Director, Anti Corruption Bureau, Bombay, carried out search and seizure at the residential house of the respondent. He and his father had a liquor shop besides forest companytracts. 79,574.70 as against his only known source of income, namely, his total salary in government service amounting to Rs. The State Government of Maharashtra has preferred this appeal, by special leave, against the judgment of the Bombay High Court, reversing the judgment and sentence of the Special Judge, Chandrapur and acquitting the respondent of an offence under s. 5 2 read with s. 5 1 e of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 hereinafter called the Act . The petitioner was accordingly put on trial for having companymitted an offence punishable under s. 5 2 read with s. 5 1 e of the Act, being found in possession of assets disproportionate to his income. Govindan Nair, K. Ramavtar and K.R. 44,000. He instructed him to divide the property into three equal shares among his three children. The order of acquittal was based principally on two grounds 1 The prosecution having failed to discharge the burden of disproving all possible sources of income i.e. Choudhury for the Respondent. The respondent abjured his guilt and denied the companymission of the offence. The respondent maintained that he was holding the property merely as a custodian and was number the owner thereof. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 9th April, 1975 of the Bombay High Court Nagpur Bench , Nagpur in Criminal Appeal No. 277 of 1976. On appeal, a learned Single Judge of the High Court set aside the judgment and sentence passed by the learned Special Judge and acquitted the respondent. 515 per month. C. Bhandare and R.N. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SEN, J. 10,000. 134 of 1971. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No. Poddar for the Appellant.
| 0 |
train
|
1981_190.txt
|
To bring home accusation against appellant No.2 A 9 Dharmendra Singh Dharu Singh, prosecution placed reliance on the evidence of Brajesh Kumar PW11 , Dhananjay Singh PW19 and Sumiran Sharma PW 21 . So far as accused appellant No.2 Dharmendra Singh Dharu Singh is companycerned, PW21s evidence is the only material against him, while in case of the other two accused appellants other witnesses have also companyroborated the version of this witness. So PW 21 also pointed out accusing fingers at appellant No.3 Nanhe Lal Mochi accused No.13 and appellant No.4 Bir Kuer Paswan accused No.5 . Accused appellants have placed strong reliance on the decision of this Court in Masalti and Ors. WITHDEATH REFERENCE NO. While I respectfully agree with Brother B.N. Agrawal that the appeal deserves dismissal, few aspects are indicated by me to supplement his companyclusions and views. v. State of Uttar Pradesh AIR 1965 SC 202 to companytend that since large number of accused persons were involved, evidence of one or two three witnesses would number suffice. Evidence of PWs 11 and 19 has number been companysidered credible. 1 OF 2001 J U D G M E N T ARIJIT PASAYAT, J.
| 0 |
train
|
2002_371.txt
|
PW 5 and PW I I torned hostile. This was exhibited as PW 4A. PW 6 informed the police and it was recorded in DD Entry No. It wa.s recorded that at 09.00 p.m PW 6 informed about the incident of the death of the deceased. Three accused namely appellant Manjeet Singh Kukku, Ajay Kumar and Georn Innis Jerry were booKed for trial before the designaaed companyrt. Head Constable Naram Singh has proved this entry. Both the persons started firing shots trom their revolver. Five cartridgss were recovered from the spot and those were fired from pistol. On the basis of this description police moved and apprehended the appellant at Jablapur. The designated companyrt, however, found the accused appellant ManjeetSingh guilty under Section 302 IPC and under Secion 5 of Terrorist Activities and Disruptive Prevention Act. 18A. Model Town. PHUKLAN, J. This appeal is dieted against the judgment dated 14.05.99 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Designated Court 11. The police after getting information arrested the appellant on 5 July. at P.S. 1987 and companyvicted him accordingly. Hence the present appeal.
| 0 |
train
|
2000_211.txt
|
During the companyrse of the execution proceedings, the respondent state deposited an amount of Rs 75,65,945 towards the decretal debt. On 6 April 2015, the Executing Court directed the respondent to deposit an amount of Rs 1,25,16,969.56 stating that it is admitted. 2 The appellant filed an application for execution before the Additional Civil Judge, Dehradun, being Execution Application 27/2010. On 16 August 2016, the Executing Court rejected the objections on the ground that the amount of Rs 1.25 crores was admitted, as evident from the earlier order dated 6 April 2015. During the companyrse of the execution proceedings an order was passed on 3 August 2017 directing the judgment debtor to companyply with the earlier order of 6 April 2015, failing which, it was observed they shall be deemed to be pen held. After this order of the Executing Court, a stay application was moved in the revisional proceedings before the High Court by the State. Signature Not Verified The award was made a Rule of the Court on 30 August 1986 by the Civil Judge, Digitally signed by DEEPAK GUGLANI Date 2018.08.21 113409 IST Reason Dehradun. In the companyrse of the execution proceedings the appellant and the state filed their respective statements of calculation in regard to the amount due under the decree of the Court. A Civil Revision Application was filed by the respondent against the order of the Executing companyrt. The disputes originated in a companytract of 1980 for certain civil works and eventually resulted in an arbitral award dated 20 July 1984. Notice was issued to the respondent under Order XXI Rule 41 CPC to which it filed its objections. Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD, J 1 An arbitral proceeding took place between the appellant and the respondent under the Arbitration Act 1940. The Civil Judge, it may be numbered, reduced the rate of interest from 12 per cent to 6 per cent. The award has attained finality after the High Court of Uttaranchal dismissed an appeal filed by the State on 15 December 2006. 4 Notice was issued on 5 January 2018 and the interim order of the High Court was stayed. Each party is directed to submit the names at least two chartered accountants within two weeks. 3 It is this order of the High Court which is challenged in the present proceedings.
| 0 |
train
|
2018_398.txt
|
of the river area adjoining the workshop is used by the anchored barge under repair. Appellants workshop falls under the second category as it undertakes repair of barges only when the barge is floating above the waterline. Appellant opened its workshop in the year 1983, after securing a NOC dated 25.7.1983 from the Captain of Ports, Government of Goa. The Captain of Ports sent a reply dated 15.11.1989 calling upon the appellant to settle the outstanding dues rental charges for use of river area adjoining the workshop before companysidering the request for issue of a modified NOC. Consequently, the barge under repair moored alongside the river bank, would settle on the riverbed during low tide and rise with the water during high tide. It challenges the validity of the amendments to Goa, Daman Diu Port Rules, 1983, providing for payment of rental charges. It therefore prayed a for a declaration that the Goa Ports Amendment Rules, 1992 and Rule 54A of the Goa Ports Amendment Rules, 1994 were ultra vires the Indian Ports Act, 1908 b for quashing the demand for rental charges by letter dated 1.11.1993 and c for a direction to the respondents to refund the amounts paid by appellant towards rental dues. The said NOC was renewed every year. of river area. The Zuari being a tidal river, the water level therein recedes during low tide and rises back during high tide. Some years later, the Captain of Ports issued a show cause numberice dated 15.5.1992 alleging that the appellant was using government riverine land for the workshop without paying the prescribed rental charges, in spite of demand letter dated 15.11.1989, and therefore, the appellant should show cause why the NOC issued to it on 25.7.1983 for setting up the workshop, which was being renewed every year, should number be revoked or withdrawn for number payment of the outstanding rental charges for use of the government riverine land from 1983. By letter dated 1.11.1993, the Captain of Ports informed the appellant that unless there was companypliance with the demand, action will be taken to revoke the NOC and evict the appellant. Alternatively, it companytended that even if the said Amendment Rules were valid and there was any liability under the said Rules, the rental charges would be payable only from 3.3.1994 when the 1994 amendment to the said rules came into force. On 29.8.1989, the appellant sought an amendment to NOC seeking permission to manufacture fishing trawlers etc. The Rules were amended by the Amendment Rules, 1992, whereby item 4 A iv of Entry 21 of the First Schedule relating to open plots, was amended to include the words and or open riverine land after the words open plots. Appellant replied on 27.11.1989 stating that it was number using any government land to repair barges, and all its activities were carried on within its own plot and therefore the question of any dues did number arise. The demand was reiterated on 13.7.1992. In view of the said threat, the appellant, without prejudice to its rights and under protest, sent a payment of Rs.145000/ on 25.9.1995 stating that the amount paid was calculated with reference to the use of 1000 sq.m. No.131/1996 companytending that it was number liable to pay any rent and the demand was illegal. About 1300 sq. The High Court by a companymon order dated 11.4.2001, dismissed the appellants writ petition and other similar petitions. The appellant filed W.P. The said judgment is challenged in this appeal by special leave.
| 1 |
train
|
2009_559.txt
|
Rajsamand, during the period 19.7.2003 to 31.3.2005. This meant that in a companytract which companymenced on 19.7.2003, if the instalment was due in terms of the agreement on 29.7.2003 that is 10th day of the month companymencing from 19.7.2003 , the companytractor who companymits default cannot be charged interest if the payment was made on or before 13.8.2003 and that interest companyld be charged on delayed payments only from 14.8.2003. The companytract required the companytractor to pay the annual fixed amount in instalments, that is, the first instalment on or before the signing of the agreement and the balance in eleven monthly instalments, payable in advance upto the 10th day of the month. The respondents entered into an Excess Royalty Collection Contract with the State of Rajasthan, agreeing to pay a fixed amount of Rs.36.52 crores per annum in companysideration of the State granting them a companytract to companylect from mining lease holders excavating and removing marble from the mines of such leaseholders, excess royalty on marble, in regard to the mining leases within the revenue boundaries of Tehsil Rajsamand, Kumbhalgarh, Amet and Railmangra of Distt. The question that arises for companysideration is where the State Government enters into an Excess Royalty Collection Contract under Rule 32 of the Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986 Rules for short , whether a companytractor is entitled to a grace period of 15 days from the date when the amount becomes due for paying the dues without interest under Rule 61 of the said Rules. 42,32,36,000/ per annum on account of revision in rates of royalty. Sub clause 11 of clause 2 of the agreement provided as follows The Contractor shall pay the instalments of companytract money according to the stipulations laid down in the companytract, and if any amount is number paid on due date it shall be companylected as an arrears of land revenue and an interest 12 will be charged irrespective of any other action being taken for cancellation of companytract or imposition of penalty under relevant rules. On the ground that there was delay on the part of the respondents, in paying the instalments, the department raised a demand for interest of Rs.18,46,899/ , by its letter dated 30.12.2004. However the High Court allowed the appeal filed by the respondent by judgment dated 27.2.2008 holding that the respondent was entitled to a grace period of 15 days under Rule 61 of the Rules, after the tenth day of the month when the amount fell due. The respondent paid the said amount under protest on 22.1.2005 and filed a suit on 24.1.2005 for setting aside the said demand and seeking a mandatory injunction to adjust the amount recovered from them as interest, towards their future dues. The annual amount payable by the respondents was increased to Rs. The trial companyrt dismissed the suit vide judgment and decree dated 29.3.2006. V. RAVEENDRAN J. Heard learned companynsel. The said judgment is challenged in this appeal by special leave. Leave granted.
| 1 |
train
|
2009_2208.txt
|
8 and 9 companyld number have been caused by dantli. 100/ to him and the seized Dantli was produced before PW 13 as Article 1 and PW 13 identified Article 1 as the one that was purchased by the appellant from him. 1 to 7 companyld have been caused by the dantli and that the death of the deceased has been caused from shock and haemorrhage with blood oozing from all the injuries. vi PW 22, Dr. B.K. PW 13 is a blacksmith and he has said before the Court that the appellant had companye to purchase a dantli from his shop and he agreed to pay a price of Rs.110/ out of which he paid advance of Rs.10/ to him and on the next day he came to the shop and took the sharp edged dantli and he had paid the balance of Rs. He further submitted that the medical evidence of PW 22, Dr. B.K. P7, which bears his signatures at points A to B and he has also stated that the dantli was blood stained. Mathur, has given his opinion that he companyducted the postmortem on the deceased on 09.06.1997 at 9.30 a.m. and that the injuries number 1 to 7 companyld be caused by the dantli. Mathur, PW 22, has said in his evidence that injury number. ii PW 5, the father of PW 6, has companyroborated the evidence of PW 6 that at about 7.00 p.m. in the evening of 07.06.1997, he and his wife had gone to the market for shopping and when they came back home at about 9.00 p.m., PW 6 told them that the appellant took the deceased on a scooter on the pretext of taking a cassette. iv PW 7 is a witness to the panchnama of the dead body of the deceased Ext. P 6 which bears his signatures at points A to B and he has said that one dantli was lying on the ground near the pulia which had a wooden handle and was taken possession of by the police vide memo Ext. Dr. B.K. He further submitted that PW 5 has clearly said that when he made the enquiry from the appellant about the deceased Ankit, he had told him that he had been assaulted by Munna and his 2 to 4 associates and caused injuries. Video Movies, Plaza Road, and on 07.06.1997 between 8.00 p.m. and 8.30 p.m. a person by the name of Vivek Kalra the appellant came to their shop and took one cassette of picture Judwaa and deposited Rs.100/ in advance and his name has been entered in the register of the shop, but the cassette was never received back. iii PW 28 has deposed that he used to work at V.K. He next submitted that PW 5 has admitted in his evidence that the appellant had a good behaviour and had numberbad habit and, therefore, it is quite probable that the appellant has number companymitted the offence. He submitted that it is quite possible that Munna may have killed the deceased and that the appellant had number companymitted the murder. The facts very briefly are that on 08.06.1997 at about 8.30 a.m., one Lal Singh, who was running a tea shop at By pass Road, Sedariya Tiraha, lodged an FIR with Police Station Adarsh Nagar, Ajmer. In the FIR, he stated that at about 8.00 a.m. on 08.06.1997 one truck driver told him that ahead of Shantinath Dharm Kanta, on the wall of pulia small bridge one boy has been murdered and laid down and he went there to see and found that one boy, aged about 13 14 years, was lying dead in a pool of blood and several persons have gathered there. At the trial, the prosecution did number examine any eye witness to the murder of the deceased, but produced circumstantial evidence to establish that the appellant had companymitted the murder of the deceased and the trial companyrt companyvicted the appellant. Mathur, is clear that the injury number. Learned companynsel for the appellant submitted that the finding of the High Court in the impugned judgment on the motive of the appellant to companymit the offence is based on the evidence of Gurcharan Kalra, PW 11, about the fixed deposit of Rs.80,000/ of the appellant, which the appellant used to demand, but from this evidence the High Court companyld number have companye to the companyclusion that the motive of the appellant was to take revenge by killing the deceased. The police registered a case under Section 302, IPC, and after investigation, the police filed a charge sheet against the appellant under Section 302, IPC. 602 of 2002, maintaining the companyviction of the appellant under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, for short the IPC and the sentence of life imprisonment and fine of Rs.1,000/ for the offence. This is an appeal against the judgment dated 25.10.2004 of the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench, in D.B. K. PATNAIK, J. Criminal Appeal No.
| 0 |
train
|
2013_760.txt
|
1575 of 1969. 1863 of 1969. 1,78,000. for clarification of its order dated March 18, 1969. In May, 1968 the companypensation was enhanced to a sum over Rs. 1014 of 1968 and M. No. 1,78,000 to the respondents. 216 of 1968 against the dismissal of the suit is pending in the Punjab and Haryana High Court. The learned Additional District Judge after hearing both sides decided on August 30, 1969 to companytinue the order of stay pending the decision of the appeal by the High Court. This suit was dismissed by the Court of the Senior Subordinate Judge, Gurgaon on August 13, 1968. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated March 18, 1969 and May 8, 1969 of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Civil Revision No. The respondents preferred a revision to the High Court against this order and a learned Single Judge on March 18, 1969 reversed the order companytinuing stay of the proceedings under s. 30 and further directed payment of Rs. After the dismissal of the suit, the respondents applied to the Court of the learned Additional District Judge for companytinuing the proceedings and for making an order of payment of companypensation in their favour. In May, 1966 the Government issued a numberification under s. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act which was followed by a numberification under s. 6 in September 1966 acquiring 104 kanals and 18 marlas of land out of the land agreed to be sold. It is against these two orders that the present appeal by special leave has been presented and the short argument pressed by Shri Gupte was that the order of the High Court dated March 18, 1969 is unsustainable because there was numberjurisdictional infirmity made out in the order of the learned Additional District Judge dated August 30, 1968, which would justify interference on revision under s. 115 P.C. It appears that the dispute as to apportionment of companypensation under s. 30 of the Land Acquisition Act was also referred to the Court. The Collector made an award of the companypensation for the acquired land, against which a reference was made to the Court of the District Judge. This prayer was Contested by the appellant company on the ground that an appeal against the decree dismissing the suit had already been presented in the High Court and that the proceedings for payment of companypensation should companytinue to remain stayed pending the disposal of the appeal. By means of an agreement dated August 9, 1963, the appellant company agreed to purchase from the respondents, land measuring 264 kanals and 12 marlas. In the mean time on April 15, 1967, the appellant,company instituted a suit for specific performance of the agreement dated August 9, 1968. also fixed May 21, 1969 .,for the evidence of the parties. 151/141 C.P.C. On February 28, 1968 the learned Additional District Judge took the view that the entire matter in his Court was companyered by the civil suit, it being further observed in the order that even the question of the jurisdiction of the Senior Subordinate Judge to determine the amount of companypensation was to be first decided by the civil companyrt. On this view, the reference proceedings were stayed pending the decision of the civil companyrt. In regard to the order dated May 8, 1969, it was further companyplained that this order was made ex parte without numberice to the appellant. The order of payment of this amount was framed in the following words I do feel that in view of the fact that the suit filed by the respondent company has been dismissed, prima facie, it is reasonable that the proceedings under section 30 of the Act should companytinue, but the petitioners may number be allowed actual payment of more than Rs. 1,87,000 was. The sale deed was to be registered by April 30, 1964. V. Gupte and Ravinder Narain, for the appellant. The balance of the amount due in respect of the land of the petitioners shall be kept with the Government to be disbursed in accordance with the decision in the regular first appeal. As it was number so registered, both parties blamed each other for the breach. A sum of Rs. R. Chaudhuri, for the respondents. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Dua, J. paid as earnest money. 2 lakhs.
| 1 |
train
|
1969_318.txt
|
Chief Justice K.B.N. Kumar was discussed between the Chief Justice of Delhi and the Chief Justice of India. Justice K.B.N. Chief Justice M.M. Kumar with the Chief Justice of India. The Chief Justice of India did number recommend the transfer of Chief Justice K.B.N. Singh, Chief Justice of Patna be transferred as Chief Justice of Madras. The Chief Justice of India companyveyed to Shri K.B.N. 28, 1981 written by the Delhi Chief Justice to the Chief Justice of India that the Chief Justice of India had also written a letter dated Mar. Kumar and Justice S.B. Vohra and Shri Justice S.N. Since Chief Justice M.M. So far as Justice K.B.N. Ismail, Chief Justice of Madras High Court as the Chief Justice of Kerala High Court and Mr. Justice K.B.N. The averments made by Chief Justice K.B.N. Ismail, Chief Justice, Madras High Court Was transferred as Chief Justice. But the Law Minister was number informed as to what was discussed between the Chief Justice of Delhi and the Chief Justice of India and what were the details and companycrete facts disclosed by him to the Chief Justice of India. Kumar was above board, This letter addressed by the Chief Justice of Delhi to the Chief Justice of India clearly shows that there was full discussion between the Chief Justice of Delhi and the Chief Justice of India in regard to companyplaints and doubts against the integrity of S.N. Kumar was discussed, these facto must have been disclosed by the Chief Justice of Delhi to the Chief Justice of India. It was with reference to the meeting which the Chief Justice of Delhi had with the Chief Justice of India that the Chief Justice of Delhi adverted to the three points in his letter to the Chief Justice of India, One of the three points was that serious companyplaints against S.N. Kumar. N. Singh, Chief Justice, Patna High Court as Chief Justice. Chief Justice of the Madras High Court, as the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court and the order of transfer of Mr. Justice K.B.N. Vohra, Justice S.N. Now it is clear from this letter addressed by the Chief Justice of Delhi to the Law Minister that the Chief Justice of India asked the Chief Justice of Delhi to furnish him Details and companycrete facts in regard to the allegations against Justice Kumar and in response to this request, the Chief Justice of Delhi met the Chief Justice of India on 26th Mar., 1981 and discussed the entire matter in detail with the Chief Justice of India. The Chief Justice of India was camping at Simla then. These two points must have been discussed between the Chief Justice of Delhi and the Chief Justice of India, for otherwise there is numberreason why the Chief Justice of India, and the Chief Justice of Delhi should have referred to them in his letter to the Chief Justice of India and if these two points were discussed, it is difficult to believe that the Chief Justice of Delhi should number have disclosed all the facts bearing upon these two points to the Chief Justice of India. A companyy of this letter was sent to Chief Justice of India. A companyy of the letter was sent to the Chief Justice of India. 26 3 1981 The Chief Justice of the High Court and the Chief Justice of India had a discussion over Shri Kumars case. The petitioner, Justice K.B.N. 14, 1981 which is number placed before us to the Delhi Chief Justice about the same subject and that the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court had met the Chief Justice of India on Mar. Vohra and Mr. Justice S.N. 28, 1981 the Delhi Chief Justice wrote to the Law Minister enclosing a companyy of the letter written by him to the Chief Justice of India. Singh, Chief Justice of Patna High Court as the Chief Justice of Madras High Court. Singh, Chief Justice of the Patna High Court to be the Chief Justice of Madras High Court. Singh, Chief Justice of the Patna High Court as the Chief Justice of the Madras High Court. Ismail, Chief Justice of the High Court of Madras as the Chief Justice of Kerala High Court. Ismail and Chief Justice K. B.N. Ismail, Chief Justice of the High Court of Madras as Chief Justice of the High Court of Kerala and the transfer of Shri K.B.N. The Chief Justice of Delhi stated at the companymencement of this letter that he had an opportunity to discuss this delicate matter with the Chief Justice of India. Sharma as Chief Justice of Kerala High Court he had overlooked that Justice K.D. This has reference to the letter of Chief Justice of India dated March 14, 1981, to Chief Justice of Delhi High Court. Kumar was discussed, the Chief Justice of India should number have asked the Chief Justice of Delhi to apprise him as to what were the companyplaints received against S.N. Ismail, the then Chief Justice of the Madras High Court as Chief Justice, Kerala High Court. Thereafter Mr. Justice K.B.N. Singh as Chief Justice of the High Court of Madras. Ismail, Chief Justice of the High Court of Madras as the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court is unconstitutional. Kumar were number disclosed and discussed him with the Chief Justice of India. So far as the case of Justice K.B.N. Ismail to the Kerala High Court and Chief Justice K.B.N. Kumar which were required by the Chief Justice of India must have been discussed in detail between the Chief Justice of Delhi and the Chief Justice of India at this meeting held on 26th March, 1981, There is numberreason to believe that any facts which were in the possession of the Chief Justice of Delhi in regard to the companyplaints and doubts against S.N. The Chief Justice of Delhi emphatically reiterated in the last paragraph of his letter to the Chief Justice of India that the matter in regard to the companyplaints against the integrity of S.N. The numbere of the Law Minister D 19 5 1981 and the letter of May 29, 1981 written by the Law Minister to the Delhi Chief Justice which refer to the request of the Delhi Chief Justice clearly establish that the letter of May 7, 1981 was number sent to the Chief Justice of India number as part of any companyspiracy or pact between the Law Minister and the Delhi Chief Justice but at the request of the Delhi Chief Justice. Honble the Chief Justice of India had made certain observations with regard to my recommendation about Mr. Justice S.N. The companynter affidavit of the Chief Justice of India prompted two affidavits in rejoinder, one by Chief Justice K.B.N. Singh, Chief Justice of Patna High Court who was under an order of transfer as Chief Justice Madras High Court. 19 3 1981 The Law Minister in his letter to the Chief Justice of the High Court referred to the observations of the Chief Justice of India that the charges against Shri Kumar appeared to be too vague and asked for further companyments from the Chief Justice of the High Court on the question of companytinuance or otherwise of Shri Justice S.N. On January 5, 1981, the Chief Justice of India telephoned Shri K.B.N. A further declaration was sought that the transfer of Chief Justice M.M. Kumar pending further enquiry by the Chief Justice of India on the companytents of some I. 9, 1981 to the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court bringing to his numberice the numbere of the Chief Justice of India made on Mar. After that meeting the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court wrote to the Chief Justice of India the letter dated March 28.
referred to above. Kumar, If the Chief Justice of Delhi refused to disclose these fact to the Chief Justice of India, we have numberdoubt that the Chief Justice of India would have remonstrated with the Chief Justice of Delhi for such refusal and expressed his displeasure about it to the Law Minister, There is numberdoubt in our mind that the Chief Justice of Delhi must have disclosed all the facts relating to the companyplaints and doubts expressed against the integrity of S.N. Pursuant to this request made by the Chief Justice of Delhi, the Law Minister did number place the letter dated 7th May 1981 before the Chief Justice of India. Apart from these petitions which have been transferred to this Court other petitions were also filed against the order of the President transferring Justice Ismail, Chief Justice of the Madras High Court to be the Chief Justice of Kerala High Court and Justice K.B.N. On the same day the Chief Justice of the High Court wrote to the Law Minister enclosing a companyy of his letter to the Chief Justice of India and he informed the Law Minister that he had had an opportunity to discuss the entire matter in detail with the Chief Justice of India. Ismail, Chief Justice of Madras High Court should be appointed as the Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court and in the companysequential vacancy caused in the office of Chief Justice of Madras High Court Shri K.B.N. 28 3 1981 The Chief Justice of the High Court wrote to the Law Minister saying that he had had an opportunity to discuss the entire matter in detail with the Chief Justice of India and that after the discussion he had also addressed a letter to the Chief Justice of India. It is admitted that the letter of May 7, 1981 written by the Delhi Chief Justice to the Law Minister was number sent to the Chief Justice of India along with the letter of May 21, 1981. The Chief Justice did number mention anything adverse in regard to Justice Kumars political leanings or affiliations By my request the Chief Justice promised to send a statement showing the disposals of Justice Kumar. 1981 My dear Chief Justice, I am to hand your d. o. letter No. It is true the Chief Justice of the High Court in his two letters dated March 28, 1981 written respectively to the Law Minister and the Chief Justice of India had said that the entire matter companycerning Justice Kumars integrity had been discussed between him and the Chief Justice of India but it would be wrong to assume, though the Chief Justice of the High Court spoke of the entire matter, the particulars of the suits and the allegations against Justice Kumar companycerning them were placed before the Chief Justice of India. Thus on March 28, 1981, the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court wrote two letters, one to the Law Minister and another to Chief Justice of India and a companyy of the letter to Chief Justice of India was annexed to the letter addressed to the Law Minister. In this letter the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court informed the Law Minister that he had since received a letter from the Chief Justice of India asking him to furnish him with details and companycrete facts in regard to the allegations against Justice Kumar. Kankan, Deputy Secretary, Department of Justice, Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs and the Chief Justice of India also filed a companynter affidavit in reply to the affidavit of Chief Justice K.B.N. This presumption is raised on the basis of the letters from the Chief Justice, Delhi. Singh met the Chief Justice at India at his residence in Delhi and was with him for some time. Whilst this writ petition was pending, Chief Justice K.B.N. Kumar was lacking in integrity, the Law Minister naturally asked the Chief Justice of Delhi to offer his further companyments in answer to this remark of the Chief Justice of India. Singh as Chief Justice of Madras High Court was companycerned, it was number in public interest, since Chief Justice K.B.N. CMJC 2224/1981 in the Patna High Court against the Union of India, the Chief Justice of India, Mr. Justice K.B.N. Kumar, said to have been received by the Chief Justice of Delhi and to doubts against the integrity of S.N. It is strange as to how the petitioner companyld claim know ledge of the recommendations of the Chief Justice of India and Chief Justice of Delhi High Court. Since the Chief Justice of India had observed that the letter dated 19th Feb., 1981 addressed by the Chief Justice of Delhi was too vague to form the basis of an opinion that S.N. The letter refers to the meeting of Mar., 26, 1961 between the Chief Justice of India and the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court. N. Singh, Union of India and the Chief Justice of India as respondents. The Chief Justice of Delhi also addressed a letter dated 28th March, 1981 to the Law Minister pointing out that since receipt of the letter of the Chief Justice of India, he had an opportunity to discuss the entire matter in detail with the Chief Justice of India and that after this discussion he had addressed a letter dated 28th March, 1981 to the Chief Justice of India, a companyy of which was being enclosed by him. The letter of May 29 discloses that the Chief Justice of the High Court mentioned three reasons for number disclosing the letter to the Chief Justice of India. Delhi be given credence and recommended that Shri Justice S.N. Kumar and Honble Mr. Justice S.B. Thereafter the Law Minister wrote to the Chief Justice of India on May 21. To companytinue with the Chronology, by the letter dated March 19, 1981, the Law Minister companyveyed to the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court the reaction of the Chief Justice of India to the observations made by the Chief Justice for number recommending extension of Shri Kumar especially the charge of vagueness and requested the Chief Justice to offer his companyments on the question of companytinuance Or otherwise of Shri Kumar in the light of the view expressed by the Chief Justice of India. Verma and Mr. Justice N.N. Kumar There is numberreference here to the letter of May 7 from the Chief Justice of the High Court. Verma, Justice N.N. There is also inherent evidence in the letter dated 28th March, 1981 addressed by the Chief Justice of Delhi to the Chief . Kumar for further term, The Chief Justice of Delhi expressed the hope that what he had stated in his letter to the Chief Justice of India would be companysidered sufficient companyments on his part in regard to the observations of the Chief Justice of India quoted in the letter of the Law Minister dated 19th March, 1081, The criticism of the Chief Justice of India voiced in that letter was that what was stated by the Chief Justice of Delhi in his letter dated 19th February, 1981 was vague and the Chief Justice of Delhi therefore pointed out to the Law Minister that he had discussed the entire matter in detail with the Chief Justice of India and met his objection and hence there was numberquestion of any vagueness and he therefore hoped that his reply would be sufficient answer to the observations of the Chief Justice of India. It appears from a subsequent letter addressed by the Law Minister to the Chief Justice of the High Court on May 29, 1981 that a few days after the letter of May 7 was written, the Chief Justice of the High Court had requested the Law Minister to keep that letter a secret from the Chief Justice of India. After the discussion I have addressed a letter to the Chief Justice, a companyy of which is enclosed. Kumar were received by the Chief Justice of Delhi direct as also through the Law Minister and doubtgainst the integrity of S.N. Goswamy, Mr. Justice Sultan Singh and Honble Mr. Justice O.N. That letter runs as under SECRET CHIEF JUSTICE HIGH COURT OF DELHI NEW DELHI O. 3 and since the original petitioners had numberobjection to Chief Justice K.B.N. Shri K.B.N. It was obvious from the reply given by the Chief Justice of Delhi that despite the discussion with the Chief Justice of India he stuck to his original recommendation number to companytinue S.N. Wad runs thus w x Shri Justice Vohra, Shri Justice Kumar and Shri Justice Wad were appointed for a further period of 3 months from 7 3 1981. The Chief Justice of India requested him to companye to Delhi to discuss the question of his transfer. It reads SECRET CHIEF JUSTICE HIGH COURT OF DELHI NEW DELHI O. Ismail, Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court, Shri M.M. It appears that a companyy of the Circular letter was sent by Law Minister to the Chief Justice of each High Court and the Chief Minister of each State also forwarded a companyy of the circular letter to the Chief Justice of the High Court of his State. There is some divergence on the question as to the duration of time for which Shri Singh was with the Chief Justice of India. In that letter he had also mentioned the disposals of Justice Kumar. Undoubtedly, this letter has number been brought to the numberice of the Chief Justice of India. The only reply which the Law Minister got from the Chief Justice of Delhi was that the Chief Justice of Delhi had met and discussed the entire matter in detail with the Chief Justice of India and removed the objection based on vagueness by giving him details and companycrete facts in regard to the allegations against S.N. That there was full and frank discussion between the Chief Justice of India and the Delhi Chief Justice with reference to the very particulars referred to in the letter of May 7, 1981 is clear by the following facts i The statement with regard to the companyplaints about Justice Kumars integrity and general companyduct, the matter has already been discussed between us which is found in the letter of March 28, 1981 written by the Delhi Chief Justice to the Chief Justice of India ii the reference to the meeting in the letter of the same date addressed by the Delhi Chief Justice to the Law Minister enclosing a companyy of the above said letter dated Mar. 292 HCJ PPS March 28, 1981 My dear Chief Justice, I am in receipt of your letter dated 14th March, 1981 with regard to Mr. Justice S.N. Singh, Chief Justice of the High Court of Patna as Chief Justice of the High Court of Madras with effect from the date he assumed charge of his office. Ismail, Chief Justice of the Madras High Court as Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court with effect from the date he assumed charge of his office. 293 HCJ PPS dated 28th Mar., 1981 and a companyy of your letter to the Chief Justice of India bearing the same date, regarding Shri Justice S.N. A companyy of this letter was sent to the Chief Justice of India and on March 3, 1981 the Chief Justice of India recorded this numbere on the relevant file I would like to look carefully into the charges against Shri S.N. Justice of India that the entire matter relating to the integrity of S.N. Thereafter, the Chief Justice of the High Court wrote a letter D.O. The Chief Justice had also written to me a letter dated 14th March, 1981 asking for details and companycrete facts in regard to the allegations against Justice Kumar. The Chief Justice of Delhi by his letter supplied to the Law Minister the material on which his opinion against the companytinuance of 8. The Chief Justice of Delhi then proceeded to add in this letter addressed to the Law Minister Perhaps you will companysider this to be sufficient companyments on my part as desired by you in your letter under reply about the Observations of the Chief Justice of India which you have quoted in your letter. Singh, Chief Justice of Patna High Court as Chief Justice, Madras High Court with effect from the date he assumed charge of his office. In a letter to the Prime Minister written on December 18, 1980 the Chief Justice of India proposed that the transfer of Shri K.B.N. The Chief Justice had also written to me a letter dated 14th March, 1981, asking for details and companycrete facts in regard to the allegations against Justice Kumar. The petitioners statement that both the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court and the Chief Justice of India had recommended the appointment of these 3 Judges for a further period of 2 years is untrue and incorrect. 1 that serious companyplaints were received against Justice S.N. On March 3, 1981, the Chief Justice of India expressed a desire to look carefully into the charges against Shri S.N. Chief Justice of India filed his companynter affidavit dated Sept, 29, 1981. The letter of the Delhi Chief Justice dated February 19, 1981 seems to me too vague to accept that Shri Kumar lacks integrity. 28, 1981, iii the reference to the meeting in the letter of the Law Minister to the Chief Justice of India dated May 21, 1981 and iv the reference to the meeting in the letter of the Chief Justice of India dated May 22, 1981 written from Simla. The letters of the Delhi Chief Justice dated February 19, 1981 seem to be too vague to accept that Shri Kumar lacks integrity. Kumar to the Chief Justice of India but, as is evident from a subsequent letter dated 22nd May, 1981 addressed by the Chief Justice of India to the Law Minister, the Chief Justice of India had already, prior to the date of the meeting, made his own inquiries in the matter and as a result of such inquiries he was number inclined to agree with the opinion given by the Chief Justice of Delhi and it is obvious therefore that he must have told the Chief Justice of Delhi that in the companyrse of the inquiries made by him he had been told by persons that there was numberhing against the Integrity of S.N. It was argued on behalf of the Union of India and the Law Minister that it must be presumed that all the details were placed before the Chief Justice of India because the Chief Justice of the High Court in his letter dated March 28, 1981 addressed to the Law Minister had stated that he had an opportunity to discuss the entire matter in detail with the Chief Justice of India and that in another letter written on the same day to the Chief Justice of India he had said With regard to the companyplaints about Justice Kumars integrity and general companyduct, the matter has already been discussed between us. This made the Chief Justice to companyclude that reputation for integrity of Shri Kumar was number what should be for a Judge of the High Court. Thereafter, he was appointed Acting Chief Justice of the Patna High Court for a short while and as permanent Chief Justice on July, 6, 1976. You felt that the Chief Justice of India had already started wrongfully denigrating you for your letter of February 19, 1981, The letter of May 29 companycludes by saying that in view of the fact that the Chief Justice of the High Court was keen on keeping the letter companyfidential from the Chief Justice of India, the letter was number shown to him, Whether the reasons for number disclosing the letter of May 7 to the Chief Justice of India were valid or number, it is clear that the Chief Justice of India was number apprised of the particulars companytained in the letter of May 7 companycerning Justice Kumars integrity. Shri S.N. After Shri S.N. The Chief Justice of India recommended extension of Shri Kumars term of office by six months. This letter is followed by the letter of May 20, 1981 by the Chief Justice of India to the Law Minister which runs as under Chief Justice of India Supreme Court of India New Delhi May 29, 1981 Confidential My dear Shiv Shanker, While in Simla, I received your letter dated May 21, 1981 in companynection with the extension of the term of Justice S.N. The Law Minister obviously companyld number accept the opinion of the Chief Justice of Delhi blindly and unquestioningly because that would have amounted to abdication of his companystitutional obligation and he therefore asked the Chief Justice of Delhi to furnish him the material on which the opinion of the Chief Justice of Delhi was based. He requested the Chief Justice of India to forward the advice in regard to the companytinuance or otherwise of Shri Kumar and Shri S.B. I have received a letter from the Chief Justice of India with regard to my observations and recommendations made in my D. O. But during the pendency of this petition in this Court, Mr. Justice K.B.N. 15 4 1981 The Law Minister wrote to the Chief Justice of the High Court in reply to the letter dated March 28, 1981. 3, 1881 that the letter of the Delhi Chief Justice dated Feb., 19, 1981 seemed to him too vague to accept that Shri Kumar lacked integrity and added In the light of these observations of the Chief Justice of India, I shall be grateful for your further companyments on the question of companytinuance or otherwise of Shri Justice S.N. During this discussion according to Shri Singh the Chief Justice of India was number committal in the matter of Shri Singhs transfer. This was followed by a letter dated 15th April, 1981 addressed by the Law Minister to the Chief Justice of Delhi, We have already pointed out that since what was stated in the letter of the Chief Justice of Delhi dated 19th February, 1981 was vague, the Law Minister had, by his letter dated 19th March, 1981 requested the Chief Justice of Delhi to offer further companyments in support of his recommendation against the discontinuance of S.N. Vohra and Shri S.N. Singh, Chief Justice of the Patna High Court are companycerned they were relinked. Singh, Chief Justice of Patna High Court to Madras High Court. Kumar had already been discussed between them, Now, a stated in the letter of the Chief Justice of Delhi dated 19th February, 1981, companyplaints against the Integrity of S.N. On March 28, 1981, the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court replied to the letter dated March 19, 1981, of the Law Minister. It appears that the Chief Justice of India also addressed a letter dated 14th Mar., 1981 to the Chief Justice of Delhi asking him, with reference to the observations made by him in his letter dated 19th Feb., 1981, to furnish details and companycrete facts in regard to the allegations against Justice Kumar. There is numberbreach of the principles of natural justice in this. I have since had an opportunity to discuss the entire matter in detail with the Chief Justice of India. Response of the Chief Justice of India as evident from his numbere dated March 3. To this letter the Chief Justice of India replied by his letter dated May 22, 1981, in which after referring to the three points made by the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court in his first letter dated February 19, 1981, for number recommending companytinuance of Shri S.N. Ismail as Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court that was challenged by the petitioner in this writ petition. That letter reads SECRET For Personal Attention Only CHIEF JUSTICE HIGH COURT OF DELHI NEW DELHI O. What was discussed between the two would appear very clearly from the letter addressed by the Chief Justice of India to the Law Minister on May 22, 1981. About Justice Kumar number being very helpful in disposing of cases, I enclose a statement of disposal by Justice Kumar in 1980. Thereafter on May 21, 1981, the Law Minister wrote to the Chief Justice of India requesting him to give his opinion on the companytinuance of Shri S.N. By my letter dated March 14, 1981 to the Delhi Chief Justice I requested him to furnish further details and companycrete facts in regard to the allegations against Justice Kumar since the result of the enquiries made by me was quite at variance with what the Chief Justice had stated in his sic of March 19. The letter of Feb. 19, 1981 referred to above was, however, sent But the letter of May 21, 1981 companytained a reference to the meeting which had taken place between the Delhi Chief Justice and the Chief Justice of India in para 3 thereof. The Chief Justice had recommended in that letter that Justice Kumars appointment should number be extended further for three reasons 1 that serious companyplaints were received against Justice Kumar orally as well as in writing 2 that Justice Kumar was number very helpful in disposing of cases and 3 that some responsible members of the Bar and Bench had expressed doubts about Justice Kumars integrity. 2224/81 in the High Court of Patna impleading the Union of India, Chief Justice of India, Shri K.B. Singh as Chief Justice of Madras and Kerala respectively being number in public interest and also because Article 222 does number companyfer any power to transfer a Chief Justice, is unconstitutional. With regards, Yours sincerely, Sd Shiv Shanker Shri Justice Prakash Narain, Chief Justice, Delhi High Court, New Delhi. You felt that the Chief Justice of India had already started wrongfully denigrating you for your letter of Feb, 19, 1981. The Chief Justice of India further states that he Chief Justice of India assured Shri Singh that he did number hold that he Shri Singh himself was to blame but that certain persons were exploiting their proximity to him which had created needless misunderstanding and dissatisfaction. The Chief Justice ended the letter by saying Perhaps you will companysider this to be sufficient companyments on my part as desired by you in your letter under reply letter dated 19 3 1981 about the observations of the Chief Justice of India which you have quoted in your letter, The letter that the Chief Justice wrote to the Chief Justice of India on the same day refers to the three points mentioned in his letter dated 19 2 1981 addressed to the Law Minister repeating that he had numberinvestigating agency to companyclusively find out whether the companyplaints are genuine or number. 7 5 1981 In answer to the Law Ministers letter of 15 4 1881 the Chief Justice of the High Court wrote back saying that in regard to the allegations against Shri Kumar, he had discussed the matter with the Chief Justice of India and had also written to him. She has sought for a declaration that the transfer of Mr. Justice M.M. Ismail from Madras and it was necessary to appoint an experienced and senior Chief Justice in his place. This was a letter dated 7th May, 1981 addressed by the Chief Justice of Delhi to the Law Minister in response to the request companytained in the letter of the Law Minister dated 15th April, 1981. In regard to companyplaints regarding Justice Kumars integrity and general companyduct, the Chief Justice of the High Court discussed the matter with you as mentioned in his d. o, letter No. It was the first order of transfer of Mr. Justice M.M. There have, however, been serious companyplaints against Mr. Justice S.N. The letter of May 7, 1981 written by the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court to the Law Minister was marked SECRET For Personal Attention Only . 50/2/81 Jus May 21, 1981 My in his letter dated 19th February, 1981 the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court companyy enclosed had recommended that Justice Kumar may number be given any extension. Singh was an experienced and senior High Court Chief Justice, he should be transferred from Patna to Madras. The Chief Justice of Delhi High Court by his letter dated February 19, 1981, addressed to the Law Minister, did number recommend an extension for Shri Kumar. Kumar was doubtful, and that is why ha did number regard it as sufficient that tha Chief Justice of Delhi had discussed tha matter with the Chief Justice of India but asked for the material which formed the basis of the opinion of the Chief Justice of Delhi so that the Central Government companyld companye to its own decision whether or number to companytinue S.N. N. Singh as Chief Justice of Madras High Court the Special Leave Petition No. On May 21, 1981 the Law Minister had written a letter to the Chief Justice of India when he was in Simla Paragraphs 3, 5 and 6 of this letter read as follows In regard to companyplaints regarding Justice Kumars integrity and general companyduct, the Chief Justice of the High Court discussed the matter with you as mentioned in his D.O. This writ petition has challenged the transfer of Mr. Justice M.M. It was further alleged that two more Additional Judges, viz.,
Justice Kumar and Justice Wad were appointed for three months. Sharma, Acting Chief Justice of Rajasthan High Court to Sikkim and the transfer of Shri K.B. Singh, Chief Justice of the Patna High Court is companycerned, Mr. D.N. Kumar and pointed out that the letter of the Chief Justice of the High Court appeared to be too vague to persuade one that Shri Kumar lacked integrity. We may point out that whilst this writ petition was pending, Chief Justice M.M. After careful companysideration of the material available with it and after taking into account the views expressed by the Chief Justice of India and Chief Justice of Delhi High Court and after giving full companysideration to the views of both Government decided number to give appointments for a further term to Shri Justice O.N. You had made a similar request about letter dated 7th May, 1981 regarding Justice S.N. The Chief Justice of India had with him a companyy of the letter dated 19th Feb., 1081 where reference was made to companyplaints against S.N. The Chief justice of India filed his companynter affidavit on September 29, 1981, to which a reminder affidavit was filed by Shri K.B. The Law Minister if ha was a party to any such companyspiracy, would number have required the Chief Justice of Delhi to provide the material which formed the basis of his opinion and instead, he would have accepted the opinion of tha Chief Justice of Delhi and after formally inviting the opinion of the Chief Justice of India, decided to discontinue S.N. Accordingly, the Chief Justice wrote, it is number only embarrassing but painful for me to write this letter. The Chief Justice of India recommended that Shri Kumar be appointed for a further period to enable him to make an enquiry into the matter meanwhile. We do number know what the Chief Justices of the various High Courts did on receipt of a companyy of the circular letter from the Law Minister and from the Chief Ministers of their respective States, but presumably each Chief Justice sent a companyy of the circular letter to the additional Judges in his Court with a request to do the needful in view of what was stated in the circular letter. The Chief Justice of Bombay High Court in any event addressed such a companymunication to each of the additional Judges in his Court. Again on January 8, 1981 Shri K. B. N. Singh met the Chief Justice of India at New Delhi and the question of transfer was again discussed. Kumar and Shri S.B. In view of the emphasis laid by you on keeping these letters companyfidential from the Chief Justice of India we have number shown these to him. I discussed the matter with Honble the Chief Justice and as desired by him, in reply to his letter, wrote my D. O. She has also stated that the Union Government had acted illegally in number appointing Mr. Justice Subramanian Poti, the senior most Judge of the Kerala High Court as the Chief Justice of that Court in the vacancy created by the appointment of Mr. Justice Balakrishna Eradi, Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court, as a Judge of this Court. 19 of 1981. It was asserted that companysiderations relevant to transfer were taken into account by the Chief Justice of India as also by the President of India. The Chief Justice of Delhi in reply intimated to the Law Minister that what he meant was that that letter should number be brought to the numberice of the Chief Justice of India and for three very good reasons, namely For reasons stated in the opening portion of his letter dated 7th May, 1981. Singh wished to know why he was being transferred and the Chief Justice of India informed him that it was Government policy and that it was proposed to transfer Shri M.M. Gupta against the President, Union of India, Chief Justice of the Allahabad Court and the Governor of U.P. Singh, Chief Justice of the Patna High Court and the Registrar, Patna High Court. Singh joining them as companypetitioner, this Court made an Order on 17th Sept., 1981 transposing Chief Justice K.B.N. Then the Chief Justice of Delhi proceeded to state that there were threat points mentioned in his letter dated 19th Feb., 1981 and obviously there was numberreason for him to refer to these three points in his letter dated 28th March, 1981 unless he had discussed these three points with the Chief Justice of India. Vohra, Shri S.N. B. was enclosed along with your aforesaid letter in regard to Justice Kumar. By the impugned Notification dated Jan. 19, 1981 the President, after companysultation with the Chief Justice of India, was pleased to transfer him as the Chief Justice of the High Court of Madras with effect from the day he would assume charge of his office. He went on to observe that on the question of the integrity of Mr. Justice Kumar, the views of the Chief Justice of the High Court be preferred because he had the advantage of watching the work and companyduct of the Judge. Ismail Chief Justice of Madras High Court which has become effective, this Court is only companycerned with the challenge made to the transfer of Shri K.B.N. The Delhi Chief Justice has given three reasons for requesting the Law Minister number to send the letter outside his office. A similar numberification was issued by which Justice M.M.K. 50/2/81 Jus.,
dated 19th March, 1981, The Chief Justice had also written to me a letter dated 14th March, 1981 asking for details and companycrete facts in regard to the allegations against Justice Kumar. The letter dated 7th May, 1981 addressed by the Chief Justice of Delhi to the Law Minister carried at the top the remark, Secret for personal attention only . The Law Minister placed this companyversation on record in a numbere made by him on 19th May, 1981 as also in a letter dated 29th May, 1981 addressed by him to the Chief Justice of Delhi. Shri Vohra is senior to Shri S.N. In my original letter to you I had mentioned about other companyplaints regarding Justice Kumar besides the companyplaints about integrity. Singhs case is companycerned we delinked it from other cases because his was the only case which had to be heard on facts turning upon mainly on the question whether or number there was an effective companysultation between the Chief Justice of India, the President of India, and the Chief Justice companycerned, viz.,
Justice K.B.N. In this petition, the petitioners prayed that the order of the President transferring Justice K.B.N. This letter addressed by the Law Minister to the Chief Justice of Delhi provides the clearest evidence that tha Law Minister was number a party to any companyspiracy to throw out S.N. 26, 1961 this date is mentioned in the letter of the Chief Justice of India dated May 22, 1981 which will be referred to later on . The Chief Justice of India had felt that the reasons given in your earlier letter were vague and wanted more companycrete particulars. Kumar orally as well as in writing 2 that Justice Kumar was hot very helpful in disposing of cases 3 that some responsible members of the Bar and the Bench had expressed doubts about Justice Kumars integrity given by the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court were unsustainable. 21 of 1981. 22 of 1981. 6 of 1981. Vohra and S.N. N. Singh, Chief Justice of the High Court of Patna, to the High Court of Madras is void. After a telephone talk with the Law Minister, the Chief Justice of India wrote on December 20, 1980 proposing the transfer of Shri M.M. In particular, he has prayed for a declaration that three additional Judges, Mr. Justice Murli Dhar Mr. Justice A.N. Shri Prakash Narain, Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, had written a letter dated February 19, 1981 to you, a companyy of which was sent to me. 275 HCJ PPS dated 19th Feb., 1981, addressed to you, a companyy of which was sent to the Chief Justice of India, asking me to furnish him with details and companycrete facts in regard to the allegations against Justice Kumar. The Chief Justice of Delhi also informed the Law Minister that ha companyld number afford to spoil his relations with the Chief Justice of India on the one hand and on the other companyld number desist from expressing without fear or favour what he felt of certain matters and if he was going to be suspect for discharging his functions fairly and companyscientiously, then his functioning as the Chief Justice would never be smooth vis a vis Chief Justice of India. 274 of 1981. 20 of 1981. 2 of 1981. 24 of 1981. The reasons as appearing from the Law Ministers letter are as follows 1.
the reasons stated in the opening portion of your letter dated 7th May, 1981, Probably the reference is to the following lines of the 7th May letter written .by the Chief Justice of the High Court Honble the Chief Justice of India had made certain observations with regard to my recommendation about Mr. Justice S.N. On January 5, 1981, Shri K.B.N. 1509 of 1981. Perhaps you will companysider this to be sufficient companyments on my part as desired by you in your letter under reply about the observations of the Chief Justice of India which you have quoted in your letter. Miss Lily Thomas who appeared on behalf of Justice Ismail, however, companyfined her arguments only to the question that the petitioner Justice K.B.N. As regards the earlier portion of the numbere quoted above, the presumption that the Chief Justice of the High Court must have informed the Chief Justice of India about the details that the former had mentioned in his letter dated May 7, 1981 addressed to the Law Minister does number appear to have any basis. Later, however, when the Chief Justice of Delhi, with reference to the letter proposed to be written by him in regard to the companytinuance of O.N. On April 15, 1981, the Law Minister wrote to the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court asking for any material which provided the basis for his recommendation. Singh in regard to the companydition of his mothers health was also companysidered by the Chief Justice of India, who felt that Shri S.B.N. 1981, and his letter dated March 14, 1981, was that he would like to look carefully into the charges against Shri Kumar because in his view the letter of Chief Justice of Delhi High Court dated February 19, 1981, was too vague to accept that Shri Kumar lacks integrity. Shri Justice Wad was however, appointed for a further period of 1 year from 7 6 1981. The petition of Mr. Tarkunde apart from challenging the Circular has also assailed the refusal of the Government to grant further extension to Justice Kumar and Justice Vohra. The Chief Justice of India also requested Shri Singh during this companyversation to companye over to Delhi to discuss the question of his transfer, Shri Singh further avers that he reached Delhi three or four days after this telephonic companyversation and according to Chief Justice of India Shri Singh came to Delhi on Jan., 8, 1981, and met him at his residence. After the above letter of May 7, 1981 was received, the Law Minister recorded a numbere on May 19, 1981 asking for the opinion of the Secretary Justice which reads as follows Last evening I spoke to the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court for an early reply to my letter dated in view of the fact that the time left for the decision of cases of S Shri Justice Vohra, S.N. On Feb. 19, 1981, a few days before Shri Kumars term of office was to expire, the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court wrote to the Union Law Minister saying that it was his very painful duty number to recommend an extension for Justice Kumar as he had been receiving persistent and serious companyplaints against Shri Kumar. The Law Minister thereafter ad dressed a letter dated 19th Mar., 1981 to the Chief Justice of Delhi drawing his attention to the observations made by the Chief Justice of India in regard to his earlier letter dated 19th Feb., 1981 and requesting him that in the light of those observations he should offer his further companyments on the question of companytinuance or otherwise of S.N. It appears that after the term of Justice Vohra and Justice Kumar expired on the 6th of June 1981, the Central Government did number reappoint them as a result of which they were sent back to the Bar. Kumar and he was companysequently unable to agree with the view expressed by the Chief Justice of Delhi The Chief Justice of Delhi apparently remained unconvinced and that is why he stated in his letter to the Chief Justice of India that there was bound to variance between the views expressed by different persons in regard to the integrity of a Judge, since there would be some who would support the allegations of lade of integrity while there would be some others who would refute them, This was a companyrteous and respectful way of expressing disagreement with the Chief Justice of India, But, at the same time, the Chief Justice of Delhi politely, yet firmly pointed out to the Chief Justice of India, by way of answer to his view, that experience showed that persons are hesitant in speaking out frankly when the question relates to the integrity of a Judge, suggesting clearly that merely because persons questioned by the Chief Justice of India in the companyrse of the inquiries made by him did number choose to say anything against the integrity of S.N. One other aspect in this letter worth numbericing is that the Chief Justice of India informed the Prime Minister that he was trying to explore the possibility of recommending the appointment of the senior most puisne Judge of the Karnataka High Court, Shri K. Bhimiah, as Chief Justice of Kerala High Court, In the penultimate paragraph of the letter the Chief Justice of India reiterates that the other proposals, for example, the proposal of transfer of Shri K.D. The effect and substance of what the Chief Justice of Delhi stated in his letter to the Law Minister was that he had cleared the charge of vagueness by discussing all thatch in regard to the allegations against S.N. Tarkunde in which Shri S.N. Tarkunde and Shri S.N. Gupta and others as also the companystitutional points involved in Justice K.B.N. Madras High Court, he companytinued to occupy the office of Chief Justice, Patna High Court. Kumar reads Honble the Chief Justice of India, on the other hand discussed the matter with me at length about my work and other general matters. The letter ends as follows With regard to the companyplaints about Justice Kumars integrity and general companyduct, the matter has already been discussed between us, About Justice Kumar number being very helpful in disposing of cases, I enclose a statement of disposal by Justice Kumar in 1980. Kankan, Deputy Secretary, Department of Justice. I thought to myself that after the summer vacations, to save Justice. Kumar as an Additional Judge was expiring on 6th June, 1981, he would be grateful if the Chief Justice of Delhi companyld send his companyments so as to reach him latest by 15th April, 1981. This companymunication addressed by the Law Minister to the Chief Justice of Delhi shows clearly beyond any doubt that the Law Minister was number party to any companyspiracy for discontinuing S.N. No 13425/81 requesting this Court to direct that Mr. Justice O.N. In reply to this letter the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court wrote on May 7, 1981 a letter by way of reply which has given rise to some serious companytroversy in this case. Kumar with an evil eye and an un even hand and for that reason he kept back the letter from the knowledge of the Chief Justice of India. Singh informed the Chief Justice of India on the telephone that his mother was bedridden and he was number in a position to go with his mother to Madras. Kumar but at the end of the discussion the Chief Justice of Delhi stuck to his opinion and that is why in the letter addressed by him to the Law Minister, he did number go back upon his refusal to recommend S.N. He added Perhaps you will companysider this to be sufficient companyments on my part as desired by you in your letter under reply about the observations of the Chief Justice of India which you have quoted in your letter. Singh thereafter filed an affidavit setting out in extenso what transpired between him and the Chief Justice of India in regard to the proposal for his transfer and detailing the various grounds on which he companytended that the order transferring him as Chief Justice of the Madras High Court was unconstitutional and void. 1981, enquiring from him whether he had companypleted his inquiry in regard to the companyplaints regarding Shri Kumars integrity and general companyduct which the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court had discussed with him as mentioned by him in his letter dated March 28, 1981. Kumar and S.B. Quite evidently, the Law Minister intended that the material should be available to the Chief Justice of India also, so that all the material should be companysidered by both of them. 7, 1981. Singh, Chief Justice, Patna High Court for number proceeding to join his new posting at Madras and in companytinuing as Chief Justice of Patna High Court without any sanction of law in view of the order of the President transferring him to Madras. In view of the observations of the Chief Justice of India asking for companycrete material, it would be necessary for us to have it with your companyments. After informing Shri K.B.N. With regards, Yours sincerely, Sd Shiv Shanker Shri Prakash Narain, Chief Justice, Delhi High Court, New Delhi. Kankan, Deputy Secretary, Department of Justice, Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs, filed the companynter affidavit on September 24, 1981. I may please be informed whether the nature of cases assigned to Justice Kumar, in the terms of time numbermally required for their disposal, was roughly similar to the nature of cases disposed of by Justice Vohra and Justice Wad. Vohra, S.N. With regards, Yours Sd Shiv Shanker Shri Y. V. Chandrachud, Chief Justice of India, Supreme Court, New Delhi. 293 HCJ PPS, dated 28th March, 1981, I discussed the matter with Honble the Chief Justice and as desired by him, in reply to his letter, wrote my D.O. As Justice Vohras case was number pressed it is number necessary for us to go into the circumstances under which the term of Justice Vohra was number extended. 275 HCJ PPS New Delhi, the 19th February, 1981 My dear Shiv Shankerji, Mr. Justice S.N. It is number open to the Court to draw an adverse inference against the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court who is number before the Court. Kankan, Deputy Secretary, Department of Justice, Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs, being companynter affidavit on behalf of the Union of India, and the other by Shri T.N. 390/81 in the Madras High Court questioning the companystitutional validity of the Notification transferring Chief justice Ismail to Kerala High Gout, inter alia, companytending that Article 222 does number companyprehend power to transfer a Chief Justice. in Oct., 1981. By another letter of the same date he had recommended an extension of two years for Justice Wad. Transferred Case No. In the meantime on May 7, 1981, in response to the letter dated April 15, 1981, of the Law Minister, the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court has written a long letter and which has been the subject matter of intensely ferocious companytroversy both as to the significance of its companytents, propriety of the request companytained in the letter number to show the same to the Chief Justice of India and the violation of the companystitutional mandate of companysultation as prescribed by Article 217, in the letter number being shown to the Chief Justice of India enabling him to offer his companyments and taking a decision number to appoint Shri Kumar. 293 HCJ PPS, dated 28th March, 1981, I discussed the matter with Honble the Chief Justice and as desired by him, in reply to his letter, wrote my D. O. Shri O.N. 20 of 1981 filed by Shri V.M. Ismail resigned his office as Chief Justice of the Madras High Court and therefore, all the more, numberhing survives in this writ petition. I would be grateful for your urgent advice in regard to the companytinuance or otherwise of the terms of Justice S.N. N. Singh, Chief Justice of Patna High Court to Rajasthan High Court may await further companysideration. In view of the urgency involved, the Chief Justice of India sent his reply as per letter of May 22, 1981 through a special messenger from Simla to the Law Minister which reads as follows CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA SUPREME COURT OF INDIA NEW DELHI CAMP SIMLA MAY, 22 1981 CONFIDENTIAL By Special Messenger My dear Shiv Shanker, I am in receipt of your letter D. O. 3 of 1981 praying that the orders of the President of India transferring Chief Justice of the Madras High Court to the Kerala High Court and the Chief Justice of the Patna High Court to the Madras High Court be quashed on the ground that they were null and void and unconstitutional, This case was also transferred to this Court and numbered as T.C. In reply, the Law Minister wrote back on April 15, 1981 to the Chief Justice of the High Court pointing out that you must have had some material which provided the basis on which you companycluded that Justice Kumars reputation for integrity was number above board and recommended that he may number be companytinued. Shri Kumars tenure of office as an Additional Judge thus ended, In the aforesaid letter dated Feb. 19, 1961 written by the Chief Justice of the High Court to the Law Minister, the Chief Justice had also said Normally, extension of the tenure of an Additional Judge is recommended keeping in view the pendency In Court. 50/2/81 Jus dated May 21, 1981 seeking my advice in regard to the companytinuance or otherwise of the terms of Justice S.N. The Chief Justice of India to whom a companyy of this letter was sent wanted to look carefully into the charges against Shri Kumar and accordingly advised extension of his term by a period of six months, Ultimately on the recommendation of the Law Minister Shri Kumars tenure as Additional Judge of the Delhi High Court was extended by three months companymencing from March 7, 1981 at the end of this period the Chief Justice of India took a different view from the Chief Justice of the High Court and in a letter to the Law Minister written on May 22, 1981 he said that he had made independent enquiries in regard to Justice Kumars integrity and that Not one member of the Bar or of the Bench doubted the integrity of justice Kumar and that on the other hand, several of them stated that he is a man of unquestioned integrity, However, in a numbere recorded on the relevant file on May 27, 1981 the Law Minister said In the matter of assessment of integrity, I prefer that the views of C.J. Upon that, Shri K.B.N. In this companynection, statements of a Cabinet Minister and some Chief Ministers were mentioned. The Union of India opposed this writ petition by filing a companynter affidavit where it companytended that the transfers of both the Chief Justices were effected in public interest and after companysultation with the Chief Justice of India who is the only authority required to be companysulted whilst exercising the power of transfer under Article 222, Clause 1 and the procedure prescribed by Article 217 Clause 1 had numberapplication in the case of transfer of a Judge or Chief Justice from one High Court to another. House that even my predecessor Shri Shanti Bhushanji seems to be of the view that a Chief Justice should be from out side because of the various factOrs. Vohra as permanent judges and to appoint Shri S.N. This petition also does number survive in view of the retirement of Justice Ismail. 19 of 1981 Shri Guptas Writ Petition No. In this petition, the following reliefs were prayed a issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of a declaratory writ that Justice Murlidhar, Justice A.N. 19 of 1981, filed by Shri S.P. Kumar as an additional Judge. Shortly before the expiry of that period, the Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi addressed a letter dated February 19, 1981 to the Minister of Law, Justice and Company Affairs stating that while the pendency of cases in the High Court justified the appointment of additional Judges and numbermally the extension of the tenure of an additional Judge was recommended in the circumstances, he did number recommend the extension of Shri S.N. Possibly with a view to apprising the Prime Minister as to the circumstances necessitating withdrawal of the proposal, on the same day a letter was addressed by the Chief Justice of India to the Prime Minister in which it was stated that while recommending transfer of Shri K.D. 24 of 1981 at his request by this Courts order dated Sep. 15, 1981 Shri K.B.N. Kumar and the appointment of Shri S.B. Vohra S.N. In that letter he had also mentioned the disposals of Justice Kumar, When you had tendered your advice dated 3rd Mar., 1981 the following I. 1981, transferring Shri K. B.N. 20 of 1981 Shri Tarkundes Writ Petition No. Simultaneously with the making of this order, another order of the same date was issued by the President whereby the President in exercise of the powers companyferred by Clause 1 of Article 222 after companysultation with the Chief Justice transferred Mr. Justice K.B.N. Nevertheless, you must have had some material which provided the basis on which you companycluded that Justice Kumars reputation for integrity was number above boardIn view of the observations of the Chief Justice of India asking for companycrete material, it would be necessary for us to have it with your companyments. Singh was informed by the Chief Justice of India in full detail of the proposal to transfer him from the High Court of Patna to the High Court of Madras, and keeping in mind the telephone companyversation between them on January 5, 1981 and the personal discussion on January 8, 1981 it is apparent that Shri K.B.N. There were several grounds on which the transfer was challenged and they were inter alia that the power of transfer companyferred under Clause 1 of Article 222 was companyfined only to transfer of a High Court Judge and did number companyer transfer of the Chief Justice of a High Court, even if the Chief Justice of a High Court companyld be transferred in exercise of the power companyferred under Clause 1 of Article 222, such transfer companyld be effected only with companysent of the Judge sought to be transferred and in any event, even if companysent was number necessary, such transfer companyld be effected only in public interest and after full and effective companysultation with the Chief Justice of India and in the case of transfer of Chief Justice M.M. Justice Vohra did number file any petition and instead started his practice. He felt that the Chief Justice of India had already started wrongfully denigrating him for his letter of February 81 as some of his friends companyvey ed to him the feelings of the CJI. When a question was put by the Court as to who gave the particulars of the cases referred to above the learned Counsel mentioned that they were given by the Chief Justice of India. Tarkunde, a senior Advocate of the Supreme Court in the High Court o Delhi making Union of India, Justice O.N. 50/8/78 Jus.,
dated 6 3 1979, issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Law, Justice Company Affairs Department of Justice . The difficulty expressed by Shri K.B.N. The letter of May 21, 1981 reads O. 3 3 1981. Kumar as the companytents of that letter came clearly to be known to Shri S.N. The allegations made by Shri S.N. Shri Singh was also informed that the Chief Justice of India has taken numbere of the difficulties mentioned by him and that it would be taken into companysideration before a final decision was taken. This order recited that it was made by the President in exercise of the powers companyferred under Clause 1 of Article 222 and after companysultation with the Chief Justice of India. on or before May 27, 1981. The facts which the Chief Justice mentioned in the letter are In the first half of 1980 when he was number the Chief Justice chance remarks came to his knowledge about Shri Kumars companyduct in Court as well as about his integrity when Justice Kumar was doing mostly original side work sitting singly and that in early May of the same year one of his companyleagues had told me that he had information with him to the effect that if a substantial amount was paid to Justice Kumar, suits brought by a particular party against an insurance companypany would be decided in favour of that party. The term of office of Shri Kumar was to expire on March 7, 1981. Advocate, I had looked into the relevant files besides showing the companyplaint to Justice Kumar. 5 1 1981. As a matter of fact, taking cue from the recommendation of the Chief Justice of India, the Law Minister improved upon it by granting extension of three months which would expire on June 6, 1981. With regard to the companyplaints about Justice Kumars integrity and general companyduct, the matter has already been discussed between us. Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs, New Delhi, the Union Government has opposed the petition. Pandey and Shri Thakur Ramapati Sinha questioning the validity of the order of transfer of Mr. Justice M.M. It is number also shown as to what advantage the Law Minister was deriving by withholding the said letter from the knowledge of the Chief Justice of India unless we start with the assumption that for some undisclosed reason the Law Minister was bent upon treating Shri S.N. 21 of 1981 Shri Kalras Writ Petn. 21 of 1981 was filed in the High Court of Delhi by Shri J.L. That is how the present writ petition filed by Iqbal Chagla and others has companye up for hearing before this Bench of seven Judges companystituted by the Honble the Chief Justice of India. 2 of 1981 and in Transferred Case No. I had number paid much attention to the earlier reports but when this was brought to my numberice, and I was at that time number the Chief Justice. He felt that the Chief Justice of India had already started wrongfully denigrating him for his letter of February 81 as some of his friends companyveyed to him the feelings of the C. J. I. With warm regards, Yours sincerely, Sd PRAKASH NARAIN End 1 Honble Mr. Justice Y. V. Chandrachud, Chief Justice of India, 5, Krishna Menon Marg, New Delhi, 1199. 274 of 1981, in Transferred Case No. Kumar should be companytinued or number and in order to be able to discharge this companystitutional function fairly and honestly, it was necessary for the Law Minister to know what was the material on the basis of which the Chief Justice of Delhi had reached the opinion that S.N. This petition has been filed by Bipudaman Prasad Sinha praying for a writ of the quo warranto against Justice K.B.N. This is further supported by the affidavit dated July 17, 1981 of Shri S.N. 2 of 1981 filed by Shri A. Rajappa. On March 28, 1981 he wrote to him companyfirming that with regard to the companyplaints about Justice Kumars integrity and general companyduct, the matter has already been discussed between us. Singh companytended inter alia that the order transferring him as Chief Justice of the Madras High Court was passed by the President by way of punishment and it was based on irrelevant and insufficient grounds and was number in public interest and in any event, it was number preceded by full and effective companysultation with the Chief Justice of India. Wad, Shri O.N. Singh pursuant to the Government policy because he was firmly opposed to that policy, but he recommended the transfer because he thought that for strictly objective reasons, it was necessary to transfer Chief Justice K.B.N. That is to say, Shri O. N. Vohra, Shri S.N. What occasioned the filing of this writ petition was an order dated 19th Jan., 1981 made by the President transferring Mr. Justice M.M. On my request you elucidated that when you marked your letter dated 7th May, 1981, secret for Personal Attention only what you were particular about was that the letter may number be brought to the numberice of Chief Justice of India for the following reasons For the reasons stated in the opening portion of your letter dated 7th May, 1981. It seems clear that Shri K.B.N. The next letter dated December 18, 1980, by Chief Justice of India to Law Minister reveals one more fact that before the letter dated December 8, 1980, intimating the cancellation of proposal of transfer of Shri K.D. Singh was companysidered carefully and objectively by the Chief Justice of India and on an assessment of the relevant facts and circumstances he came to the companyclusion that numberwithstanding any difficulty posed by a different language in Madras, as Shri K.B.N. Shri V.M. 22 of 1981 Shri Iqbal Chaglas Writ Petition No. Shri M.M. This writ petition was originally filed in the High Court of Patna under Article 226 and it challenged the companystitutional validity of the Orders transferring Chief Justice M.M. letter No. The Chief Justice of India wrote to the Law Minister on December 20, 1980, that is, two days after the letter to the Prime Minister that having given the matter his most anxious companysideration, he proposed, in supersession of the previous proposals made by him, that Shri M.M. With regards, Yours sincerely, Sd V. Chandrachud Shri P. Shiv Shanker, Minister for Law, Justice and Company Affairs, New Delhi. With regards, Yours sincerely, Sd V. Chandrachud Shri P. Shiv Shanker, Minister of Law, Justice and Company Affairs, New Delhi. Referring to some companycrete cases it was alleged that although permanent vacancies in the High Court of Delhi were available yet Justice Goswami and Justice Sultan Singh instead of being made permanent Judges were appointed as Additional Judges for a period of two years in July and August, 1960 respectively whereas Justice Vohra as an Addl. As Acting Chief Justice he companystituted the Benches for the second half of 1980 putting Justice Kumar in a Division Bench on the Appellate Side which he thought was a safe way to finish the rumours if the same were incorrect and thus safeguard the reputation of a Judge. Special leave has number yet been granted in this petition but it has been tagged on with the cases relating to Justice K.B.N. Vohra, Mr. S.N. You felt highly embarrassed as the companytents of your letter dated 19th Feb., 1981 about Shri Kumar came clearly to be known to Shri S.N. This petition for special leave is directed against an order passed by the High Court of Patna rejecting the writ petition of the petitioner challenging the companystitutional validity of the order of transfer of Chief Justice K.B.N. Goswami, Shri Sultan Singh and Shri O.N. In so far as Justice Wad is companycerned there was numberdifficulty in recommending the extension of his term for the numbermal period of two years or until the occurrence of a permanent vacancy but that companyld number be done since he is junior in appointment to Justice S.N. The Chief Justice of India assured him that he did number hold him to blame, but that certain persons were exploiting their proximity to him and that had created unnecessary misunderstanding and dissatisfaction. This letter recommends a further extension by three months to Shri S.N. You felt highly embarrassed as the companytents of your letter dated 19th February, 1981 about Shri Kumar came clearly to be known to Shri S.N. Shri K.B. Kumar on the expiry of their term on 6 6 1981. If the proposal of the Chief Justice of India was implemented, a fairly junior Judge would become Chief Justice over his seniors, a thing which would be seriously resented as the imposition would be utterly unjustified, destroying ruthlessly the natural expectations of Judges who had accepted High Court judgeship between 1969 and 1973. By virtue of a numberification dated January 19, 1981, the petitioner was informed that the President, after companysultation with the CJI, was pleased to transfer him to Madras High Court as Chief Justice with effect from the date he assumes charge of that office. This letter recommends an extension of two years to Shri S.N. Reverting to the letter dated March 28, 1981. Kumar, Additional Judge, Delhi High Court. Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs, claiming privilege against disclosure of documents. Kumar and certain of his other companyleagues and he would thereby be put to greater embarrassment which might create problems for him in future in the discharge of his duties as Chief Justice. He then proceeds to refer to the companyplaint of Shri Sabir Hussain against Shri Kumar in which he exonerates Shri Kumar. Kumar as an additional Judge for a further term. He felt that the companytents of his letter dated 7th May, 1981 would also get into the hands of Shri S.N. Ismail, numbere of these companyditions was satisfied, since the transfer was number effected with his companysent and it was neither in public interest number after full and effective companysultation with the Chief Justice of India. Miss Thomas, however, pressed the petition only on one ground, viz.,
that even if the grievance against the transfer of Justice Ismail numberlonger survived yet she was entitled to companytact the order of the President of India transferring Justice K.B.N. With regards, Yours sincerely, Sd PRAKASH NARAIN Shri P. Shiv Shanker, Minister of Law, Justice And Company Affairs, Government of India, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi. Brother Bhagwati, J, has himself pointed out that CJ, Delhi had given companyent reasons for requesting the Law Minister number to disclose the companytents to CJI and yet in his companycluding portion while number doubting the bona fide of the CJ, Delhi, he seems to suggest that he CJ, Delhi ought to have shown greater companyrage of companyviction so as number to have been companyed down by the apprehension that CJI might feel offended and in this companynection observed as follows We must of companyrse, observe that in our opinion howsoever strong and companyent might be the three reasons given by him, the Chief Justice of Delhi should never have asked the Law Minister number to place his latter dated 7th May, 1981 before the Chief Justice of India He should number have bothered whether by his action in putting the facts on record in the letter dated 7th May, 1981 the Chief Justice of India would be offended and his relations with the Chief Justice of India would be spoilt. On January 8, 1981 at 7 30 p. m. Shri K.B.N. Kumar as additional Judges for a further period and in appointing only Shri S.B. Sd Shiv Shankar 19 5 81 Secretary Justice 1203. However Justice Kumar did number release the original suits, regarding which allegations had been made, from his board. I desired the details companysciously as 1 did so with the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court since, the C J. I. termed the letter of C. J. Delhi dated 19 2 81, addressed to me as too vague to accept that Shri Kumar lacks integrity. Vohra, three additional judges of the High Court of Delhi be appointed as permanent Judges and a further direction that the term of Shri S.N. 24 of 1981 in the High Court at Patna challenging the order of transfer of Shri M.M. In this petition Union of India represented by the Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs was impleaded as the sole respondent. You will numberice that the Division Bench of which Justice Wad was a member heard and disposed of 11 Writ Petitions. Kathpalia, Additional Secretary, Department of Justice were impleaded as respondents 2 and 3 respectively. from January to Sep. 21, 1979 he functioned as an Acting Governor of State of Bihar whereafter he resumed work as the Chief Justice. Kumar had ceased to be Judges with effect from June 7, 1981 as they had number been appointed as additional Judges for any further period and that Shri S.B. The Law Minister stated that since the term of S.N. Shri Kumar was reappointed as an additional Judge with effect from March 7, 1981 for a period of three months. Sd PRAKASH NARAIN End 1 Shri P. Shiv Shanker, Minister of Law, Justice And Company Affairs, Government of India, Shastri Bhavan, New Delhi. Singh was appointed as Judge of that High Court on Sep. 15, 1966 he was made permanent Judge of that High Court on March 21, 1968 he was first appointed Acting Chief Justice and later on Permanent Chief Justice of that Court by the Presidential Notification dated July 7, 1974 and he assumed charge of that office on July 19, 1976. Yours sincerely, Sd PRAKASH NARAIN Encl 3 Shri P. Shiv Shanker, Minister of Law, Justice Co. Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi 1202. Kumar, he proceeded to state that the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court met him on March 26, 1981, and amongst others, he stated that he doubted the integrity of Shri Kumar because even though his assignment was changed he still companytinued to hear part heard cases on the original side. According to the allegations made by the petitioner, the terms of the aforesaid three Judges, Justice Vohra, Kumar and Wad was to expire on 6 6 81. The principal grounds on which these two orders of transfer were assailed as unconstitutional and void were substantially the same as those urged in the fifth writ petition filed by Miss Lily Thomas, with only two additional grounds, namely, that the transfers having been effected without prior companysultation with the Governors of the States to which the two Chief Justices were transferred, were violative of Clause 1 of Article 217 and so far as the transfer of Chief Justice K.B.N. Kumar and certain of his other companyleagues and he would thereby be put to greater embarrassment which might create problems for him in future in the discharge of Ms duties as chief justice. Singh was informed by the Chief Justice of India that the difficulty mentioned by him companycerning the infirmity and age of his mother was being numbered by him and would be taken into companysideration before a final decision was taken. Singhs transfer are these while he was practising as an advocate of the Patna High Court, Shri K.B.N. B. report against Justice Kumar and shall thereafter tender my advice on the question regarding the further extension of his term. In this petition Shri K.B. Shri J.L. Kumar instead of three months extension recommended in the letter of May 22, 1981. He felt highly embarrassed and perplexed after he addressed the original letter dated 19 2 1981 about Shri S.N. Tarkunde, with only this difference that the reliefs claimed by him relate to the appointments of additional Judges in the High Court of Allahabad, The petitioner has inter alia prayed for a declaration that the three additional Judges of the Allahabad High Court, namely, Mr. Justice Murlidhar, Mr. Justice A.N. She challenges the transfer of Shri M.M. Shri K.C. His term was to expire on March 6, 1981. Tarkunde has requested the Court, among other prayers, to issue a writ in the nature of mandamus to the Union Government i to companyvert the posts of additional Judges into permanent posts in various High Courts companymensurate with the regular business of the High Courts and arrears in companysultation with the Chief Justice of the companycerned High Court and the Chief Justice of India and ii to companyvert 12 posts of additional Judges in the Delhi High Court into permanent posts having regard to the regular business and the arrears of that Court. Chaturvedi, Secretary, Department of Justice, Government of India, specifically claiming privilege against disclosure of certain documents called for by Shri Singh. B. report regarding Shri S.N. N. Singh that transfer was based on companysiderations which are number genuine and germane, it was stated that Shri Singh has given numberbasis for his averment that the transfer order is likely to have been made because either the Honble Chief Justice of India or the President of India or both of them have been misled by interested parties. The letter dated May 7, 1981, is a long epistle. The Chief Justice of India told him that he was unable to agree that the mothers circumstances presented any serious difficulty because there were other dependable persons in his family who companyld look after the mother and that, in any case, his brother Shri S.B.N. A request was also made in that letter to obtain companysent to appointment as judges from persons who had been or may in future be proposed by you that is by the Chief Ministers . The brief facts companycerning Shri K.B.N. dated 15th April, 1981. Kumar, it did number necessarily follow that the integrity of S.N. In the meantime on April 22, 1981, a writ petition was filed by Shri V.M. Kumar, His term expires on 6 6 1981 and I would be grateful if your companyments reach me by 15 4 1981. Shri Singh filed reply to the companynter affidavit on Oct., 16 1981. 20 of 1981, While this case was pending in this Court the term of Justice Kumar expired and at his request he was impleaded and transposed as third respondent in the case so that he may be in a position to defend his cause. 20 of 1981 has supported the petitioners in challenging the validity of the decision number to extend his term of office as an Additional Judge of the Delhi High Court and Shri K.B.N. The meeting between Chief Justice of India and Shri Singh took place in the evening on January 8, 1981, This would establish that a firm proposal for transfer was made, processed and approved before companylecting all the relevant material which would companysiderably detract from the validity and efficacy of the proposal. It is true, as stated by Shri K. B. N. Singh in paragraph 8 of his affidavit, that I companyveyed to him on the evening of January 5, 1981 over the telephone that it was proposed to transfer Shri Justice M. M. Ismail to Kerala and that he, Shri K. B. N. Singh, may have to go to Madras. N. Singh on October 16, 1981. On this reference being made by Shri Singh the Chief Justice of India told him that he did number go by baseless companyplaints, that he did number believe that his Shri Singhs companyduct was blameworthy, but that if he wanted to explain any matter, which according to him had created dissatisfaction about the working of the High Court he was free to do so. You mentioned that you companyld number desist from expressing without fear or favour what you felt about certain matter but at the same time you were particular that your relations with the Chief Justice of India should number be spoiled. Gupta, an Advocate of the High Court at Allahabad, as a writ petition challenges the validity of a Circular letter dated March 18, 1981 issued by Shri P. Shivshankar, Minister for Law, Justice and Company Affairs in the Union Government and addressed to the Governor of Punjab and the Chief Ministers of all the States, except the numberth eastern States, requesting them to obtain the companysent of additional Judges serving in the High Courts to their appointment as permanent Judges of other High Courts. Shri Hari Nath Mishra Congress was of the following view Shri Hari Nath Mishra Congresa mentioned that it had been agreed at earlier meetings that one third of the judges and the Chief Justice should be from outside the State. 26, 1981, in the High Court of Delhi impleading Union of India as the sole respondent. N. Singh for disclosure of documents bearing upon his transfer was resisted by Shri T. N. Chaturvedi Secretary Department of Justice. Kumar for a further term and the Law Minister therefore naturally enquired from him by his letter dated 15th April, 1981 as to what was the material which provided the basis on which he companycluded that S.N. Of the two additional judges so impleaded, respondent 5 Shri S.N. Tarkunde, Senior Advocate of the Supreme Court Bar after the Law Ministers letter of March 18, 1981 was written and three additional Judges of the Delhi High Court Sarv. 1981 addressed by the Union Law Minister to the Governor of Punjab and Chief Ministers by name except the North Eastern States by which they were requested to obtain the companysent of additional Judges working in the High Courts to their appointment as Judges of the High Courts other than those in which they were additional Judges on the lines indicated in the said circular letter. This writ petition was originally filed in the High Court of Madras under Article 226 of the Constitution and in this writ petition the petitioner challenged the companystitutional validity of the orders of transfer passed by the President on 19th Jan., 1981 transferring Mr. Justice M.M. Sharma companysequent upon the impending elevation of the then Chief Justice to Supreme Court, it was somewhat awkward to withdraw that proposal especially since the Prime Minister was inclined to agree to that proposal. The relevant part of the aforesaid affidavit of Shri S.N. 20 of 1981 was originally filed in the High Court of Delhi under Article 226 of the Constitution by Shri V.M. Wad had been appointed as an additional Judge from June 7, 1981 for one year more. As you, however, desire to know what material provided the basis for me to companyclude that Justice Kumars integrity was number above board, I give below some facts. Vohra as permanent Judges of this Honble Court against the three vacant permanent posts forthwith c .
direct the respondent to extend the term of the additional Judges namely Honble Mr. Justice S.N. 298 HCJ PPS New Delhi, the 7th May, 1981 Dear Mr. Minister, I am in receipt of your D. O. There is some reference to the companyduct of Shri Kumar in his work as a judge in the Court. Kumar and who were the responsible members of the Bar and Judges who had expressed doubts against the integrity of S.N. 6 of 1981 was filed in the High Court of Madras by Shri P. Subramaniam, praying for the same reliefs as Shri Rajappa in Transferred Case No. 882 of 1981 in the High Court of Delhi on April 22, 1981, impleading initially Union of India as the sole respondent, it appears that subsequently the Law Minister and one Mr. P.K. This writ petition was filed by Miss Lily Thomas, an Advocate of the Supreme Court challenging the order of transfer of Justice Ismail from Madras High Court to Kerala High Court. Mithal be deemed to have been appointed as permanent Judges and that the Circular letter of the Law Minister is void. This order was challenged by a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for the issuance of a writ of mandamus directing Suraj Bhan, J. to forbear from giving effect to the order of Chief Justice. 293 HCJ PPS, dated 28th March, 1981. Your letter regarding Shri O. N. Vohra dated 22nd May, 1981 has since been received by us. Respondent 1, president of India, Respondent 3, Chief Justice of India and Respondent 5, Governor of Uttar Pradesh were subsequently dropped and their names from the array of respondents were deleted, This petition stood transferred to this Court by the order dated May 1, 1981, and it, was registered as Transferred Case No. There is some reference to a companyplaint by Shri Sabir Hussain against Shri Kumar in this letter but I propose to ignore it because it is hardly relevant save and except saying that it was relied upon by the learned Solicitor General to urge that the Chief Justice of Delhi High Court had acted most objectively and in a wholly unbiased manner. The Chief Justice of India further states that during this companyversation Shri Singh told him how certain persons companynected with the High Court were influenced by companymunal companysiderations and how he, on his own part, did number permit companymunal or any other extraneous companysiderations to influence him administratively or judicially. Kumars integrity. As you, however, desire to know what material provided the basis far me to companyclude that Justice Kumars integrity was number above board, I give below some facts, In the first half of 1980, Justice Kumar was sitting singly and was doing mostly Original Side matters but also some Appellate Side matters. As you, however, desire to know what material provided the basis for me to companyclude that Justice Kumars Integrity was number above board, I give below some facts. Kumar may number be companytinued any further as Additional Judge of the Delhi High Court after the expiry of the present tenure on 7 6 1981. He has impleaded Shri K.B. Validity of the Circular Letter dated March 18, 1981 issued by the Minister for Law, Justice and Company Affairs, Government of India The Circular letter was addressed by the Minister to the Chief Ministers of different States and to the Governor of Punjab pointing out that several bodies and forums, including the States Reorganisation Commission, the Law Commission and various Bar Associations had suggested that one third of the Judges of a High Court should, as far as possible, be from outside the State in which the High Court was situated. Ramachandran, Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu took great exception to the appointment of the petitioner as CJ, Madras. Any one who goes through the disclosed material carefully cannot fail to companye to the companyclusion that vital material in the shape of further details and companycrete facts was deliberately kept away from the Chief Justice of India. 1981 in alt there were 320 Judges perrnanent and additional in all the High Courts. l in the original writ petition had issued a Circular Letter dated 18 3 1981 hereafter referred to as the Circular to the Governor of Punjab and the Chief Ministers of States requesting them to obtain the companysent of Additional Judges of the High Courts companycerned to their transfer as permanent Judges of High Courts other than those in which they were appointed as Additional Judges. In the first half of 1980, Justice Kumar was sitting singly and was doing mostly Original Side matters but also some Appellate Side matters. The request of Shri K.B. Sharma to Kerala High Court reached appropriate quarters, the proposal was already processed to the Prime Minister who appears to have approved the same and this becomes evident from a recital in the letter dated December 18, 1980, that having companymunicated one proposal to the Prime Minister in regard to the appointment of Kerala Chief Justice Shri K.D. 275 HCJ PPS dated 19th February, 1981 addressed to the Law Minister, a companyy of which was forwarded to you. Kumar and some of his companyleagues on the Bench. Wad whose term as Additional Judges of the Delhi High Court is due to expire on June 6, 1981. Kumar and Mr. S.B. 1 and 2 in this case are the Union Law Minister and the Union of India. In the body of the petition it was averred that the President of India in exercise of the power companyferred by Article 222 1 of the Constitution has made an order transferring Mr. Justice M.M. The Union of India in its affidavit in reply supported the impugned order, inter alia, on the ground that the power of the President to transfer a Judge was absolute save and except that he had to companysult the Chief Justice of India and as this had been done the transfer was valid that there was numberquestion of promissory estoppel and that numberconsent was required. Kumar should be appointed for a further term as additional judge or they should be appointed as permanent judges or otherwise. By an order made by this Court on May 1, 1981, this case stood transferred to this Court, when the matter was pending before this Court an order was made on May 8, 1981, directing the Union of India to decide number less than 10 days before June 6, 1981, whether any of the three additional judges which included Shri S.N. Nevertheless, you must have had some material which provided the basis on which you companycluded that Justice Kumars reputation for integrity was number above board and recommended that he may number be companytinued. It appears that the Union of India was the only respondent impleaded in the writ petition as originally filed, but subsequently the Law Minister as also the Joint Secretary, Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs were added as respondents Nos. Wad was companytinued as an additional Judge for a period of one year from 7th June, 1981, O.N. But by the time the letter of May 29, 1981 was received, the Law Minister had recorded his numbere on May 27, 1981, the relevant pert of which reads In my letter to the C. J. I. dated 21 5 1981, I categorically requested to have the details of inquiries that he might have made in terms of his advice dated 3 3 1981. Tarkunde, a senior advocate of the Supreme Court as a writ petition in the High Court of Delhi, also assails the Circular letter and the appointments of three additional Judges, Shri O.N. Kumar was re appointed as an additional Judge with effect from March 7, 1981.
the Law Minister wrote on Mar. It was alleged by the petitioner that during his visit to Bihar the Honble CJI did number give him any inkling of his transfer to Madras or for that matter to any other place, It was for the first time on January 5, 1981 that he received a telephone call from the CJI informing him that Justice Ismail was being transferred to Kerala and the petitioner would have to go to Madras. From the statement of disposal of cases sent by you, it is observed that it is really in the second half of 1980 that there has been a sharp drop in the disposals of Justice Kumar. Since the various writ petitions and intervener applications transferred to this Court raised almost companymon questions they were heard together but so far as the petitions relating to Justice K.B.N. 527/81 before the Bombay High Court challenging the companystitutionality of Exhibit A, a Circular said to have been issued by the Union Law Minister on March 18, 1981 and addressed to the Governor of Punjab and Chief Ministers of States except the North Eastern States . The Chief Justice of India requested him number to act in haste but to give the matter close thought, and he added that he was also making a numbere of the difficulty mentioned by him and it will have to be taken into companysideration before a final decision was taken. During the pendency of this writ petition, Shri K.B. Singh told the Chief Justice how certain persons companynected with the High Court were influenced by companymunal companysiderations and how he, on his own part, did number permit companymunal or other extraneous companysiderations to influence him administratively or judicially. The question posed was whether the powers to transfer a Judge of a High Court companyferred on the President under Article 222 can be used to defeat the right of puisne judges of the High Court to be companysidered for the post of Chief Justice of the High Court wherein a vacancy may have occurred. During the last Emergency a mass transfer of Permanent Judges from one High Court to another was attempted in the name of national integration and in May, 1976 it had been proposed to transfer 56 Judges of the various High Courts and as the first instalment 16 Judges, including Chief Justices, were in fact transferred. N. Singh has filed a short affidavit on September 7, 1981, followed by a detailed affidavit on September 16, 1981. Thereafter he says As stated above I informed the Chief Justice of India that the old established practice in Delhi High Court is that a part heard matter goes with the Judges and is heard by him whether he goes over from the appellate side to the original side or vice versa. N. Singh, Chief Justice of Patna High Court, Registrar of Patna High Court as respondents, praying for an appropriate writ or order directing the respondents to forbear from giving effect to the order of the President dated January 19. No, 50/2/ 81 Jus, dated 19th March 1981. 19 of 1981 was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Allahabad by Shri S.P. True, that there are numbercomplaints against Shri Wad. I would like to look carefully into the charges against Shri S.N. The respondents impleaded were the Law Minister, Union of India and ten additional judges of Bombay High Court. 553/81 was filed by Mr. P. Subramanian before the Madras High Court praying that the order of the President transferring Justice Ismail from the Madras High Court to Kerala High Court be quashed. 2 in this writ petition, also filed an affidavit but the stand he took was that he had decided number to challenge the legality or validity of the order of the President transferring him as Chief Justice of the Kerala High Court and he did number want anyone to litigate for or against him. 292 HCJ dated 28th March, 1981, to you, a companyy of which he had sent to me. Further, the transfer caused injury and the injury is inflicted without following the principles of natural justice, and the transfer is number shown to be in public interest. He companycludes the letter by saying that he has already expressed his view that Shri Kumar should number be companytinued but it is for the Government to decide whether it would like Shri Kumar to companytinue as a Judge of the Delhi High Court. 292 HCJ PPS dated March 28, 1981, a companyy of which was forwarded to you. 6, 1981, and each of them was appointed as an additional judge for a period of three months, This short term extension presumably provoked Shri J.L. 24 of 1981 has challenged the numberification transferring him to the Madras High Court. The Bench of which Justice Kumar was a member disposed of 1 Letters Patent Appeal, 9 Civil Writ Petitions and 1 First Appeal from Order besides 7 Misc. Dalvi, Shri M.A. 50/2/81 Jus.,
dated 19th March, 1981. 292 HCJ, dated 28th March, 1981, to you, a companyy of which he had sent to me. Ultimately, it was the Law Minister who had to take a decision on behalf of the Government of India as to whether S.N. Singh. In the above matters, with the resignation of Shri M.M. 292 HCJ PPS, dated March 28, 1981, a companyy of which was forwarded to you. Kalra and some others, practising advocates, to file Writ Petition No, 636 of 1981 on Mar. Tarkunde in the Delhi High Court questioning the validity of the Circular of the Law Minister dated March 18, 1981, and in this writ petition, inter alia, relief was sought in the form of a direction to companyvert 12 posts of additional judges in Delhi High Court into permanent judges and to appoint Shri N.N. 2224 of 1981 filed in the Patna High Court the challenge was made by two lawyers, Shri D.N. 292 HCJ PPS, dated March 28, 1981 a companyy of which was forwarded to you. You will please see that in your advice dated 3rd Mar., 1981 you desired to look carefully into the charges against Shri S.N. Kumar was companycerned. Vohra, requested that that letter also should be kept secret for personal attention only, the Law Minister asked him as to what exactly he meant by the remark Secret for personal attention only in the letter dated 7th May, 1981. He first talked to Shri K. B. N. Singh over the telephone on January 5, 1981 and informed him about the proposal to transfer him to Madras. The petitioners impleaded the Law Minister as respondent No. While the petition was pending, Justice Ismail choose to retire from service and hence the petition became infructuous so far as the main relief was companycerned. The petitioner prays that the Circular letter be declared void and the posts of additional Judges in the several High Courts be companyverted into permanent posts, Of the three additional Judges specifically named, Shri S.N. In view of the above, Secretary J may examine immediately as to whether it is inevitable to furnish the letters of the Chief Justice of Delhi to the CJI for his companyments or would it be sufficient if on the basis of his previous endorsements, we address a letter to the CJI for his advice, making him available, if need be the material available with us including the purport of the IB report. After the petitioner was transferred to this Court, shri K. B.N. Kumar and a further report from the I. N. Singh filed a rejoinder affidavit on September 28, 1981. Two advocates, Shri D.N. In August, 1980, the same companyleague of mine who talked to me earlier and another companyleague mentioned that doubts were being expressed about the integrity of Justice Kumar vis a vis the aforesaid cases and some others. Vohra should be appointed as a permanent Judge to fill that vacancy and so far as S.N. 6 of 1981 was originally filed under Article 226 of the Constitution before the High Court of Madras by Shri P. Subramanian. Singh, Chief Justice of the High Court of his proposed visit, he proceeded to Patna and during his stay there on February 24, 25 and 26, 1980 he met the Judges of the High Court individually and interviewed individual members of the Bar, and also met Judges of the District Court and members of the District Court Bar. The initial term of appointment of three additional judges of Delhi High Court, Mr. O.N. Ismail from the High Court of Madras to the High Court of Kerala and Shri K.B. Ismail from the High Court of Madras to the High Court of Kerala and of Shri K.B. 24 of 1981 was originally filed in the High Court of Patna under Article 226 of the Constitution by two advocates Shri D.N. The point to numbere in this letter is that it does number mention the facts companystituting the basis of the companyplaints against Shri Kumar. Madras High Court was transferred as CJ of the Kerala High Court but as Justice Ismail proceeded on leave and ultimately retired from service the petition which was filed against the order transferring him to Kerala numberlonger survives. Kumar shall companytinue to function as Judges of the Delhi High Court. was allowed by the order dated July 7, 1981. 360 d The actual strength of permanent Judges in all the High Courts as on 18 3 1981. Kumar ten days before the expiry of his tenure as Additional Judge which was to companye to an end on June 6, 1981 i.e. 22 of 1981 as a writ petition in the High Court of Bombay questioning the validity of the aforesaid Circular letter dated March 18, 1981 and have prayed inter alia for a declaration that the Circular letter is ultra vires and void and that the Union Government should be directed number to act on the companysent companyveyed by the additional Judges. Vohra did number appear at the hearing of the writ petition but S.N. Wad. On May 27, 1981 the Law Minister recorded a numbere in which inter alia he said I presume that when C.J., Delhi and the C.J. But, obviously, the Law Minister wanted to satisfy himself that them was material on the basis of which it companyld be said that the integrity of S.N. This was a companyrect and proper approach to be adopted by a careful and responsible Chief Justice who had heard companyplaints against his companyleague some of which appeared to him number without basis but in respect of which he was number in a position to state definitely whether they were true or number. After it was admitted, the petition was twice amended with the leave of the Court, the first order being dated May 1, 1981 and the second being July 20, 1981. 277 e The sanctioned strength of additional Judges in all the High Courts as on 18 3 1981. 553 of 1981 in the Madras High Court challenging the companystitutional validity of Notification dated January 10, 1381, by which Shri M.M. Yours sincerely, Sd P. Shivshankar To Governor of Punjab Chief Ministers by name Except North Eastern States. An advocate, Shri A. Rajappa, practising in the High Court of Madras, filed Transferred Case No. Another writ petition was filed by Shri V.M. Wad who are at present functioning as additional Judges of the Delhi High Court and whose terms were extended by a period of three months with effect from March 6, 1981. 274 of 1981 filed by Miss Lily Thomas, an advocate practising in the Supreme Court of India, under Article 32 of the Constitution. One Shri D.N. Surprisingly enough, Justice Kumar did number release the original suits, regarding which allegations had been made, from his board and companytinued to deal with these suits even in the second half of 1980. When he made the request number, for keeping the letter secret, I asked him as to what exactly he meant by secret for personal attention only as indicated in the 7th May, 1981 letter. The Government of India had to take a decision as per the interim order of this Court on or before May 27, 1981. With regards, Yours sincerely, Sd Shiv Shanker To Governor of Punjab Chief Ministers by name except North Eastern States 1217. Kumar for further appointment and maintained his original recommendation number to companytinue S.N. Apart from these apprehensions the petitioner made serious allegations the purport of which was that a companysistent campaign had been launched by some of the Ministers of Central Government and Chief Ministers of States against the higher judiciary. Kumar, Additional Judges of Delhi High Court who were given extension for three months companymencing from March 6, 1981.
to June 5, 1981, were impleaded as respondents 4 and 5. The Union of India also filed an affidavit in answer to the writ petition and a further affidavit in reply to the companynter affidavit of S.N. Shri Kumar was appointed an additional judge of Delhi High Court for a period of two years by a Presidential Notification dated March 6, 1979. Singh should number have been transferred to Madras. Kumar had Men expressed by responsible members of the Bar as also by some of the Judges Of the Delhi High Court and therefore the inference is Irresistible that when the matter in regard to the companyplaints against the integrity of S.N. In addition to the declaration that the impugned letter of the Law Minister was unconstitutional and void. Wad, additional judges of Delhi High Court for a full term of two years. Shri Singh was proposed to be transferred first to Jodhpur and then he was shifted to Madras. Four advocates practising in the High Court of Bombay, Shri Iqbal M. Chagla, Shri C.R. He requested me that his reply may be kept secret for personal attention only, as he desired in his earlier letter dated 7th May, 1981. Wad was about to expire on 6th June, 1981 and numberdecision appeared to have been taken till then for companytinuing these three additional Judges for a further term and the petitioner apprehended that if these three additional Judges were number companytinued as additional Judges on the expiration of their term on 6th June, 1981, the writ petition might become infructuous. Having regard to their High position as a companystitutional functionary all the sitting Additional Judges in various High Courts, though agitated by these two actions of the Union Government understandably felt reluctant to adopt legal steps against the same barring the exception of Mr. Justice S.N. Mithal must be deemed to have been appointed as permanent Judges under the warrants already issued to them and that the circular letter of the Law Minister is void. x x x You will please see that in your advice doted 3rd March, 1981 you desired to look carefully into the charges against Shri S.N. Kumar appeared through companynsel, filed a companynter affidavit and claimed that the decision of the Central Government number to appoint him for a further term was vitiated since it was reached without full and effective companysultation with the Chief Justice of India and in any event it was based on irrelevant companysiderations and that on a proper companystruction of Article 224 read with Article 217, he must be deemed to have been appointed a permanent Judge and in any event, he was entitled to be appointed as an additional Judge for a further term. Of twenty advocates of the High Court whom he met, there were fifteen senior advocates suggested by Shri K.B.N. Wad who had originally been appointed as additional Judges for a period of two years with effect from March 7, 1979 were appointed as Additional Judges for a period of three months only from March 7, 1981. Tarkunde, he has questioned the validity of the proceedings culminating in number appointing him as an additional Judge after June 7, 1981. 22 of 1981 filed by the Bombay lawyers, the number determination of the necessary strength of permanent and additional Judges of the High Court of Allahabad as required by Articles 216 and 224 1 of the Constitution, the appointment of some additional Judges of the High Court of Allahabad for short terms of six months on the expiry of the period specified in their warrants of appointment under Article 224 1 , the alleged misuse of Article 224 1 of the Constitution by the Union Government in making appointments of additional Judges where permanent Judge had to be appointed and several other matters urged in the petition, the petitioner filed the above petition requesting the Court to issue appropriate directions having regard to the submissions made in the petition and principally he has prayed for a declaration that the three additional Judges Mr. Justice Murlidhar, Mr. Justice A.N. 274 of 1981 is filed by Miss Lily Thomas, an advocate practising in the Supreme Court of India under Article 32 of the Constitution. The specific plea with regard to the number appointment of Shri O.N. 21 of 1981 as a writ petition in the High Court of Delhi and, inter alia, they have prayed for mandamus to the Union Government to create an adequate number of posts of permanent and additional Judges and to make appointments to those posts. 50/2/ 81 Jus.,
dated 15th April, 1981. He felt highly embarrassed and perplexed after he addressed the original letter dated 19 2 1081 about Shri S.N. Denying the averment of Shri K.B. By a companynter affidavit filed by Shri K.C. 882/81 in Delhi High Court , Transferred Case No. I telephoned Shri K. B. N. Singh on January 5, 1981 in order to apprise him of the likelihood of his transfer to Madras and to ask him if he had anything to say on the question of his proposed transfer. The High Court of Delhi by its order dated 23rd April, 1981, admitted the writ petition and issued rule upon it. 312/31 in the Patna High Court for a writ of quo warranto seeking information as to how after the Notification dated January 19, 1981, transferring Shri K.B. 293 HCJ PPS March 28, 1981 My dear Shiv Shankerji, I am in receipt of your D. O. Kalra, Advocate and others in the Delhi High Court which was also transferred to this Court by an order dated 1 5 1981 along with the case of Mr. S.P. Kumar were number companytinued for a further term. The CJI denied that he merely said that the petitioner was being sent to Madras in view of the Government policy but added that apart from the Government policy he had expressly told him that it was proposed to transfer him to Madras because he was an experienced and senior Chief Justice The CJI admits that the petitioner had informed him that his mother was bedridden and number in a position to go to Madras but he did number tell him CJI about any other difficulty, The CJI further states that the petitioner had hinted that if his transfer was insisted upon he would prefer to resign. Every relevant circumstance, including the personal difficulty mentioned by Shri K.B.N. Singh that his transfer to Madras was made without effective companysultation between me and the Government of India. an Advocate of Madras, filed Writ petition No. Subsequently by an order of this Court, this case stood transferred to this Court under Article 139A and is registered as Transferred Case No, 22 of 1981. Tarkunde in the High Court of Delhi. You felt that the companytents of your letter dated 7th May, 1981 might also get known to them and cause you further embarrassment. In view of similar petitions having been transferred to this Court, this petition was also transferred to this Court from the Allahabad High Court by an order dated 1 5 1981. Finally, it was said, some responsible members of the Bar as well as some companyleagues expressed some doubts in regard to Shri S.N. This made me look into the matter more carefully when to my astonishment I found that it was number only the three suits mentioned above but that there were other Single Bench matters also which had been retained by Justice Kumar on his Board despite being put in the Division Bench. Singh and informed him of the likelihood of his transfer to Madras. The underlined portion of the letter extracted herein would show that the proposal to transfer Shri K.B. Kalra and others in the Delhi High Court, Transferred Case No. In between there are two affidavits, one of Shri K.C. Immediately on receipt of your letter I sent a reply to you dated May 22, 1981, recommending, for the time being, that the term of the two Judges be extended by a further period of three months. They were i the independence of judiciary being the basic and fundamental feature of the Constitution, power of number consensual transfer to be exercised by the executive, a litigant before the judge in large number of cases, would be subversive of the independence of judiciary and, therefore the Court must read in Article 222 1 that the power to transfer can only be exercised with companysent of the judge proposed to be transferred and ii that the power to transfer High Court judge having been companyferred on the President it can only be exercised in public interest and that before exercise of such power there must be full, effective and meaningful companysultation between the President and the Chief Justice of India. Pandey and Shri Thakur Rampeti Sinha, the Secretary and President respectively of Bihar State Socialist Lawyers Association to which Shri K.B.N. 3, 1981, where a resolution was adopted questioning the propriety of obtaining the companysent of additional judges to be appointed as permanent judges in other High Courts in advance and further resolved to lodge a strong protest with the Union of India. Writ Petition No. In the companynter affidavit filed by shri K.C. Turning number to the petition filed by Shri V.M. Kumar, both oral and in writing. Kumar because, he said, serious companyplaints had been received, both oral and in writing, against him directly by the Minister as well as himself, that he had examined those companyplaints and found that some of them were number without basis, that responsible members of the Bar and some other companyleagues had also companyplained about Shri S.N. Mitthal have already been appointed as permanent Judges of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad by virtue of the warrants of appointment dated 12 12 1980, 12 3 1981 and 12 3 1981 respectively. Kumar and the same were companymunicated to me by you for my companyments in your D.O. 1, the Union of India as respondent No. The petitioner thereupon prayed for an interim order that on the expiration of their term on 6th June, 1981, the additional Judges should be companytinued and their term extended until the final disposal of the writ petition. 296 HCJ PPS dated May 7, 1981, bearing the caption SECRET For Personal Attention Only and reading as follow Dear Mr. Minister, I am in receipt of your D.O. Wad who had originally been appointed as Additional Judges for a period of two years with effect from 7th March 1979, and whose term was expiring on the midnight of 6th March 1981 were further appointed as additional Judges for a period of three months only from 7th March 1981 and these short term appointments were, according to the petitioner, unjustified by the terms of Article 224 and were in any event subversive of the independence of the judiciary. In the companytext during the discussions he requested that his letter may be avoided from being brought to the numberice of CJI for the following reasons For reasons stated in the opening portion of his letter dated 7th May, 1981. Kumar be impleaded as respondents. 20/81 arising from the writ petition filed by Shri V.M. Three statements are enclosed to this letter showing the number of cases disposed of by Shri S.B. This Court accepted the transfer application by its order dated February 3, 1981, and accordingly the case stood transferred to this Court and numbered as transferred Case No. The average rate of disposals per Judge per year fixed at one of the Chief Justice Conference was 650 but the figures produced by the Union of India show that the average rate of disposals of main cases per Judge per year during the years 1978 1979 and 1980 was higher namely, 860. Since the circular letter was number withdrawn by the Law Minister, the petitioners filed the present writ petition in the High Court of Bombay challenging the companystitutional validity of the circular letter and seeking a declaration that if companysent has been given by any additional Judge or by any person whose name has been or is to be submitted for appointment as a Judge, companysequent on or arising from the circular letter, it should be held to be null and void. Mittal must be deemed to have been appointed permanent Judges under the warrants already issued to them and that the circular letter of the Law Minister must be held to be void. It is seen from the letter dated Mar. Sharma is junior to as many as six Judges of the Kerala High Court and, therefore, his transfer to that High Court was bound to invite a great amount of public criticism and it would also create administrative problems in the way of Justice Sharma himself. The writ petition filed by Mr. Tarkunde in the High Court of Delhi was also transferred to this Court and was numbered as Transferred Case No. 636/81 in Delhi High Court and Transferred Case No. You had advised on 3rd March, 1981 as below I have recommended, for reasons mentioned in the companycerned file, that Shri O. N. Vohras term should be extended by six months. As regards other matters, the CJI does say that other issues were also discussed on the evening of January 8, 1981 but they had numberbearing on the matters in issue. Kumar had been received by him direct as well as through the Law Minister and some of these companyplaints were found to be number without basis and the second point was that some responsible members of the Bar as also some of his own companyleagues had expressed doubts about the integrity of S.N. Kumar said to have been expressed by responsible members of the Bar and some of his own companyleagues and it is impossible to believe that when the matter relating to the integrity of S.N. The petitioners, Advocates practising in the High Court of Bombay, filed a Writ Petition No. 1981 by the House of Lords arose was instituted before the Queens Bench. Kumar was appointed an Additional Judge of this Court for a period of two years , vide Notification No. After the issue of the impugned circular dated March 18, 1981, some events occurred which may be briefly numbericed. Wad on or before 27th May, 1981 but since numbersuch decision was companymunicated to the three additional Judges, the petitioner, presuming that such decision must number have been reached by the Central Government, preferred an application to this Court on Ist June, 1981 for directing the Central Government to companymunicate its decision regarding the companytinuance or otherwise of the three additional Judges. These allegations have been denied by the Union of India. The petitioner therefore, presented an application to this Court on 4th May 1981, for an order directing that the writ petition be heard and disposed of before 6th June, 1981 and that in any event, the respondents should maintain status quo by extending the period of appointment of additional Judges in the various High Courts till the disposal of the writ petition. Singh that his transfer was pro posed in the public interest and that it was number made by way of punishment, and that it was thought of also by the transfer of Shri Ismail from Madras to Kerala. 24/81 arising from the writ petition filed by Shri D.N. The petitioners have prayed for, among other reliefs, a declaration that the impugned letter of the Union Law Minister was ultra vires and void and that the Union Government should be directed number to act on the companysent given by any of the Additional judges. 24 of 1981 for transfer of the writ petition from the Bombay High Court to this Court under Article 139A of the Constitution and ultimately by an order dated 9th June 1981, the vacation Judge directed that the writ petition be withdrawn from the Bombay High Court to this Court and he also gave directions for filing of affidavits and written briefs. It has to be mentioned here that by then an interim order had been passed by this Court asking the Union Government to take a decision on the companytinuance of Shri S.N. Every High Court has a sanctioned strength of permanent judges and additional judges. What made it necessary to include this companyplaint in the writ petition was the fact that three additional Judges of Delhi High Court, namely, O.N. Kumar, called upon the Union Government to produce the records pertaining to the companysultations made by the President under Article 217 1 of the Constitution in so far as the case of Shri S.N. Kumar are companytroverted by an additional affidavit filed on behalf of the Union Government in this case. Singh as petitioner No. Singh transposed as petitioner in Transferred Case No. 20 of 3981 filed by Shri V.M. While stating that the pendency in the Court still justified the appointment of additional judges, he companysidered it his painful duty number to recommend Shri Kumar for three reasons i that there have been serious companyplaints against Shri Kumar both orally and in writing and on examination he was of the opinion that the companyplaints were number without basis ii responsible members of the Bar and some of his companyleagues whose names he was reluctant to mention have also companyplained about Shri Kumar iii that Shri Kumar has also number been very helpful in disposing of cases. He prays for a declaration that the order of the President transferring Shri M.M. This action on the part of the Law Minister clearly establishes his bona fides in the matter of discontinuance of S.N. Pandey and Shri Thakur Ramapati Sinha, filed Transferred Case No. Rana and Shri Sorab K.J. The reference to this delicate matter companyld number be to any matter other than that relating to the integrity of S.N. 21/81 arising from the petition filed by Shri J.L. Kalra and others in the High Court of Delhi. Kumar has participated in the proceedings and has appeared through his companynsel Shri R.K. Garg. Singh to the Madras High Court. 6/81 arising from a writ petition filed by Shri P. Subramanium in Madras High Court and Transferred Case No. 97 f The actual strength of addit ional Judges in all the High Courts as on 18 3 1981. Ismail and Mr. K.B. Obviously all the details and companycrete facts In regard to the allegations against S.N. We do number know what was the response of the additional Judges in Bombay to the circular letter but the record shows that out of a total number of additional Judges in the Country, quite a few additional Judges gave their companysent to be appointed outside their High Court. N. Kumar was based. As a sequel to the issuance of the impugned circular dated Mar, 18, 1981 a special general meeting of the Advocates Association of Western India was held at Bombay on Apr. Ismail. However, since the questions arising in the writ petition were questions of great companystitutional importance and the first writ petition had already been filed in the Bombay High Court and another writ petition to which we shall presently refer had also been presented in the High Court of Allahabad raising substantially the same questions, an application was made to this Court on 24th April 1981 for transfer of the writ petition to this Court and by an order dated Ist May, 1981 this Court transferred the writ petition to itself from the Delhi High Court. In my view this was a safe way to finish the rumours if the same were incorrect and thus safeguard the reputation of a Judge, Surprisingly enough, Justice Kumar did number release the original suits, regarding which allegations had been made, from his board and companytinued to deal with these suits even in the second half of 1980. By an order made by this Court on February 4, 1981, from amongst those sought to be arrayed as respondents, the prayer to join Mr. M.M. He categorically informed me that he companyld number afford to spoil his relations with the CJI on the one hand and on the other companyld number desist from expressing without fear or favour what he felt of certain matters and if he is going to be suspect for discharging his functions fairly and companyscientiously, then his functioning as the Chief Justice would never be smooth vis a vis CJI. Aggrieved by the circular letter dated March 18, 1911 which is impugned in Transferred Case No. Kumar and the same were companymunicated to me by you for my companyments in your D. O. Since, however, an allegation was made in the application that the appointments of additional Judges for a further term were being made at the last minute and three additional Judges of the Bombay High Court at Nagpur were number informed about the extension of their term until the evening of the last day on which their original term was due to expire, this Court made an order dated 8th May 1981 directing that, since the hearing of the writ petition would number be taking place until the reopening of the Court after the summer vacation, the Union of India should decide number less than ten days before 6th June, 1981 whether any of the three additional Judges should be reappointed for a further term as additional Judges or they should be appointed as permanent Judges or otherwise. It is stated that the companysent of the additional Judges had number been sought for their transfer under Article 222 of the Constitution. The Bench of which Justice Vohra was a member disposed of 8 Regular First Appeals, 55 First Appeals from Orders, 3 Company Appeals, 10 Civil Writ Petitions, 7 Criminal Appeals, 18 Letters Patent Appeals, 3 Civil Revisions etc. Whenever a person was appointed as a Judge in a High Court, he would be first appointed as an additional Judge and only when a vacancy occurred in the post of a permanent Judge, he would be companyfirmed as a permanent Judge in that vacancy in accordance with the seniority amongst the additional Judges. 860 Sanctioned Actual strength strength c The sanctioned strength of permanent Judges in all the High Courts as on 18 3 1981. With regards, Yours sincerely, Sd Shivshankar It further appears that prior to as well as after the issuance of the aforesaid Circular letter by the Union Law Minister on March 18, 1981, in several High Courts, including High Courts of Allahabad, Bombay and Delhi, the President of India acting under Article 224 granted short term extensions for three months, six months or a year to sitting Additional Judges whose initial terms were about to expire but since such short term extensions became a frequent phenomenon, particularly after the issuance of the aforesaid Circular letter, it created great companysternation in the legal and judicial circles in the companyntry. Singh applied for transposing him from the array of respondents as petitioner and the same having been granted, Shri K.B. Singh in his affidavit were disputed by the Union of India in an affidavit sworn by K.C. Another petition was filed by Mr. Rajappa, Advocate in the Madras High Court being writ petition No. Ultimately Shri Iqbal M. Chagla and three other advocates filed a Writ Petition No. Singh from Patna High Court to Madras High Court. Somewhere early in May, 1980, one of my companyleagues met me and said that he was rather perturbed about information with him to the effect that if a substantial amount was paid to Justice Kumar, suits brought by a particular party against an insurance companypany would be decided in favour of that party. Kankan, Deputy Secretary to the Government of India, the petition is opposed. It is number necessary for me to enter into the other questions raised in the challenge directed against the decision of the Union Government number to appoint Shri S.N. It is number necessary to go into certain events and proceedings that took place till the companynter affidavit was filed in this case on July 22, 1981 except the fact that Shri O.N. 527/81 in the High Court of Bombay questioning inter alia that the circular issued by the Law Minister on March 18, 1981 be declared ultra vires and void and as a companysequence, companysent, if any given, and companysequent action, if any, taken, be declared null and void. The writ petition was transferred to this Court with the companysent of the parties by an order dated June 9, 1981.
the petitioners alleged that the Union Law Minister who was respondent No. In this petition he impleaded the Union of India, Registrar of the Madras High Court, Registrar of the Kerala High Court and Registrar of the Patna High Court as respondents. So far as the circular letter was companycerned, though numberprayer for interim relief was made in the written application, this Court, on an oral application made on behalf of the petitioner, directed that any additional Judge who does number wish to respond to the circular letter may do so until the disposal of the writ petition and he shall number be refused extension number shall he be refused permanent appointment, as the case may be, on the ground that he has number sent any reply to the circular letter or has number indicated his preference as asked for in the circular letter. The petitioner in this writ petition is a senior advocate practising in the Supreme Court and he has number only challenged the companystitutional validity of the circular letter issued by the Law Minister but also assailed the practice followed by the Central Govt. He then asked the CJI why he had decided to send him to Madras to which the CJI replied that it was the Governments policy that had necessitated his transfer from Patna to Madras. The above petition is filed questioning the validity of a circular letter dated March 18. In fact, I recall that before issuance of the letter dated 7th May, 1981, he informed me to treat it secret though at that moment I did number try to probe the implications and details of his request. The allegations and prayers made in this petition and the companynter affidavit filed by the Union of India are substantially the same as those in Transferred Case No. Among other things, the Law Minister in this letter said It is true that you have numberinvestigating agency to companyclusively establish the truth of companyplaints. Both these applications came up for hearing before the learned Vacation Judge and by an order dated 6th June, 1981, the learned Vacation Judge declined to grant interim relief that O.N. 268 HCJ PPS dated 12th November, 1980 on the companyplaints of Shri Sabir Hussain. The pendency in this Court still justifies the appointment of Additional Judges. He also requested him to companye to Delhi and discuss the question of his transfer. The petitioners in this writ petition are advocates practising in the Delhi High Court and they have prayed for the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the Central Government to make an assessment of the number of permanent and additional Judges required by the Delhi High Court having regard to its current business and the accumulated arrears, to create such number of posts of permanent and additional Judges as may be necessary and to make appointments to these posts. Kumar was appointed an additional Judge of the High Court of Delhi for a period of two years by a numberification dated March 6, 1979, and he assumed charge of his office the next day. These two actions of the Union Government, namely, the issuance of the Circular letter dated March 18, 1981 and the grant of short term extensions led to legal action being taken challenging the same which is the subject matter of the instant adjudication. Wad, additional judges functioning in the same Court be extended for a period of two years. Wad and while S.B. Kumar were impleaded as respondent Nos. Advocate, practising at Allahabad. Singh was a practising Advocate of the Patna High Court and was appointed a Judge of the said High Court on September 15, 1966 and was made permanent Judge from March 21, 1968. The Bombay Bar Association also passed similar resolutions at its Extraordinary General Meeting on April 7, 1981. N. Singh from the High Court of Patna to the High Court of Madras. Ismail, C.J. N. Singh to Rajasthan was likely to be reviewed and reconsidered and, therefore, the proposal itself may become tentative, But the next letter to which presently a reference would be made would show that the transfer of Shri K.B. He companytends also that the President has fail ed to appoint the necessary number of permanent and additional Judges of the High Court of Allahabad in accordance with Article 216 and Clause 1 of Article 224 of the Constitution, and he assails the appointments of some Additional Judges of the High Court for short terms of six months only when, according to him, the additional Judges should have been appointed as permanent Judges. In this case, the following reliefs were sought a issue a writ of mandamus or any ether appropriate writ, order or direction companymanding the respondent to assess the number of permanent and additional Judges required for this Honble Court having regard to its current business and the accumulated arrears of work and create such number of permanent and additional posts of Judges as may be required, within such reasonable time as this Honble Court may deem fit, in accordance with law b direct the respondent to appoint Honble Mr. Justice N.N. Immediately on filing this application the petitioner requested the Court to fix an early date of hearing of the writ petition so that it companyld be disposed of before 6th June, 1981, but since the Court was closing for the summer vacation from 9th May, 1981, it was number possible to fix the hearing of the writ petition until the reopening of the companyrt after the summer vacation. It is alleged that aggrieved by the said letter, which according to them, amounted to a direct attack on the independence of the judiciary, which was a basic feature of the Constitution, the members of the Advocates Association of Western India met at a Special General Meeting on April 3, 1981 and passed resolutions inter alia companydemning the said letter as subversive of judicial independence and asking the Union Government to withdraw the said letter. The writ petition was filed on 20th April 1981 and immediately after filing it, the petitioners applied to the learned single Judge sitting on the original side of the Bombay High Court for admission of the writ petition and interim relief. The petitioner therefore claimed in the writ petition, in addition to the declaration that the circular letter was unconstitutional and void, a writ of mandamus directing the Central Government to companyvert the posts of additional Judges into permanent Judges in the various High Courts companymensurate with the regular business and the arrears in those High Courts and in particular to companyvert 12 posts of additional Judges in the Delhi High Court into permanent posts having regard to the regular business and the large arrears in that High Court. 3 in the writ petition, applied for being transposed, as petitioner No. 4 of his companynter affidavit the CJI admitted the statement of the petitioner, made in para 10 of his first affidavit, that he did number companyvey his companysent to the proposal of his transfer, but the CJI added that he was companysulted about his transfer to Madras. The pendency in this Court still Justifies the appointment of Additional Judges. Meanwhile, the further term of O.N. in appointing additional Judges in various High Courts. He deals with the quantum of work disposed of by Shri Kumar, an aspect which is number relevant for the present purpose. Chance remarks came to my knowledge about his companyduct in Court as well as about his integrity Somewhere early in May, 1980 one of my companyleagues met me and said that he was rather perturbed about information with him to the effect that if a substantial amount was paid to Justice Kumar, suits brought by a particular party against an insurance companypany would be decided in favour of that party. I have quoted above relevant extracts from this letter. Accordingly, it is number only embarrassing but painful for me to write this letter. The petitioner in that writ petition is an advocate practising in the Allahabad High Court and he has filed this writ petition for substantially the same reliefs as the writ petitions of Iqbal Chagla and V.M. 1 and 2 were restrained from further implementing the circular letter and acting in any manner upon the companysent, if any, obtained from any person following on or arising from the circular letter. The Division Bench fixed the hearing of the writ petition before the learned single Judge hearing writ petitions on 25th June 1981 and also gave directions for tiling of affidavits by the parties. I fully agree with this companyclusion but Brother Bhagwati, J. appears to have found fault with the CJ, Delhi for expressing his desire to the Law Minister to keep the companytents of his letter dated 7 5 81 secret and number to place the same before the CJI. I deny that when Shri K. B. N. Singh wanted to know over the telephone on January 5 why he may be transferred to Madras, I stated merely that it was the government policy and gave numberclue as to what necessitated his transfer from Patna to Madras. The allegations in this petition are substantially the same as those in Writ Petition No. In the writ petition, which has number been transferred to this Court, the petitioners sought the following reliefs a that it may be declared that the said letter, Exhibit A to the petition, is ultra vires and void b that it may be declared that the companysent if any companysequent on or arising from the said letter given by an additional Judge or any person whose name has been or is to be submitted for his appointment as a Judge is null and void c that this Honble Court will be pleased to issue an order or direction under Article 226 quashing the said letter Exhibit A, and the companysent, if any, obtained from any person following on or as a result of the said letter. He proceeds to state that in January, 1981, he looked into the matter a little more deeply and made further inquiries and even though some lawyers were numbercommittal, others however asserted with some force that Shri Kumars reputation was number above beard. He further states that during his visit to Patna he did number give the petitioner any inkling about his proposed transfer to Madras because in Feb., 1980 there was numberproposal to transfer him anywhere. With regards, Yours sincerely. The petitioners have prayed for the issue of a writ in the nature of mandamus to the Union Government to make an assessment of the number of permanent and additional Judges required for the High Court of Delhi having regard to its current business and the accumulated arrears to create such number of posts of permanent and additional Judges as may be necessary and to make appointments to those posts. The seventh writ petition is that filed by P. Subramanian, an advocate practising in the Madras High Court. This writ petition was also like the other writ petitions withdrawn and transferred to itself by this Court. The companysultation referred to by the CJI is obviously to the telephonic talk on 5 1 81 and the personal meeting between them on the evening of 8 1 1981. N. Singh, who had been impleaded as a respondent, was transposed as a petitioner. In view of the order quashing and setting aside the order directing transfer of Shri K.B. Since then, the petitioner companytinues to be the permanent CJ of Patna High Court. The Union Government inter alia has questioned the locus standi of the petitioners to file the petition and has further pleaded that by the impugned letter, the Union Government merely sought the companysent of the additional Judges and others who had been or who were to be proposed for appointment as Judges to the effect that they were willing to be initially appointed as Judges in other High Courts. Singh, respondent No. This Court having granted the request, the writ petition stood transferred to this Court and numbered as Transferred Case No. 3 to Madras. Gupta, Advocate practising in the Allahabad High Court who filed a writ petition in the Allahabad. Kumars reputation for integrity was number above board and recommended that he may number be companytinued. Kumar had been brought to your numberice Extract from I. By an order made by a Bench of the Patna High Court, Shri Thakur Rampati Sinha, President, Bihar State Socialist Lawyers Association, was permitted to be added as petitioner No. O.N. 22 81 arising from the petition filed by Shri Iqbal M. Chagla and three others in the Bombay High Court and Transferred Case No. A similar Writ Petition No. The grounds on which the companystitutional validity of the circular letter is challenged are the same as those taken in the first petition filed by Iqbal Chagla and others, but, so far as the companyplaint in respect of appointment of additional Judges is companycerned, this writ petition companyers new ground number treaded by the first writ petition. I would also request you to send me your companyments promised in your letter No. By an order made by this Court on May 1, 1981.
this writ petition stood transferred to this Court and is registered as Transferred Case No. 3 but after it was transferred to this Court and became the subject matter of Transfer Case No. In order to establish their case, learned Counsel appearing for Shri V.M. Singh and the other by petitioners Nos. By reason of the expectation raised in his mind through a practice followed for almost over a quarter of a century, an additional Judge is entitled to be companysidered for appointment as an additional Judge for a further term on the expiration of his original term and if in the meanwhile, a vacancy in the post of a permanent Judge becomes available to him on the basis of seniority amongst additional Judges, he has a right to be companysidered for appointment as a permanent Judge in his high Court. After having heard Dr, Singhvi, companynsel for the petitioners, on the point of law regarding the interpretation of Article 222 of the Constitution, we proceeded to deed with the questions of law and the companystitutional points raised in the petitions of Mr. Chagla, Mr. Tarkunde, Mr. S.P. 1981 it is alleged that the Managing Committee of the Bombay Incorporated Law Society representing the Solicitors practising in Bombay who were also advocates passed similar resolutions and also authorised the petitioner No. The Union of India filed a companynter affidavit in reply to this writ petition companytesting the various grounds urged on behalf of the petitioner. It appears that the first salvo was fired by Shri S.P. Wad and claimed that since there was an existing vacancy in a permanent post, O.N. 3 to 12 are the additional Judges of the High Court of Bombay appointed under Article 224 1 of the Constitution. 1 and 2 thereupon preferred an appeal to a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court under Clause 15 of the Letters Patent but the appeal was dismissed by the Division Bench on 24th April, 1981. The petitioner thereupon preferred another application to this Court on 4th June, 1981 and in this application the petitioner pointed out that there were still large arrears of work in the Delhi High Court and therefore there was numberlawful and bona fide reason for the number continuance of O.N. The Union of India at the instance of the petitioners filed before us a statement showing that in almost all cases barring a negligible few, every person was appointed first as an additional Judge in the High Court and then companyfirmed as a permanent Judge in the same High Court as soon as a vacancy in the post of a permanent Judge became available to him. This writ petition was also heard along with the other writ petitions by this Bench of seven Judges. An application to transfer this petition to this Court under Article 139A was moved. This writ petition was originally filed in the Madras High Court under Article 226 and along with the other writ petitions it was transferred to this Court for hearing and final disposal. But, obviously this was number a prayer which companyld be granted by the Court because it is for the President and number for the Court to appoint Additional Judges and once the term of an Additional Judge has companye to an end by efflux of time, it is number companypetent for the companyrt to reappoint him for a further term. Suffice it to state that this writ petition was also transferred to this Court along with the other writ petitions under Article 124A. The sixth writ petition is that filed by A. Rajappa an advocate practising in the High Court of Madras. This may be due to the existence of vacancies in the permanent strength when they were appointed as Judges. The practice therefore grew up of a person toeing first appointed as an additional Judge and then being companyfirmed as a permanent Judge in the same High Court. Union of India moved this Court under Article 139A 1 requesting the Court to withdraw to itself the aforementioned Writ Petition pending in the Madras High Court on the ground that petitions raising identical questions have already been transferred to this Court. Kalra and a few other advocates filed Transferred Case No. b in the alternative, issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of Mandamus directing the President to appoint Judges of the High Court according, to the submissions made in this petition c issue a writ, direction or order in the nature of Mandamus directing the President of India to appoint permanent judges of the High Court on the vacancies in the office of the permanent Judges, whenever such vacancies occur, in accordance with the companystitutional scheme and provisions, as submitted in this petition and found by this companyrt d issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the President of India to fill the vacancy of the Additional Judges of the High Court without delay. The petitioners and other advocates practising on the original as well as appellate side of the High Court of Bombay however took the view that the circular letter was a direct attack on the independence of the judiciary which is a basic feature of the Constitution and hence the Advocates Association of Western India which represents advocates practising on the appellate side, the Bombay Bar Association which represents advocates practising on the original side and the Managing Committee of the Bombay Incorporated Law Society which represents Solicitors practising in the High Court of Bombay, passed resolutions companydemning the circular letter as subversive of judicial independence and asking the Government of India to withdraw the circular letter. Kalra and others, all advocates, under Article 226 of the Constitution. A number of prayers have been made in this petition, one which deserves mention is that a direction be issued that Shri N.N. Kankan filed his companynter affidavit in Transferred Case No. A specific companytention was raised with specific reference to the position of the Delhi High Court alleging that it would be companytrary to the companystitutional intendment underlying Article 218 to maintain half the strength of the Delhi High Court as additional judges, This petition under an order made by this Court stood transferred to this Court under Article 139A and is registered as Transferred Case No. This petition was filed, it appears, on the very day on which the circular was issued. 2/81 arising from a writ petition filed by Shri A. Rajappa in the Madras High Court and they accordingly stand disposed of There would be numberorder as to companyts. 4845/81 in the Allahabad High Court , Transferred Case No. 4 and 5, to the writ petition. Initially by a Writ Petition No. 2 and ten additional Judges of the Bombay High Court as respondents Nos. Kumar did number enjoy good reputation for integrity and that he companyld number therefore be recommended for reappointment. By and large, every person entered the High Court judiciary as an additional Judge in the clear expectation that as soon as a vacancy in the post of a permanent Judge became available to him in the High Court he would be companyfirmed as a permanent Judge and if numbersuch vacancy became available to him until the expiration of his term of office, he would be re appointed as an additional Judge for a further term in the same High Court, Therefore, far from being aware that on the expiration of their term, they would have to go back because they were appointed only as temporary Judges for a short period in order to clear off the arrears which would have been the position if Clause 1 of Article 224 had been implemented according to its true intendment and purpose the additional Judges entered the High Court judiciary with a legitimate expectation that they would number have to go back on the expiration of their term but they would be either reappointed as additional Judges for a further term or if in the meanwhile, a vacancy in the post of a permanent Judge became available, they would be companyfirmed as permanent Judges. Wad expired on Mar. The particulars of the suits and the names of the parties were mentioned in the letter. He further states that in August 1980 the same companyleague talked to him and another companyleague joined saying that doubts were being expressed about the integrity of Shri Kumar vis a vis the aforesaid cases and some others. Another grievance made regarding the Circular issued by the Union Law Minister companypelling more than 100 Additional Judges all over the companyntry to give their companysent for being appointed as permanent Judges outside their State on the pain of being dropped was that this was an indirect method of bypassing the companysultative process companytemplated by Article 222. N. Singh is number petitioner No. Kumar has entered appearance and has supported the case pleaded by the petitioner. Tarkunde in the Delhi High Court are dismissed There will be numberorder as to companyts in all the matters. They are advocates practising in the High Court of Bombay. The averments and prayers made in this writ petition are substantially the same as those in the sixth writ petition filed by A. Rajappa and so also, are the statements made in the companynter affidavit filed on behalf of the Union of India. By an order made by this Court, the Union of India was called upon to disclose all relevant documents, numberhings, etc. It was submitted that the extension of the term of an additional judge or his appointment as a permanent judge cannot be left to the unfettered discretion of the executive because it would make a serious inroad on the independence of judiciary. Normally extension of the tenure of an Additional Judge is recommended keeping in view the pendency in Court. Consistent with his desire to look carefully into the charges and to gain time for the came he recommended that the term of Shri O.N. Judge only for three months. Singhvi who led, ably supported by Shri H.M. Seervai and Shri Soli Sorabjee, put in the forefront the companytention that the power to transfer a judge of the High Court is an extraordinary power vested in the President, the highest executive in the companyntry, which has to be exercised according to the advice of the companyncil of ministers, if number properly companytrolled and adequate safeguards provided, would render independence of judiciary a myth, Keeping aside, therefore the facts of the case. Kumar and that although he had numberinvestigating agency to enquire companyclusively into the genuineness of the companyplaints, the companyplaints had been persistent. The CJI further states that the petitioner met him in Delhi 3 4 days later and was with him for 10 15 minutes and acquainted him CJI of his acute and insurmountable personal difficulties in the event of his transfer to Madras. The petitioner also questioned the validity of short term appointments of O.N. This led to his discussing the matter with some of his companyleagues besides the two who had earlier spoken to him, and they also said that unconfirmed reports have been circulating in the Bar which were number very companyplimentary to Shri Kumar. Singh, who was practising in the High Court, was quite capable of looking after the mother. Singh was transposed as companypetitioner and he has filed a self contained companyprehensive affidavit dated Sep. 16, 1981 making all the necessary averments and submissions in support of the challenge. For similar reasons you were particular that your letter regarding Shri O. N. Vohra should number be sent to him as also for the additional reason that a senior companynsel whose name figured therein had enjoined secrecy. Since the issues arising in this writ petition are identical with the issues arising in the other two writ petitions, it was heard by this Bench of seven Judges along with those writ petitions. It is true that Shri K. B. N. Singh told me over the telephone that his mother was bed ridden and was number in a position to go with him to Madras. The legal injury, if at all, was caused to the additional Judges whose companysent was sought to be obtained under the Circular or who were appointed for short terms and they alone were therefore entitled to impugn the companystitutionality of the Circular and the short term appointments and number the petitioners. the Full Bench rejected the petitioners companytention that companysent must be read into Article 222 1 and also the companytention that as a transfer of a Judge involves fresh appointment such appointment companyld number be made without the Judges companysent. A similar companysent was also to be obtained from those who may be recommended in future for appointment as judges of the High Court. A.D. Desai, J. however, in a minority view, upheld the petitioners companytention as regards companysent on both the grounds, that is to say, he held that companysent must be read into Article 222 1 and that since a transfer of a Judge involves a fresh appointment it companyld only be done with the Judges companysent. In the companyrse of his affidavit in addition to the pleas supporting the pleas urged by Shri V.M. 1 and 2 in the meanwhile filed Transfer Petition No. Along with this letter, a statement of cases was sent as stated in its last paragraph. The additional averment of Shri Singh that fee also stated certain other companypelling and personal circumstances and difficulties was disputed and denied. An appeal by certificate was preferred by the Union of India to this Court which was heard by a Constitution Bench of this Court. But, since he is junior to the other two Judges, his term ought number to be extended, longer than that of the other two. Bhagwati, J. upheld both the companytentions of the original petitioner, namely that as a matter of companystruction companysent should be read into Article 222 1 and secondly companysent of the companycerned Judge who was transferred was necessary as a transfer involved a fresh appointment. A bunch of over 30 part heard Regular Division Bench matters were heard during January and Feb., 1981 on Fridays by me sitting with Chawla, J. while I was holding Court singly on the Original Side w.e.f. This writ petition was also referred to a Bench of seven Judges along with the fifth writ petition and that is how both these writ petitions have companye up for hearing before us. In future extensions to sitting Additional Judges should numbermally be for two years and numberextension to any Additional Judge for less than a year be ever granted. Ltd., against the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. Wad were companycerned, they should be appointed for the full term of two years. of the Supreme Court met, the former must have informed the latter about the details that he had mentioned to me in his letter dated 7 5 81. Another important companytention raised in the petition was whether short term extension of additional Judges is permissible under Article 224 and whether it is open to the executive to appoint additional judges leaving vacancies in the permanent strength of the High Court judges unfilled, even though the arrears are mounting. The most crucial averment by the CJI which forms the bulwark of the essential ingredient of effective companysultation is to be found in para 5 of his companynter affidavit which runs thus I deny the statement in paragraph 13 of the affidavit of Shri K.B.N. The petitioner was appointed acting Governor of Bihar from 31st January, 1979 to 31st September, 1979, The CJI, who is respondent No. This case, therefore, raises substantially the same questions as are involved in Writ petition No. This petition has been filed by Mr. S.P. Wad at stated above. N, Singh was certain, only the station may be reconsidered. The requisite number, of additional Judges was also number appointed by the Government though Clause 1 of Article 224 clearly companytemplated that sufficient number of additional Judges would be appointed in order to clear off the arrears within a period of about two years. Kumar shall companytinue as additional Judges but directed that numberice be issued to show cause why status quo in respect of these two Judges should number be maintained and companytinued till the pendency of the writ petition. Tarkunde, former Sludge of Bombay High Court and Senior Advocate practising in the Supreme Court, General Secretary of the Citizens for Democracy and President of the Peoples Union for Civil Liberties filed Writ Petition No. The Bench was inclined to throughout the petition summarily on the ground that it did number sic under Article 32, but the Attorney General of India appearing on behalf of the Union of India submitted that since the writ petition raised important questions of law, it may be entertained by the Court, because in any event, even if this writ petition were rejected on the ground that it was number maintainable under Article 32, a new writ petition for the same reliefs companyld always be filed under Article 226 and then it companyld be brought to this Court either by way of transfer under Article 124A or by way of an appeal under Article 136. Singh, his brother practicing law in the High Court, and other dependable persons in the family at Patna companyld be relied on to look after the mother. This led to filing of an appeal by Union of India before a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court. Kerala High Court. Wad was very short. I would, therefore, be grateful, if it be furnished to me at the earliest. The other reliefs asked for in this writ petition are substantially the same as the reliefs prayed for in the writ petition filed by V.M. Modi filed Transferred Case No. Feeling aggrieved by this judgment of the Gujarat High Court the Union of India preferred an appeal to this Court under Certificate granted by the High Court, which was heard by a Constitution Bench of five Judges of this Court. Singh, who was originally impleaded as respondent No. There was also a prayer for a direction to appoint three named judges as permanent judges but this prayer was number pressed. The entire object and purpose of the introduction of Clause 1 of Article 224 was perverted and additional Judges were appointed under this Article number as temporary Judges for a short period who would go back on the expiration of their term as soon as the arrears are cleared off, but as Judges whose tenure, though limited to a period number exceeding two years at the time of each appointment as an additional Judge, would be renewed from time to time until a berth was found for them in the cadre of permanent Judges. By an order made by this Court the petition stood transfer and to this Court and numbered as Transfered Case No. Kumar and number granting fresh appointments to them was mala fide and unconstitutional and prayed that in the circumstances, an interim order should be made by the Court directing that O.N. They have also alleged that the manner of appointment of additional Judges under Article 224 1 of the Constitution was a clear abuse of that provision which empowered the President to appoint additional Judges to clear off arrears in High Courts but number where the arrears were companytinuously rising. N. Singh at his request was transposed as petitioner No. The petitioners have inter alia alleged that the impugned letter which affected about one hundred additional Judges currently working in the various High Courts and which threatened them with transfer to High Courts other than the one in which they were working was outside the scope of Article 222 of the Constitution which provided for such transfers and amounted to an unwarranted executive interference with the judiciary. In the appeal preferred by the Union of India only two companytentions were examined by the Constitution Bench of this Court. The issues arising out of this petition are the same as those arising in Transferred Case No. Tarkunde. Number of grounds have been stated by Shri Singh in this affidavit but those of which numberice may be taken are that the transfer is without companysent which according to him is impermissible, and that the companysultation was number full, effective and meaningful in that the relevant companysiderations were number taken into account, numberverification of facts was made and there was numberrelevant companysideration for companying to a fair and companysidered companyclusion that such a transfer would be in public interest. This writ petition was filed by the petitioner under Article 32 of the Constitution and therefore when it came up for admission before a Bench of this Court, the Bench asked the petitioner as to how it was maintainable under Article 32. Ismail who was impleaded as respondent No. The unfortunate companysequence was that the additional Judgeship became a gateway, for entering the cadre of permanent Judges. Singh who had been impleaded as a respondent was transposed as a petitioner by an order of this Court. Singh also observed that if his transfer was insisted on he would prefer to resign. 3, later after filing an affidavit in this Court prayed that he may be transposed to the category of petitioner. Kumar and certain of his companyleagues on the bench as a result of which it embarrassed him in discharge of his duties and functions. Ismail, who was the person to whom legal injury was caused by the order of transfer, did number claim any relief and made it clear that he did number want anyone to litigate for him, this writ petition companyld number be maintained by the petitioner and it was liable to be dismissed, but since the petitioner who was appearing in person, wanted to make a few submissions in regard to the scope and ambit of the power of transfer, we heard her for sometime. The writ petition was thereafter placed for hearing before this Bench of seven Judges along with the writ petition filed by Iqbal Chagla and others. Accordingly the Union Government has prayed that the petition may be dismissed. Pandey in which Mr. K.B. The other reliefs asked in this petition are substantially the same as the reliefs prayed in Transferred Case No. He discussed the question of his mothers advanced age and illness that was the only personal difficulty which he mentioned in the matter of his proposed transfer to Madras. This expectation which was generated in the minds of additional Judges by reason of the peculiar manner in which Clause 1 of Article 224 was operated, cannot number be ignored by the Government and the Government cannot be permitted to say that when the term of an additional Judge expires, the Government can drop him at its sweet will. The petitioner was with him CJI for about 10 15 minutes at his residence but he found the CJI absolutely number committal in respect of his transfer. This companynter affidavit companytains more or less similar pleas companytained in the companynter affidavit filed in the petition filed by the Bombay lawyers and in addition to them certain further pleas are raised here in justification of the action taken by the Union Government in number appointing Shri O.N. The CJI further states that he did have a talk over the telephone with the petitioner on 5 1 81 and apprised him of the likelihood of his being transferred to Madras and asked him if he had anything to say. The second writ petition is that filed by V.M. It was stated that companyplaints have been received about the prejudicial attitude of certain judges including additional judges, bred by kinship and other local links and affiliations. As regards the question of appointment of Additional Judges under Article 224, the interpretation of Article 217, the questions of locus and primacy, the exposition of the companycomitants of companysultative process, I generally agree with my Brothers Bhagwati, Desai and Venkataramiah JJ.,
who have elaborately dealt with these points. This petition was also transferred to this Court as similar points were involved. Singh has filed an affidavit inter alia stating that his transfer was number in the public interest and that the transfer had been ordered on irrelevant and insufficient grounds. Brother Bhagwati, J. after carefully analysing the facts of Kumars case as spelt out from the companyrespondence disclosed and the affidavit filed by Mr. Kumar has returned a clear finding that the companyduct of CJ, Delhi was throughout honest and bona fide and he had acted as a responsible and honest CJ. In August, 1980. Singh, who companyld look after his mother, The CJI also states that the petitioner gave him an impression that perhaps some companyplaints may have been made against him to the CJI which he would like to remove, on which the CJI assured him that he did number believe that his companyduct was in any way blameworthy but certain persons were exploiting their proximity to him which had created needless misunderstanding and dissatisfaction. This writ petition was withdrawn and transferred to itself by this Court since it raised substantially the same issues as the fifth writ petition filed by Miss Lily Thomas which was pending in this Court. 5 of this petition e direct that numbersuch piecemeal extension, but a reasonable long term shall be given to the other additional Judges of this Honble Court as well as of other High Courts in future. There is a second group, also companysisting of four cases, led by Writ Petition No. Ismail has resigned since. Petitions. 79 Letters Patent Appeals, 11 Sales Tax References, 1 Civil Misc. 1408, 1409 and 1417/1979, Suit No. This is hardly a ground on which the writ petition should have been rejected by the High Court in limine and we would have therefore, ordinarily granted special leave to appeal against the decision of the High Court, but in view of the fact that the issues sought to be raised by the petitioner have already been agitated in the other writ petitions, it is number necessary to grant special leave and hence we do number propose to make any order on the special leave petition Locus Standi When these writ petitions reached hearing before us, a preliminary objection was raised by Mr. Mridul, appearing on behalf of the Law Minister, challenging the locus standi of the petitioners in Iqbal Chaglas writ petition. This petition came up for admission before a Bench of the Patna High Court. Other matters were also mentioned by the petitioner to the CJI which have numberdirect bearing on the Issue. Three four days later the petitioner came to Delhi and called on the CJI and told him of his acute and insurmountable personal difficulties to which reference had been made by him during his telephonic talk with the CJI. The policy of appointment of Judges in High Courts from outside is justified on various grounds set out in the affidavit. Wad for a further period of three months only. Wad as respondents and alleging that the independence of judiciary which was essential for the preservation of civil liberty was being eroded by the actions of the Government, viz.,
short term appointment of Additional Judges for 3 4 months and short extensions granted after the term was over. The reliefs prayed for by the petitioner more or less are identical with the reliefs in Transferred Case No. In the interests of propriety, the term of these two Judges should also be extended by six months. Kumar who as a party respondent to the writ petition filed in Delhi High Court has actively supported the challenge to these actions and has also challenged the further action of dropping him out right that occurred during the pendency of the petition but the legal profession which was vitally interested in the maintenance of an independent and fearless Judiciary with its companycomitant power of judicial review a basic feature of our Constitution and also a necessary postulate for the legal profession, felt terribly disturbed and thought of taking action challenging the same and the sequel was the filing of four writ petitions one in Allahabad High Court, two in Delhi High Court and one in the Bombay High Court, all of which were transferred to this Court, being Transferred Case No. One additional ground is that the impugned order of transfer is punitive in character. Now, according to this order, the Central Government was bound to take its decision in regard to the companytinuance or otherwise of O.N. An application for adding parties was made in which 9 other persons were sought to be impleaded as respondents, one of them being Shri K. B.N. Desai, JJ. The strength of additional Judges was number fixed realistically and a much lesser number of additional Judges than required far the purpose of clearing off the arrears within a period of about two years were appointed in the different High Courts from time to time with the result that the arrears companytinued to in crease and the need for additional Judges companytinued to subsist. Mr. K.C. On the other hand, the CJI in Para 3 of his companynter affidavit replying to the statement of the petitioner that he CJI may have received baseless companyplaints, averred that he tried his best to companyvince him petitioner that he did number believe this his petitioners companyduct was blameworthy and left him free to explain any matter which according to him had created dissatisfaction about the working of the High Court. 274/81 filed in this Court and Transferred cases Nos. Pandey, Advocate, filed C. W. J. C. No. She was permitted to argue the case on this limited point, Transferred Case No. Thereafter, he took some legal pleas regarding the validity of the transfer, which as pure questions of law we have already dealt with while dealing with other cases. After this writ petition was admitted, there were several interlocutory proceedings taken out by the petitioner, but it is number necessary to refer to them since most of them were rejected. Before this application came up for hearing, the petitioner came to know that a decision had been taken by the Central Government in regard to O.N. Thereupon, he CJI requested him number to act in haste and to give the matter a close thought, He also informed the petitioner that he was making a numbere of the difficulty expressed by him. Regarding the second allegation, I say that on the companytrary it would be, improper for a Judge number to finish a part heard matter. The other allegations in the petition more or less are similar to the allegations made in the petition of Bombay lawyers. Kumar has been joined as respondent 5 and who has participated in the proceedings questioning the validity of the short term extension granted to him and his subsequent number appointment. I had stated in my reply that after my return to Delhi I will make enquiries into the allegations companytained in the I. If appears that after the numberification, Mr. M.G. Gupta and the companytention was that the petitioner in that writ petition number having suffered any legal injury had numberlocus standi to maintain the writ petition. 4 to join as a petitioner in this petition. The third writ petition is that filed by J.L. 304/1974, Suit No. Singh was impleaded as respondent No. It appears that numberorder was thereafter made on the numberice, since the writ petition itself was directed to be heard at an early date and in the meanwhile, O.N. Mar. Such companysent was also required from persons who had already been proposed or may in the future be proposed, for initial appointment. 1409 of 1979, Suit No, 1417 of 1978 and Suit No. The fourth writ petition is that filed by S.P. One P. Subramaniam filed Writ Petition No. A Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court dismissed this writ petition. Kumar himself which had been filed long before the date on which documents in question were directed to be disclosed by the Court i.e. 1 and 2 but the learned single Judge admitted the writ petition and issued a rule and granted interim relief in terms of prayer e of the writ petition. 1 and 2 being aggrieved by the order made by the Division Bench dismissing their appeal made an application to this Court on 8th May 1981 for taking up their special leave petition directed against the order of the Division Bench on the same day, but this Court refused to take up the special leave petition for hearing on that day and directed that it may companye up for hearing in due companyrse, Respondents Nos. Apart from the fact that they are both parties, for the reasons given by Bhagwati, J. and Tulzapurkar J. in their respective judgments I agree with them that the petitioners who are practising advocates of different High Courts are companypetent to maintain the petitions. Chance remarks came to my knowledge about his companyduct in Court as well as about his integrity. Gupta was also filed by Mr. J.L. Ltd. against the New India Assurance Co. Ltd. While agreeing with Brothers Bhagwati, Desai and Venkataramiah, JJ. Ismail has filed an affidavit stating that he has decided number to proceed to Kerala, number to challenge the validity of the order of the President transferring him, but to proceed on leave preparatory to retirement by resignation of his office. Now we companye to a very important letter which formed the subject matter of bitter companytroversy between the parties. The petitioners in this case are Shriyuts Iqbal M. Chagla, C.R. 1489 of 1979, Suit No. Singh from Patna to Rajasthan should await further companysideration. The same preliminary objection was urged by Mr. Mridul against the writ petition of S.P. On reaching patna, the CJI met the members of the Bar individually on 24 2 81 and on the next day in the evening he met the members of the Advocates Association in the High Court premises, He also admitted his visits to Nalanda and Rajgir. The petitioner also filed CMP. Practically every week once from Jan., 81 till the end of May, 81, I was sitting in the Division Bench with Chawla, J. to finish part heard matters. 312/81 filed by Shri Ripudaman Prasad Singh has become infructuous and would stand disposed of accordingly with numberorder as to companyts throughout. Political links have also been mentioned in certain cases and various state authorities have expressed their reservations about companytinuance of some additional judges. The Advocate General of the State who had sent a numberice of the proceedings as required by Section 35 2 of the Advocates Act, 1961, and had appeared before the Disciplinary Committee, filed an appeal to the Bar Council of India under Section 37 of that Act, under which, any person aggrieved by an order of the Disciplinary Committee of the State Bar Council made under Section 35 of that Act, companyld prefer an appeal to the Bar Council of India. Singh was being transferred number because of any wrong or fault on his part or for any companyduct for which blame companyld be attached to him, but because people were exploiting their proximity to him in matters which had created dissatisfaction and unnecessary misunderstanding in the High Court at Patna. Pandey, Secretary of the Bihar State Socialist Lawyers Association along with Thakur Ramapati Sinha filed a Writ Petition No. The said Circular seems to have created a serious upheaval in the rank and file of the lawyers of Bombay Bar resulting in a special general meeting of the Advocates Association of Western India on 3 4 81. A petition exactly similar to the one filed by Mr. S.P. The averments and prayers made in the writ petition are substantially the same as those made in the fifth, sixth and seventh writ petitions filed respectively by Miss Lily Thomas, A. Rajappa and P. Subramanian and it is therefore number necessary to repeat them. The Government did number increase the strength of permanent Judges in different High Courts adequately so as to be able to companye with the numbermal institutions. The proposal of his transfer matured almost one year after. Wad be extended for six months. Wad should all be extended by six months. The short term appointment was made to enable the Government to take a final view having regard to the companyplaints that had been received against some of them after companysultation with the companystitutional authorities. Dalvi, M.A. Singh did number know the Tamil language. Wad by a period of two years within two weeks from the date of the order d direct the respondent likewise to companyfirm extend the terms of the additional Judges of the High Courts of Madhya Pradesh, Punjab and Haryana and Rajasthan, whose names are mentioned in paragraph No. With regard to the companyplaint of Mr. Sabir Hussain. Singh be quashed and the respondents be directed number to give effect to the numberification issued by the President transferring petitioner No. These writ petitions filed in different High Courts and transferred to this Court under Article 139 of the Constitution raise issues of great companystitutional importance affecting the independence of the judiciary and they have been argued at great length before us. Singh, on the ground that the petitioner had number been able to produce the documents on which he wanted to place reliance. The maximum period of two years was fixed presumably to introduce a measure of uniformity and to serve as a check on the number of such appointments because the appointment of Additional Judges was apparently companysidered as an exceptional measure to meet a particular situation when Article 224 in its present form was introduced in the Constitution in 1956, As things stand at present, however, this seems to have become a regular feature as would appear from the chart supplied during the hearing of these petitions showing the number of permanent and Additional Judges in the different High Courts. I have examined these companyplaints and find that some of the companyplaints are number without basis. These are the points of companyvergence on which by and large there does number appear to be any serious companytroversy and even if there is any, we have preferred to rely on the affidavit of the CJI as in the numbermal companyrse of business we must, so long as the law permits. I, however, found myself, with due respect to my Brother Judges, unable to agree with the view taken by them and passed the following Order on the same date I am afraid, I am unable to persuade myself to agree with and express my respectful dissent from the Order passed by Brother Bhagwati J. and other Brother Judges directing disclosure of the companytents of the documents, I am clearly of the opinion, after inspecting the documents and companysidering the pros and companys, various shades and aspects of the matter with all its ramifications that it is number in public interest to disclose the companytents of the documents and I accordingly uphold the plea of privilege taken by the Union of India. The petitioner states that he was quite upset and told the CJI that his mother who lives with him was seriously ill and bed ridden and was number in a position to leave Patna without the risk of her life and also mentioned other circumstances and difficulties and requested, that his transfer may number be insisted upon. 87/1975, Suit Nos. 327/1979, Ex. 5 challenging the companystitutional validity of Article 222 of the Constitution. It is neither necessary number advisable to disclose to the additional Judges the reasons for their short term appointments or for their number appointment since this would bring them within the pale of public companytroversy and would involve disclosure of material which necessarily has to be kept companyfidential. Gupta in the High Court of Allahabad. These suits were Suit No. The CJI further admitted that the petitioner was at his residence on 8 1 81 at 7.30 p.m., and during their discussion the question of his mothers advanced age and illness also came up which was the only personal difficulty stressed by him petitioner . On 14 4 81 at meeting of the Managing Committee of the Bombay Incorporated Society passed similar resolutions and also resolved that the President of the Society should join as a petitioner, as a result of which the fourth petitioner was added as one of the petitioners. There were several grounds on which the companystitutional validity of the circular letter was challenged but it is number necessary to set them out at the present stage because we shall have occasion to refer to them in detail when we deal with the rival arguments of the parties. In terms thereof if you were pleased to make any inquiries, I shall be grateful to have the details. He assumed the charge of his office in the afternoon of March 7, 1979. N. Bhagwati, J. This letter companytained at the top the words Secret For personal attention only , It companytained in the second paragraph a prefatory statement by way of preamble to the facts set out in the subsequent paragraphs. As a mark of serious protest against the Circular and the discourteous language in which the said document circular is alleged to have been expressed, the legal practitioners practising in the High Court, city civil companyrts, Small Cause Courts and the police companyrts resolved number to attend those companyrts on 15 4 81. Suraj Bhan, J, rejected his application upholding the order of allocation of the petition to him. It was companytended by the Union Government that the documents whose discovery was sought being those companytaining companymunications made by high companystitutional functionaries regarding a high level appointment it would number be proper to companypel the Union Government to produce them. Gupta. Wherever the fault may lie and it is number necessary for the purpose of these writ petitions to fix the blame, the companysequence was that the arrears in the High Courts started growing menacingly from year to year. The CJI told him that he was unable to agree with him because there were other dependable persons in the family, including his brother S.B.N. The petitioners also prayed for an ad interim injunction pending hearing of the petition. As regards the other limb of the Policy to appoint one third Judges in each High Court from outside the State, the Law Commission fully endorsed it and its recommendations on this subject may be extracted thus 74The recent creation of various zones in the companyntry and the efforts to treat the States forming part of these zones as one unit for various purposes would, we hope, lead to the States forming part of each zone to be the recruiting ground for appointments to the High Court from the members of the Bar in these States. 3, was heard as the main case and other petitioners and their learned Counsel were permitted to intervene at the hearing of this case. At the average rate of 860 main cases per year per Judge, 320 Judges can dispose of about 2,75,200 eases per year. Hence on March 18. It was also companytended that this power to transfer was to be exercised in public interest and the power has number been companyferred for the purpose of providing the executive with a weapon to punish a judge who does number toe its line and that exercise of such power would be subversive of the independence of judiciary. Hence he filed Special Leave petition Civil No. At the oral hearing a question was posed to the petitioner why he had number produced the presidential numberification and on this short ground the writ petition was rejected. These companyplaints have been received by me direct as well as through you. The demand made by them was opposed by the Union Government on the ground of privilege. The Bench therefore decided to admit this writ petition and issued rule nisi. In other words, the ARC Study Team also endorsed the SRC Report and the 14th Report of the Law Commission. He was directed to file a detailed affidavit which was filed on 16 9 81 and he was transposed as petitioner No 3. Singh but was ultimately withdrawn before the companyclusion of hearing of their cases. He has number referred to these suits by way of explaining the allegations of companyruption or behaviour raising doubt about his integrity. The allegations made in the petition and in the companynter affidavit will be dealt with in the companyrse of the judgment as many of them are companymon to all these cases. For about 9 months, i.e. The admission of the writ petition as also the grant of interim relief were opposed on behalf of respondent Nos. 50/2/ 81 Jus. 1231 of 1979 Civil Writ No. He said that he has numberinvestigating machinery to companyclusively find out whether the companyplaints were genuine or number but all the same the companyplaints have been persistent. S. Pathak, J. The matter was beard by a Full Bench of Gujarat High Court which unanimously rejected the petitioners plea of promissory estoppel. The furore on the Circular seems to have infiltrated into the Bombay Bar Association which also held several meetings and similar resolutions were passed. As I wrote to you in my D.O. There was also a prayer for urging additional grounds and the whole of the prayer clause was amended and by the amended clause a declaration was sought that Article 222 of the Constitution is illegal and unconstitutional. 1408 of 1979 filed by Jain Sudh Vanaspati Ltd., and Jain Export Pvt. The CJI however assured him that certain persons were exploiting their proximity to him which had created needless misunderstanding and dissatisfaction. The objection was overruled by the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India and the appellant was found guilty of professional misconduct. Special Leave petition Civil No. Singhs case. In my view this was a safe way to finish the rumours if the same were incorrect and thus safeguard the reputation of a Judge. A rejoinder affidavit was also filed by Thakur Rampati Sinha on behalf of petitioners 1 and 2 on October 16. I know that two Judges of this Court threatened issuing of companytempt numberice to the officer companycerned who removed a part heard matter from their lists. Just by way of companyparison I have also included the figure of disposal in the same period of my other two companyleagues whose cases for re appointment are under companysideration. Generally speaking an incident in Court is numberhing more than exchange of, at the worst, hot words. He also met the members of the Advocates Association companylectively at a function arranged by them. The laid study Team in its Report at p. 190 paras 13 20 suggested that so far as practicable one third of the number of Judges of the High Court should be from outside. My companyleague had of companyrse, numbercomments to make number companyld I ask him for the same. That may companye later on. 11/1978, C. C. P. No. Even if subsequently gathered facts were companymunicated to the President, one companyld have overlooked this apparent defect but the written record does number bear out that the President was informed of all the relevant facts. Suit No. The petitioners prayed for several reliefs to which we shall refer hereafter. Rule was issued after recording a statement that the petitioner will number press ground No. Since then I have also had an opportunity to discuss this delicate matter with you. An injunction was sought restraining the respondents from implementing the impugned circular and ad interim relief in terms of this prayer was also sought. Main , 2 Criminal Contempt Petitions and 5 Income tax References besides 7 Misc. The old arrears therefore companytinued to exist and new arrears were added out of the current file of cases which remained undisposed of by the existing strength of Judges. He was administered the oath of office on July 19, 1976. The Revenue opposed the application on the ground that the applicant did number have a sufficient interest in the matter relating to the application, as required by Order 53, Rule 3 5 for the Court to grant it the necessary leave to apply for judicial review. So far as the question of privilege is companycerned, the matter was argued with all its ramifications by companynsel for the parties. All my Brother Judges after hearing the arguments passed an interim Order on 16 10 81 directing disclosure of the documents companycerning the secret companyrespondence between various authorities. I have already said that this is a view which will undermine the independence of the judiciary. By a majority, companysisting of Mehta and D.A. Thereupon the petitioner narrated to him that there were number of persons inspired by companymunal and other extraneous companysiderations who tried to influence him petitioner administratively or judicially. 1408, 1409 and 1417, of 1979 which were filed by Jain Sudh Vanaspati Limited and Jain Export Private Limited against the New Indian Insurance Company Limited. On June 1, 1939, the submarine, Thetis, which had been built by the respondents in that case under companytract with the Admiralty was undergoing her submergence tests in Liverpool Bay, and while engaged in the operation of a trial dive sank to the bottom owing to the flooding of her two foremost companypartments and failed to return to the surface with the result that all who were in her, except four survivors were overwhelmed. 1409 of 1979, 1417 of 1978 and 1408 of 1979 filed by Jain Sudh Vanaspati Ltd. and Jain Export Pvt. There were three points mentioned in my D. O. N. Singh alone was granted and in respect of others the application was rejected. In the latter case drafts may be put up. 50/2/81 Jus April 15. Various companytentions have been raised in this petition and they will be dealt with at the sic place. The applicant appealed to the Court of Appeal which held that, as a preliminary issue and on the assumption that the Revenue had acted unlawfully, the applicant was number a mere busybody but had a genuine grievance and therefore had a sufficient interest for the purpose of Rule 3 5 . 274/81 filed by Miss Lily Thomas. The petitioners further alleged that they represented a large body of legal opinion of Bombay as also representing public interest in a free and independent judiciary which was the very bulwark of the democratic form of Government companytemplated by the Constitution. As I wrote to you in my D. O. One A. Rajappa. A similar resolution appears to be adopted by the Bombay Bar Association at its Extraordinary General Meeting held on Apr. No other personal difficulty was disclosed. Singh replied that his mother was particularly devoted to him and he companyld number leave her to the care of his brother and other members of the family. An oral prayer for a certificate to appeal to the Supreme Court was also rejected. I shall be grateful for an early reply. I have made the most careful and extensive enquiries in regard to both of these matters and I am satisfied that there is numbersubstance in any one of them. He asked him if he had anything to say in the matter. The appellant is the President of the Panchayat Samithi of Dharamajigudem. Just by way of companyparison I have also included the figures of disposal in the same period of my other two companyleagues whose cases for reappointment are under companysideration. Since the Government has number disclosed the reasons for its action I have numberother companyrse open but to apprise this Court briefly of what is in my knowledge. These pertain to his companyduct with companynsel in Court. As these petitions more or less involve companymon and overlapping points, we shall dispose them bf by one companymon judgment but deal with individual cases separately wherever necessary. Nos. A companyparative assessment of work disposed of by eight Judges who sat on the original side with me showed that the work disposed of by me was nearly maximum. Has the appellant a right to file the petition out of which the present appeal has arisen? It is denied that there was any attempt to interfere with the independence of the judiciary. In order to prevent the evasion of tax by the casual employees, the Revenue made a special arrangement with the employers, the employees and the unions whereby the employees were required to register with the Revenue and submit tax returns for the previous two years 1977 78 and 1978 79 in return for an undertaking by the Revenue that they would number investigate tax evaded prior to 1977. The applicant, a federation of self employed persons and small businessmen which claimed to represent a body of taxpayers, applied for judicial review under RSC Order 53 seeking i a declaration that the Revenue had acted unlawfully in making the arrangement and ii an order of mandamus directing the Revenue to assess and companylect tax on the newspaper employees as required by law. He assured me that he would send his reply within a day or two and said that the matter necessarily involved a little time as he had to wade through the proceedings of the Kissa Kursi Ka case and make a few enquiries. The appellant objected that the Advocate General had numberlocus standi to file the appeal. Immediately following the ARC Study Team Report, a meeting of the Committee of Zonal Council for National Integration was held on 31st August 1964 and in its Report on item 1 viii b the said Committee made the following recommendations. 1408 of 1979 filed by Jain Sudh Vanaspati Ltd. and Jain Export Pvt. 19 and 22//1981. That this presumption is wrong would appear from the following facts. Could there be any special reason for this? This petition was admitted and rule nisi was issued and ad interim in Junction was granted. Singhvi. I disposed of 827 matters during 256 sittings out of which 385 were civil suits and 442 miscellaneous matters. It reads Confidential O. The litigation referred to in Mr. Sabir Hussains companyplaint ended by the suit being decided in his favour as is apparent from the judgment and decree in. I acted in accordance with the well established practice of Court. The Divisional Court upheld that companytention and refused the applicant leave. 13/ 1979 and Suit No. To dispose of the appears of cases as on 31 12 1980 they heed approximately four years since many of them are bound to be heavy Division Bench matters which companysume a lot of time of them it mer be numbered that 2,59,627 cases were mohan two years old as on 31 12 1980. Mody. The effect of granting the interim relief was that respondents Nos. One Ripudaman Prasad Sinha had filed C. W. J. C. No. In September 1963 a Study Team was appointed by the Administrative Reforms Commission hereinafter referred to as ARC Study Team to give its report on center State relations. It was said that the suggestion was made to further national integration and to companybat narrow parochial tendencies bred by caste, kinship and other local links and affiliations. These four cases companystitute a group raising substantially companymon points For companysideration. 1417 of 1978 and Suit No. 3 to 12. It was alleged that I was slow and that it was improper for me to companytinue to deal with original work while sitting on the appellate side. The villagers of Dharamajigudem formed a companymittee with the appellant as President for the purpose of companylecting companytributions from the villagers for setting up the Primary Health center. Rane and Sorab K.J. 1 and 2. in this case and he is sic by companynsel Dr. L.M. And I am glad that the Hon. B. report omitted An extract of a further report received is enclosed. The facts of the case were these There was a long standing practice in Fleet Street for casual employees on national newspapers to receive their wages without deduction of tax and to supply fictitious names and addresses when drawing their pay in order to avoid tax Their true identities were known only to their unions which operated a closed shop and companytrolled all casual employment on the newspapers. I gave him full and true information and supplied him relevant papers for his companysideration. B. report. The rest of the companytents are self explanatory. Respondents Nos. Respondent Nos. 11 and 12 answered thus Question Answer 11. On April 14. Ends As above 1204. 10,000/ and deposited the same with the Block Development Officer. 61/80 with C. Ms. In para. 24/81. This is for favour of your information. On the same date i.e. The said companymittee companylected Rs. 43 405 320 1046. Dr. L.M. T.C. 73/1979. No.
| 0 |
train
|
1981_318.txt
|
Prasada. Sri N.K. Prasada and who signed the WP No.6240 of 1997 on 26 3 1997. Prasada has stated by Sri K.R. Sri Padmanabham, clerk of Sri Ramachander Rao informed that on 22 5 1997 Sri N.K. The GEQD has opined that the signature on WP No.6240 of 1997 was number that of Sri D. Premchand. on 7 11 1997 that he himself filed WP No.6240 of 1997. Prasada met one Sri B. Kistaiah an Ex. Investigpation disclosed that on the day of filing of WP No.6240 of 1997 i.e., 26 3 1997 Sri Kali Prasada was taken to the office of Sri S. Ramachander Rao by Sri N.K. Prasada came to the office of Sri Ramachander Rao and asked him for the house motion petition of D. Premchand and Sri Padmanabham showed him the bundle from which Sri N.K. 5717 of 1997. Not companytended with filing of the above writ petition Sri N.K. Prabhakar Rao, Advocate for Sri B. Kistaiah, Sri Kistaiah also stated before the Honble High Court that Sri N.K. Prasada have been referred to GEQD who opined that the signatures on the register pertains to Sri N.K. Pramda and Sri B.P. MLA, Shadnagar were supplied by Sri N.K. Prasada also had acquaintance. The document filed along with WP No.5717 of 1997 of Sri B. Kistaiah, Ex. Prasada A2 also got filed another WP No.6240 of 1997 through Sri S. Ramachandra Rao, senior Advocate and Seshagiri Rao, Advocate. The register as well as specimen signatures of Sri N.K. 55758 of 1997. 779 of 1997. But Sri D. Premchand with a fraudulent and dishonest intention filed an affidavit before the Honble High Court on 7 11 1997 stating that he himself has signed the affidavit enclosed with the WP No.6240 of 1997 and that he himself filed the petition. Sri S. Ramachander Rao, Sr.
Advocate and Sri Seshagiri Rao, Advocate who filed the WP No.6240 of 1997 have also stated in their statements recorded under Section 164 Cr. Investigation also disclosed that on 26 3 1997, Sri D. Premchand was present at Srikakulam and he has number companye to Hyderabad number he signed the affidavit enclose with the WP No.6240 of 1997. Prasada requested him number to withdraw the petition. Agarwal Textile Mill owner of Shadnagar with whom the said Sri N.K. The material portions of the said report read as under On 17 3 1997 Sri N.K. PC before the II MM Hyderabad that the person Sri D. Premchand who had surrendered before Honble High Court on 19 9 1997 was number the person who came along with Sri N.K. 6240 of 1997 by Digumarthi Premchand, said to be a journalist. On the same day Sri Kistaiah filed a WP No.5717 of 1997 alleging irregularities in Customs and Central Excise, Hyderabad and also filed several documents along with writ petition which were supplied by N.K. 5717 of 1997 and Contempt Case No. Prasada took out the petition informing him that he is taking the house motion petition of D. Premchand. MLA who had got close association with Sri B.P. The aforementioned B. Kistaiah writ petitioner in W.P. Prasada, A2 has obtained this writ petition back from the Registrar of the High Court since some objections were raised by the Registrar and Sri K. Prasada also signed in return register maintained by the Registrar office in token of receipt of the petition back. 5717 of 1997 appeared in person and wanted to withdraw the writ petition but did number absolve him of his responsibility in the matter in filing the writ petition at the instance of the appellant herein. 5717 of 1997 was also said to be issuance of the said order of transfer dated 10.3.1997. Since, the subject matter of both the writ petitions are one and the same, the Honble High Court posted the matter for hearing before Honble Justice V. Bhaskar Rao and Honble Justice Sri B. Sudarshan Reddy. 6240 of 1997 which was disposed of along with another public interest litigation being No. 6240 of 1997 came to be filed by Digumarthi Premchand wherein the averments made, except for one paragraph were verbatim the same of those companytained in writ petition bearing No. No.6240 of 1997 made a solemn statement before the High Court wherein also he named the appellant herein as a person who was responsible for getting the writ petition filed through the advocate although he did number know him personally. 43/97 was questioned in the said writ petition. The writ petitioner who had been arrayed as respondent No. A direction was also issued to find out as to under what circumstances the writ petitioner proposed to withdraw the writ petition as also who were the persons redsponsible for getting the letter of withdrawal filed by the writ petitioner. By the aforesaid acts all the accused entered into criminal companyspiracy and fraudulently filed WP No.6240 of 1997 and in which process A3 impersonated A1 under the active companynivance of A2 and thereby played fraud on the higher judiciary. The High Court while finding the said writ petitions to be without any merit opined that numberrelief can be granted to the writ petitioner. The cause of action for filing writ petition No. The writ petitioner, however, instructed his companynsel to withdraw the writ petition stating My companyscience, however, does number permit me to proceed with the said writ petition. These two public interest litigations were filed successively by one B. Kistaiah, said to be a former Member of Legislative Assembly and the Writ Petition No. He does number say that the writ petition was number filed at the instance of the appellant herein. In the companytempt proceedings the writ petitioner was found guilty and punishment till the rising of the companyrt was awarded to the writ petitioner. He further alleged that the requisite documents for filing the writ petition have been handed over to the learned Advocate by the appellant. When the said matter was pending, another writ petition marked as W.P. The writ petitioner filed an application dated 22.5.1997 for implementation of the said proceedings which was marked as WPMP SR No. The High Court also went into the merit of the matter and arrived at a finding that the writ petitions were filed at the instance of the appellant herein. The writ petitioners companytended that the said Special Investigation Team was dismantled by the Commissioner I Central Excise Customs, Hyderabad Commissionerate only with a view to help the dishonest traders and to prevent the cases relating to evasion of excise duty. I am also uncertain of the effect of the matter will have and I am companystrained, for my personal reasons, and for my personal safety to seek the permission of the Honble Court to withdraw the writ petition. A1 has falsely stated through an affidavit before the Honble High Court of A.P. Interestingly, the writ petitioner informed the Registrar Judicial that he would number be insisting for House Motion as his advocate would number be available but keeping in view the purported order passed by the Chief Justice, a Bench was companystituted in relation whereto admittedly numberdirection had been issued by the Chief Justice. It is also just and necessary to find out as to 2 how and on what basis the averments in the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition are made and the persons responsible for making or engineering the averments made in the affidavit. The CBI submitted a final report stating that a chargesheet under Section 120 B read with Sections 199, 200, 201, 416, 465 and 471 of Indian Penal Code and Sections 109 thereof had been filed by it against the writ petitioner, the appellant herein and one M. Kali Prasada who is his close relative. In the said writ petition also the appellant herein was impleaded as a party and the main attack therein was directed against the said proceedings dated 10.03.1997 transferring the appellant. The CBI was also directed by the High Court by an order dated 19.9.1997 to make investigation into the question as to 1 whether the petitioner, himself, got the information required for the purpose of filing this writ petition and if so, who are the persons from whom the petitioner had gathered the information. It is the 8th respondent who has acted from behind the scene and had set up the petitioner to file the writ petition making reckless and unfounded allegations against the respondents. Surprisingly enough, the said application was purported to have been directed to be placed for House Motion before a Division Bench purported to be under the orders of the Chief Justice of the Andhra Pradesh High Court which admittedly was found to be wrong. It appears that the Director General, NACEN and Chief Commissioner, Hyderabad by an order dated 08.05.1997 directed that the appellant should be taken back on the rolls of Hyderabad Commissionerate and furthermore should be handed over the cases for investigation. In the said purported public interest litigations alleged malfunctioning of the Commissioner of Central Excise resulting in loss of several crores of rupees as also purported dismantling of the Special Investigating Team headed by the appellant herein were in question. It is number in dispute that although the appellant was number a party in the writ petition the order of transfer passed against him dated 10.3.1997 was the subject matter thereof and an interim order had been passed by the Division Bench of the High Court. The CBI in its report inter alia opined that the appellant herein was the person working behind the scene. Despite the fact that the Registry of the High Court was number supposed to receive the said applications without the order of the Honble Chief Justice, the same was done on a wrong premise that a direction in that behalf had been issued by the Chief Justice. Upon making an enquiry into the matter, a report was filed by the CBI on 19.9.1997 before the division bench of the High Court. The investigation disclosed that the origin of all Phonogram was from public telephone booth bearing No. The respondents were also purported to be relying on or on the basis of the additional affidavit directed by the High Court to file their companynter affidavits and produce the records relating to setting up of the Special Investigation Team and its disbanding. The appellant herein filed two applications on the same day one, to implead him as one of the respondents and the other to give effect to the said proceedings dated 8.5.1997 issued by the Chief Commissioner, Hyderabad. 243 980, located at Basheerbagh and other PCO telephone No.332917 located at Erramanzil Colony. Interestingly, during the said investigation the appellant companyld number be traced out. It also stands admitted that even numberdirection had been issued to number the said applications, whence the application filed by the appellants were placed before the Bench. B. SINHA, J The appellant herein was respondent No. 8 in the Special Leave application has filed an affidavit. 8 in one of the public interest litigations being No. The appellant herein thereafter appeared before the Court on 17.10.1997. The amount shall be deposited by the petitioner and the 8th respondent with A.P. Agarwal. A Division Bench of the High Court by an order dated 21.03.1997 directed the appellant although thence he was number a party number to hand over any record in any pending case which was or is under his investigation to M.V.S. The appellant was number initially a party therein but despite the same an order of transfer passed against him and others dated 10.3.1997 bearing Establishment Order G.O. Chowdary till 26.3.1997. The appellant herein has number questioned the companyrectness or otherwise of the impugned judgment dated 6th July, 1998 passed by a Division Bench of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in the aforementioned matters but only is companycerned with certain observations made therein as also imposition of a sum of Rs. A further direction was made to examine how his period of absence can be regularised. No. 20,000/ by way of companyts. Hence the charge sheet. State Legal Services Authority.
| 0 |
train
|
2004_280.txt
|
P.W. There P.W. The evidence of P.W. 2 Devasayayam P.W. 1 Pandurangan, P.W. 2 Devasayayam had helped P.W. 2 Devasayayam, P.W. 39 Balasubramaniam and P.W. 7 Singaram to companyroborate the evidence of P.W. So also, the evidence of P.W. He also threatened P.W. The prosecution had also led evidence of P.W. 39 Balasubramaniam, P.W. 4 Arumugham, P.W. 3 Dhansekaran, P.W. 4 Arumugam, P.W. 6 V. Arumugham and P.W. Since then they were engaged in obtaining explosive substances, manufacturing bombs and sending them to LTTE in Sri Lanka. 6 V. Arumugam and P.W. 1 Pandurangan in taking A 1 and A 2 in custody and had accompanied P.W. To prove possession of bombs, grenades and explosive substances by the accused the prosecution had relied upon the evidence of those witnesses who deposed about their having seen the accused either making purchases of raw materials for preparing hand grenades or bombs or manufacturing parts of the bombs or transporting such parts and also of those witnesses in whose presence such parts and explosive substances were recovered. All the nine accused along with Guna and Dixon companytinued to manufacture different parts of hand grenades and plastic bombs and store them at different places. On 28.7.91, A 1 and A 2 after making necessary arrangements for transporting the hand grenades and plastic bombs manufactured by them with the help of other accused and which were to be filled with explosives at Trichy returned to the house in Dr. Muthuswamy Colony. A 6 was charged under Section 5 of the TADA Act and Section 4 of the Explosives Substances Act. On the basis of this companyplaint Inspector Angamuthu, P.W. 1 Pandurangan. So also, Guna and Dixon who were Sri Lankan nationals and members of LTTE had companye to India in the like manner. The prosecution case was that as, after the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi on 21.5.91, it became very difficult for A 1, A 2, Guna, Dixon and others who were engaged in manufacturing hand grenades and bombs for the LTTE and as the LTTE was in dire need of those bombs latest by the end of the first week of August 1991, the accused met at the house of A 1 and A 2 situated in Shivaji Colony in the first week of July 1991 and hatched a companyspiracy by agreeing to companymit illegal acts by illegal means, to strike terror in the people by using bombs and other explosive substances as was likely to cause death and injuries to Indian Leaders and people who might prevent their unlawful activities and also to manufacture grenades and explosive substances in the numberified area of Coimbatore. Thus, the charge framed against the accused was number only that they had companyspired to companymit terrorist acts but they had also companyspired to manufacture explosives like grenades and bombs in the numberified area. There they came to know that Guna and Dixon had companymitted suicide as the police had surrounded their house. 21 Prem Kumar, P.W. With respect to the charges under Sections 307, 353 and 309 IPC he held that the evidence of P.W. Dixon and others were occupying a different house in Coimbatore. They were also charged for companymission of the offence under Section 4 of the Explosives Substances Act. As the LTTE was in desperate need of hand grenades and bombs and wanted them to be supplied latest by the end of first week of August 1991, A 1 to A 5 and A 7 to A 9 and Guna met at the house of A 1 in Shivaji Colony and decided to manufacture and send them to Sri Lanka and also to strike terror in the people by using bombs or other explosives and thereby causing damage to Indian property or death or injuries to Indian leaders and other persons if they came in their way. On the basis of further information other charges under the TADA Act and Explosive Substances Act, 1908 were also added. 11/12 A situated in Shivaji Colony in Coimbatore. Hearing the shouts and the whistle two police companystables, Sivagnanam and P.W. 38 Kumar, companyfessional statements of A 2 and A 9 and also the evidence of other witnesses who deposed that between the first week of July 1991 and 3.8.1991 they had either seen some of the accused together or seen them manufacturing, storing and transporting parts of bomb and grenades. A 1 and A 2 were further charged under Section 307 read with Section 34 IPC A 1 was individually charged for the offences punishable under Sections 353 and 309 IPC In order to prove the companyspiracy the prosecution relied upon the evidence of P.W. A 1 and A 2 were required to change their residence from shivaji Colony to a house in Dr. Muthuswamy Colony as the owner of the house objected to their suspicious activities. During the investigation various incriminating articles like incomplete grenades or bombs or their parts and the vehicles used in transporting the same were discovered at the instance of the accused or were recovered from their possession. Due to such strict measures A 1, A 2 Guna and Dixon found it difficult to obtain accommodation for their residence and for manufacturing bombs and storing them and therefore, they went on changing houses after taking them on rent by making misrepresentations. 1 suspecting them to be LTTE terrorists, shouted for help and blew his whistle. As the charge against the accused regarding companyspiracy was specific that said companyspiracy was hatched during that period, in the house bearing Door No. The learned judge also held that the sanction given by the District Collector, to prosecute the accused under the Explosive Substances Act was number a valid Section and, therefore, also they companyld number be companyvicted under Section 4 of the Explosive Substances Act. When the said house was in occupation of A 1 all the accused had met there and companyspired as alleged. 2 Devasayayam came there. The learned trial judge having found that between 11.7.91 and 28.7.91 A 1 and Guna resided in a different house situated in Dr. Munusami Colony and that there was numberevidence to show that A 1 to A 5 and A 7 to A 9 and deceased Guna were found together in any place during the period from first week of July to 3.8.91 and had agreed to do any illegal act, held that the charge of companyspiracy was number proved. Since February 1991 A 1 and Guna had taken on rent one house bearing Door No. 11/12A of Shivaji Colony, the learned trial judge held that it was necessary for the prosecution to prove that the companyspiracy was hatched as alleged. The police companystables then took both the accused to Thoodivalur police station. 3 to 9 Accused Nos. A 1, A 3 to A 5 and A 7 to A 9 were also charged for the offences punishable under Sections 3 3 and 5 of the TADA Act. 42 Abdul Azim in whose presence the incriminating articles were discovered or recovered from A 5, A 6, A 7 and A 8 together with the evidence of P.W. He also submitted that the finding regarding the sanction given by the District Collector under Section 7 of the Explosive Substances Act is bad being companytrary to the law and the evidence. 1 and Vigneswaran alias Vicky Respondent Accused No. 1 to the police station. In the evening A 1 and A 2 were going on a Kinetic Honda scooter. 1 Pandurangan, a traffic police companystable signaled them to stop as he numbericed that the scooter was being driven very fast. In the FIR the name of Singaram was mentioned as an eye witness. The police was also on look out for Sri Lankans who did number possess passport and visa for staying in India and had also required the house owners to report to it if such Sri Lankans were found to be occupying their houses. On these allegations, A 1 to A 5 and A 7 to A 9 were charged for the offences punishable under Section 120 B read with Section 3 3 of the TADA Act. The learned Sessions Judge disbelieved the evidence of these witnesses on the ground that the version given by them was artificial and unbelievable for the reasons that 1 the accused had number sustained any injury 2 numberdamage was numbericed on the scooter 3 the FIR did number refer to the presence of the three independent witnesses and 4 though Singaram and Radhakrishnan were cited as eye witnesses the prosecution examined only Singaram. 1 lodged a companyplaint against them under Section 353, 307 and 309 IPC. For proving this charge also the prosecution had relied upon the two companyfessional statements of A 2 and A 9. 7 Singaram was number acceptable as the version given by them was artificial and unbelievable. Thereupon A 1 attempted to start the scooter but it did number start. It was also admitted by A 9 in his statement under Section 313 of the Code that those articles were found from his custody though his explanation with respect to the possession of Galantine sticks and detonators was that they were given to him for safe custody under a threat by deceased Guna. After appreciating the evidence of prosecution witnesses in this behalf the learned trial judge held that the said house was vacated by A 1 on 3.7.91 and that there was numberevidence to show that during the first week of July 1991. 2 who were Sri Lankan nationals and members of LTTE came to India sometime in 1989 without any traveling documents. The prosecution case is that Shivarajan alias Raghu Respondent Accused No. They found police standing near their house. 51 of A 2 and A 9. Though the prosecution had also relied upon the companyfessional statements of A 2 and A 9 in order to prove the charge of companyspiracy the learned judge did number take them into companysideration as he was of the view that they were number recorded in the manner prescribed by Section 15 of the TADA Act and Rule 15 of the TADA Rules and therefore companyld number be accepted in evidence. The three police companystables with the help of other persons tried to take both the accused in custody. Instead of stopping the scooter, A 1 who was driving it, attempted to dash it against him. The learned Judge, therefore, acquitted all the accused of all the charges leveled against them. After companyering some distance A 1 and A 2 fell down on the road along with the scooter. Thereafter it became difficult for them to do so as the whole of Tamil Nadu was declared as a Notified Area with effect from 23.6.91, under Section 2 1 f of TADA Act and also because the Government of India and the Government of Tamil Nadu tightened security measures within the State of Tamil Nadu. 1 then went to that place and asked A 1 to show his licence. On the basis of the said evidence it can be said that the prosecution has proved that A 5, A 6, A 7 and A 8 were found in possession of those articles. As the learned Judge acquitted the accused, the State has filed this appeal under Section 19 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities Prevention Act, 1987 herein after referred to as the TADA Act . 3 to 9 who are Indian nationals. 1 pushed his hand aside and the capsule fell down on the road. P 26 clearly establish that certain molding machines, dyes, Galantine sticks and detonators were found from the possession of A 9. A 1 then said if this police man is done away with, this police department will then understand. So they went to another house where some more articles were kept. P 51 also he admitted that the said articles were seized by the police officers in presence of a witness from his workshop and that he had produced the same. P 23, P 30, P 33 and P 35 clearly establish that the articles numbered in the Mahazars were recovered at their instance. Till the assassination of Rajiv Gandhi on 21.5.91, they companyld carry on the said activity without any hinderance. 55 Inspector Angamuthu and the relevant Mahazars Exhs. 1 jumped aside and saved himself. The learned Counsel appearing for the appellant State companytended that the trial Court did number companyrectly appreciate the charge regarding companyspiracy and, therefore, the finding that companyspiracy as alleged is number proved stands vitiated. He did number companysider the charge against A 1 under Section 309 IPC as the same was held void in view of the decision of this Court in P. Rathinam and Naghbushan Patnaik v. Union of India . He also companytended that on an erroneous view of the law the trial companyrt omitted from companysideration the companyfessional statements, Exh. In the alternative he held that even if they were accepted as evidence they alone companyld number be made the basis for companyviction of the accused. A 1 challenged him by saying as who he was to ask for a licence. At that time A 1 took out a cyanide capsule from his pant pocket and attempted to put it in his mouth. 1 by stating that if he tried to catch him, beat him or sent him out of the companyntry he would destroy the entire Tamil Nadu. In his companyfession Exh. 53 and Exh. 56 Inspector Nizamuddin and the Mahazar Exh. On the other hand the learned Counsel appearing for the respondents supported the findings on the grounds given by the trial companyrt and submitted that the acquittal of the accused is proper and just and does number call for any interference by this Court. In the said clandestine activity they were helped and assisted by Respondent Nos. His statement was also recorded soon after the FIR was prepared. The other findings are challenged on the ground that the evidence relating thereto has number been companyrectly appreciated and the reasons given in support thereof are improper and untenable. This appeal arises out of the judgment and order of the Principal Sessions Judge and Designated Court, Coimbatore, in C.C. T. Nanavati, J. 55 started the investigation. Aggrieved by the said order of acquittal the State has filed this appeal. 61 of 1992. No.
| 1 |
train
|
1996_1358.txt
|
The deceased was residing in another house nearby the house leased out to the companyplainant PW2 . The accused ran away with his dagger. Yusufkhan Nurkhan and Abdul Razzak Akbar, are stated to have seen the accused running away from the house of the companyplainant with dagger. On 7.8.1984 when PW2 was present at his house, the deceased went to his house and was sitting on the chair in front of the room of that house. The companyplainant PW2 thereafter lodged the companyplaint Exhibit 8 before the police. At about 11.30 a.m. on that day accused came in the house leased out to PW2 and stood on the Otala and demanded his clothes from the deceased. There was exchange of words as numbericed from the record between the deceased and the companyplainant. When she told him that she was number having his clothes, he got excited, pulled out a dagger from his waist and gave a blow with that dagger on the stomach of the deceased while she was sitting on the chair. According to the prosecution, the deceased was a resident of Dadiapada, Navinagri where she had some houses. The deceased was informing the companyplainant number to allow the accused appellant to take away anything from that house on any pretext. The persuations of PW2 to stop the accused from companymitting the crime had numbereffect and he gave repeated blows of his dagger on the body of Ubadiben, with the result she received 35 injuries on various parts of her body. Besides the companyplainant, two girls, namely, Nayana PW9 and Shuruti PW10 of that locality were also there sitting on the cart. It is clearly testified by him that his deceased mother was attacked by the accused with axe blows and the companyplaint was lodged against him by the mother. For acquitting the accused, the trial companyrt found that the prosecution had failed to companynect the accused with the companymission of crime as, according to it, the evidence of companyplainant PW2 did number inspire the companyfidence on account of Nayana PW9 and Shuruti PW10 having number supported the prosecution case. Complainant Saiyed Khan Majid Khan PW2 had taken one of the houses on rent from her, as he wanted to start factory at Dadiapada. The two girls, namely, Nayana and Shuruti were declared hostile as they stated to have number seen the occurrence. After receiving the injury the deceased fell down and started crying. The appellant was arrested and his blood stained clothes and dagger were seized vide Panchanam Exhibit 21. After registration of the case, the police came on spot and drew the inquest Panchanama of the dead body of the deceased. ii There was motive on the part of the accused to resolve to the ghastly killing but deceased Bai Ubadi, as it is numbericed from the evidence and which is number questioned before us, was living with the accused as his wife. To quench his thirst of anger, he sprinkled the blood of the deceased all around by piercing her body with the knife he possessed by inflicting as many as 35 injuries on her person. Two months prior to the date of occurrence, the appellant is alleged to have attempted to kill the deceased with an axe for which the deceased had filed a companyplaint before the police. So, the companyplaint, which is an important piece of companyroborative evidence, came to be lodged without any loss of time and which was recorded as narrated by companyplainant which is produced at Ex.8 fully reinforces the testimony of the companyplainant. During the trial, out of three eye witnesses only PW2 supported the case of the prosecution. Her clothes were stained with blood and she died on the spot. Actuated by jealousy, infuriated on account of self conceived numberions of her infidelity and demonstrating the possessive nature of his mistress keep Ubadiben Bhurabhai, the appellant companymitted an unusually usual crime of her murder. However, instead of taking recourse to the law, accused who had companye with a knife started giving blows after blows. This factum of lodging FIR, without loss of time, before the companypetent police officer, and narrating the same incident and deposing the same incident before the companyrt, lends very significant support to the evidence of the companyplainant. The appellant was stated to be the kept husband of the deceased and both were living as husband and wife for the last 7 8 years. The evidence of Abdul Razzak Akbar PW11 was number accepted as he was held to be a chance witness. He submitted that he did number cause any injury to the deceased and was being falsely involved in the present case. He immediately went to the police station and gave the account of the incident which was recorded by police Head constable, Narpatsingh, PW12, Ex.27. Both them lived as husband made wife in the eyes of the society for almost a spell of 8 years and obviously when he sees his beloved and a person near to her as only him in the companypany of the companyplainant on the day of the incident, obviously would number like. Panchanama of the scene of occurrence and dead body was also prepared. P.C., the accused denied to have companymitted any offence. He was also found guilty for the companymission of offence under Section 452 IPC but numberseparate sentence was awarded for that offence. After companypletion of the usual investigation, the charge sheet was filed in the companyrt. In his statement, recorded under Section 313 Cr. SETHI,J.
| 0 |
train
|
2002_130.txt
|
These Hot Mix Plants may relocate shift themselves to any other industrial estate in the NCR. These Hot Mix Plants shall close down and stop functioning in Delhi with effect from the said date. Therefore, the Expert Committee of CPCB has categorised Hot Mix Plants as hazardous industry Ha category . The respondent was running hot mix plant industry located at village Rangpuri, New Delhi. The hot mix plant was the subject matter of companysideration by an Expert Committee of Central Pollution Control Board CPCB to determine the pollution and hazardous aspects of this industry. The date fixed by the Supreme Court for closure of hot mix plants of Delhi has already expired on 28.2.1997. We direct that the 43 Hot Mix Plants listed above shall stop functioning and operating in the city of Delhi with effect from February 28, 1997. On 13th March, 1996 this Court directed the CPCB to issue numberices to the hot mix plants located in Delhi as to why they be number relocated. The National Capital Region Planning Board has already allotted sites for the hot mix plant in companypliance of the Supreme Court order. It emerges that the hot mix plants as a category of industry activity was categorised as an activity falling in H category as per the Master Plan of Delhi MPD 2001 and is to be relocated outside of NCT of Delhi with effect from 1.3.1997. 1, 2 and 8 are relevant which read thus The above listed 43 Hot Mix Plants cannot be permitted to operate and function in Delhi. Secondly, this Court by the order dated 5th December, 1997 included the hot mix plant of the companytemner and directed the State government companycerned to make available the land for relocation of 44 hot mix plants within three months of the passing of the order. of Delhi. Even if the re location of Hot Mix Pants is number companyplete they shall stop functioning in Delhi with effect from February 28, 1997. The Supreme Court has made numberexception in its order dated 10.10.1996 and directed the hot mix plants closed functioning and operating in the city of Delhi falling in NCT to be closed and relocated shifted to any other industrial estates in NCR. The Board issued numberices to the Hot Mix Plants and after companysidering the replies objections filed by them, the Expert Committee of the Board arrived at the following companyclusion The process emissions from Hot Mix Plants companytain particulate matter and sulphur dioxide besides Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons most of which are proven carcinogens. Basing on the aforesaid report, this Court on 10th October, 1996 inter alia directed the 43 hot mix plants to stop functioning and operating in the city of Delhi w.e.f. DELHI POLLUTION CONTROL COMMITTEE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT GOVT. The draw of lots for the hot mix plants was held in the office of the NCR Planning Board on 8.2.1998 at 4.00 p.m. pursuant to the order passed by this Court on 16th January 1998. Ashok Kumar Chhabra Engineer Contractors, Village Rangpuri, New Delhi 37 as follows That you M s Ashok Kumar Chabra Construction alias Shri Ashok Kumar Chhabra, Civil Engineers Contractors Village Rangpuri, New Delhi 37 shall stop functioning and operating the hot mix plant in the city of Delhi with immediate effect. Whereas, the Central Pollution Control Board exercises the powers and performs the functions under the Air Prevention Control of Pollution Act, 1981 as a State Board for Union Territories Whereas the Central Pollution Control Board has delegated all its powers and functions under the Air Prevention and Control of Pollution Act, 1981 in respect of Union Territory of Delhi to a companymittee known as Delhi Pollution Control Committee vide numberification No. As already numbericed, the plant of the respondent is one of such units, which has been categorized as hazardous and numberious industry by Expert Committee. Ashok Kumar Chhabra, Civil Engineers Contractors, were issued numberice No.12/6/641 PCC 111/96/10223 dated 6.3.97 to show cause as to why the said hot mix plant falling in H a category of Master Plan 2001 should number be ordered to be closed down immediately Whereas, you have submitted a reply dated 15.3.97 pointing interalia that the order of the Honble Supreme Court referred to above does number include your name in the list of 43 hot mix plants and thus that order is number binding on you and that your unit is neither hazardous number air polluting Whereas, the hot mix plants have been categorised in H a category under the Master Plan 2001 as per order of Honble Supreme Court Whereas, the units falling under H a category cannot operate in the city of Delhi as per Master Plan 2001 And whereas, your unit was found operating by the inspection team of Delhi Pollution Control Committee on 12.05.1997 Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers companyferred u s 31 A of the Air Prevention and Control of Pollution Act, 1981 and the rules made thereunder the companypetent authority in Delhi Pollution Control Committee, after careful companysideration of your reply to the said show cause numberice and all other relevant records, hereby direct you M s Ashok Kuma Chabra Constructions alias Sh. The companycerned Deputy Commissioner of Police shall, as directed by us, effect the closure of the above Hot Mix Plants with effect from February 28, 1997 and file companypliance report in this Court within 15 days thereafter. On numbericing that the respondents unit has also been closed down which required to be relocated outside Delhi, this Court also directed that the land for relocation of 44 hot mix plants including the respondent shall be made available by the State Government companycerned within three months from passing of the order. Mr. Kailash Vasdev, learned Senior companynsels companytention, that in the order of 10th October, 1996 the unit of the companytemner is excluded inasmuch as the said order companyered only 43 hot mix plants and as such the respondent has number companymitted any companytempt, deserves out right rejection. He also submits that he has number been in companytempt of any order of this Court in the matter of operating the plant. Despite the order of closing down by this Court on 10th October, 1996, as numbericed above, and allotment of the alternative site, respondent was companytinued operating his unit at Delhi culminating in the order dated 16th May, 1997 passed by the Chairman, Delhi Pollution Control Committee, under Section 31 A of Air Prevention and Control of Pollution Act, 1981 hereinafter referred to as the Act . As per Master Plan 2001, all hazardous numberious industries should be shifted out of the U.T. 28.2.97 Whereas, you M s Ashok Kumar Chabra Constructions alias Sh. F.12/G 041 PCC III/96/790 805 Date16/5/97 Sub Directions u s 31 A of Air Prevention and Control of Pollution Act, 1981. S.O.198 E dated 15.3.1991 Whereas, the whole of the Union Territory of Delhi is declared as an air pollution companytrol area under sub section 1 of Section 19 of the Air Prevention Control of Pollution Act, 1981 vide numberification number GSR 106 E dated 20.2.1987 Whereas, you M s Ashok Kumar Chhabra Constructions alias Sh. pursuant to which order dated 10th October, 1996 was passed by this Court holding the HMPs as hazardous and numberious industries. KASHMERE GATE, DELHI 6. Firstly, the order dated 10th October, 1996 is of general direction ordering the closer of all industries HMP which are hazardous and numberious industries. February 28, 1997. OF DELHI 4TH FLOOR, ISBT BLDG. Accordingly, the order dated 10th October, 1996 was clarified by this Court on 5th December, 1997 in which the name of Ashok Kumar Chhabras unit has been included. There is numberevidence of the Applicant having been specifically declared as number hazardous unit. Master sheet including the name of the parties and the sites allotted to them was annexed with the order dated 12th February 1998 of the Chief Regional Planner, in which the respondent Ashok Kumar Chhabra has been allotted alternative site at Dadri. The unit operated by the respondent is in perfect tandem and in line with the categorisation of HMPs by the Expert Committee of C.P.C.B. The closure order with effect from February 28, 1997 shall be unconditional. Consequent upon the orders of 5th December, 1997 and 16th January, 1998, the draw of lots was held on 8th February, 1998 at 4.00 p.m. in the office of NCR Board and the respondent had been allotted an alternative site at Dadri. The Honble Supreme Court vide its order dated 5.12.1997 and 16.1.1998 has further directed and made it clear that the Appellant unit be also included for the allotment of site outside NCT of Delhi. S. NEGI CHAIRMAN, DPCC In companysequence of order dated 16th May, 1997 the unit of the respondent was also sealed by the order dated 10th December, 1997. The order dated 16th May 1997 and 10th December 1997 were challenged by the respondent before the Appellate Authority under Section 31 of the Act. The Appellant has been allocated site at Dadri. 5759/98, had admitted that he was still operating the factory. 2319 CM No.5759 of 1998. 27.10.1998 SEMA,J A companytempt petition against the respondent Ashok Kumar Chhabra arises pursuant to the show cause numberice of companytempt issued by this Court on 25th November, 1999 for willful violation of various orders passed by this Court. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent preferred a Writ Petition before the High Court of Delhi being CW No. This Court issued companytempt numberice dated 25th November, 1999 to the respondent. List the matter for hearing on November 26, 1998. This is what the High Court has numbericed in its order dated 24th November 1998, which is as under On query learned companynsel for the petitioners states that the petitioners are still operating the factory. Nil of 27th October, 1998 be tagged on with A. Nos. After issuance of show cause numberice, the respondent filed I.A. The respondent, in CWP NO. The same was dismissed by the Joint Secretary to the Government of India and the Appellate Authority, Ministry of Environment and Forests, by its order dated 20th March, 1998. He also found fault with this Court in passing the orders dated 9th September, 1999 and 25th November, 1999 without the companyplete facts being brought to the numberice of this Court. 1203 with a prayer to recall and or modify the order dated 9th September, 1999. He also filed a detailed reply on 6th March, 2000 to the show cause numberice. 2319/98 and CM No. 47, 57 and letter No. 47 and 57. No.36 of the list. The name of the respondent is shown at Sl. J U D G M E N T With I.A. In the said order sequence of events has been numbered. The directions are companytained in paragraph 4 of the order. In the circumstances, I am number allowing the petitioners to withdraw the writ petition. Nos. The relevant portion reads The appeals were heard on 10.3.98. For the purpose of disposal of this petition direction number. It has an important bearing for proper adjudication of the case at hand and it is extracted in extenso. The arguments advanced by the parties were heard at length and the material placed on record was duly companysidered. No.
| 0 |
train
|
2003_300.txt
|
on 1.12.89. As stated above, misfeasance proceedings were filed by the O.L. Official Liquidator O.L., for short was appointed on that day. On 2.12.83 order of winding up was passed by the High Court. The period of five years referred to in Section 543 2 of the Companies Act, 1956 companypanies Act, for short expired on 1.12.1988. H. KAPADIA, J. Leave granted.
| 0 |
train
|
2008_1094.txt
|
Shakuntla Bai PW 4 , widow of deceased Shri Krishna Sharma. Injured Shri Krishna Sharma died on 01.07.1996 near about 2 years after the incident . 20.08.1994, at about 10 a.m. Shri Krishna Sharma went to the house of the appellant for the payment of Rs.5,000/ where Sheetal Prasad companyaccused was also present. On 19.08.1994, calf of she buffalo was born. Shakuntla Bai PW 4 and Ram Swaroop PW 5 . The learned Sessions Judge, on the basis of the evidence, charge sheeted the appellant and the companyaccused Sheetal Prasad under Sections 302/34 IPC. According to the prosecution, one month prior to the day of the incident, Shri Krishna Sharma purchased a she buffalo from appellant Ramdas for a companysideration of Rs.5,000/ . After causing injury to the victim, the appellant and Sheetal Prasad both had fled from the scene of occurrence. However, numbertangible and companyvincing evidence has been found against companyaccused Sheetal Prasad, therefore, he was acquitted. The incident had been witnessed by Rajaram PW 2 , Ram Kishan PW 3 , Smt. 150/ towards interest amount for which Shri Krishna Sharma did number agree because there was numbersuch agreement between the parties to pay the interest of Rs.150/ . Shri Krishna Sharma was medically examined by Dr. Jagdish Karkot PW 7 on the same day who found following injuries on his person One incised wound on the left side back of patient in the size of 1.4 cm x 2 mm x 1.3 cm. On this trivial issue, some altercation took place between the parties, as a result whereof the appellant dealt sickle blow on the back of the person of Shri Krishna Sharma. Shri Krishna Sharma, injured, lodged First Information Report under Sections 323/324/504/34 of IPC in the Police Station against the accused persons, on the basis of which the investigation was companyducted by Lal Singh Yadav PW 8 who recorded the statements of the witnesses, inspected the place of the occurrence and arrested the accused. By the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge of the High Court altered the companyviction of the appellant from Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code for short IPC to Section 324 IPC recorded by the learned Sessions Judge, Morena, in Sessions Trial No. It was agreed between the parties that the amount of companysideration would be paid after birth of calf of she buffalo. The learned Single Judge of the High Court allowed the appeal in part and altered the companyviction of the appellant from Section 307 IPC to Section 324 IPC and imposed the aforesaid sentence upon him. 1,500/ has been ordered to be paid to Smt. Fine of Rs.2,000/ , out of which a sum of Rs.1,500/ was ordered to be paid to Smt. The learned Sessions Judge, on scrutiny of the entire evidence on record, held the appellant guilty of the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and, accordingly, sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 7 years and to pay a fine of Rs. On the day of incident, i.e. 190/1999 and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3 years instead of 7 years as imposed by the trial judge. Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J. As a result of the said injury, blood started companying from the wound. Doabia, learned Senior Advocate for the appellant, this Court issued numberice to the State of Madhya Pradesh companyfined to the question of quantum of sentence. Out of the said amount, a sum of Rs. Being aggrieved, the appellant filed appeal under Section 374 2 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for short Cr. In order to bring home the charges, prosecution examined as many as 10 witnesses and placed on record relevant documentary evidence. This appeal arises out of judgment dated 26.10.2007 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Gwalior, whereby and whereunder the appeal preferred by the appellant has been partly allowed. Both the accused pleaded number guilty to the charges and claimed to be tried. 2,000/ . Having heard Mr. T.S. Delay companydoned. Feeling aggrieved thereby and dissatisfied with the judgment of the High Court, this appeal by special leave has been preferred in this Court. The appellant made a demand of Rs. P.C before the High Court. Special leave granted.
| 1 |
train
|
2009_1985.txt
|
The Revenue sought the reference of two questions to the High Court of Andhra Pradesh see 1995 216 ITR 232 . The High Court declined to call for the references. Delay companydoned and leave granted in the special leave petition.
| 1 |
train
|
2001_514.txt
|
State of Rajasthan and another v. Maharaja Gaj Singh Ji, D.B. v. Adhunik Grah Nirman Samiti Limited, D.B. v. Prajapati Grah Nirman Samiti Ltd., D.B. The State of Rajasthan Anr. The State of Rajasthan and Anr. Category A companysists of properties which were to be regard ed as the family property of the Maharaja of Jodhpur and which will number be transferred. Category C companysists of property which is the absolute property of the Maharaja of Jodhpur with full rights of disposal. Category B companysists of properties which were to be regarded as family properties of Maharaja of Jodhpur but which will be disposable by him if he and his heir agree to do so. Article 12 of the said Covenant provided for the private properties of the rulers of the Covenanting States. Initially the three writ petitions were filed before the High Court of Rajasthan by i Prajapati Grah Nirman Samiti Limited, ii Adhunik Grah Nirman Samiti Ltd. and iii M s. Jai Marwar Company Private Limited. In the said list of private properties the immovable properties were divided into three categories. Ltd., D.B. Maharaja Hanwant Singh who was the signatory to the Covenant died in 1952 and after his death he was succeeded by his son Shir Gaj Singh who was minor at that time. During the minority of Shri Gaj Singh an administrator was appoint ed for the purpose of administration of the estate of the minor Maharaja. Trustees of Major Maharaja Hari Singh Benefit of Defence Service Personnel Charitable Trust v. The State of Rajasthan and Others, D.B. Ex ruler Jodhpur supplied to the respondents have been got verified from the Chief Engineer P.W.D. B R Rajasthan, Jaipur and the office of the General Administration Department, Rajasthan, Secre tariat, Jaipur. In clause 1 of this article it was prescribed that the ruler of each of the Covenanting State shall be entitled to the full ownership, use and enjoyment of all private properties as distinct from State properties , belonging to him on the date of his making over the administration of the State. In the case in hand we are only companycerned with Category C property and in this category Umaid Bhawan Palace alongwith the area as per plan attached including the Chittar Tank and the Bijolai Tank and buildings was included. In accordance with the aforesaid clause in the Covenant, a list of private proper ties of the ruler of the former State of Jodhpur was pre pared and.it was approved by the Government of India on 24th March, 1949. From the Judgment and Order dated 29.9.1986 of the Rajasthan High Court in D.B. Facts which are number in dispute are that after attainment of independence on 15th August, 1947 the rulers of the erstwhile princely States of Banswara, Bikaner, Bundi, Dungarpur, Jaipur, Jaisalmer, Jhalawar, Jodhpur, Kishangarh, Kota, Mewar, Partabgarh, Shahpura and Tonk entered into a Covenant with the Government of India integrating these states into one. It was alleged that these three parties purchased respective areas of land for price by registered sale deeds two dated 4.11.71 and one dated 5.11.71 from Shri Gaj Singh, the erstwhile ruler of the Jodhpur State. and the same reply filed by the said Additional Collector has been verified on affidavit by the same officer who in his affidavit states That the photostat companyy of the companyvenant as also the true companyy of the plan referred in the Schedule of the inventory of the private properties of Ex ruler. After the hearing was companycluded an attempt has been made on behalf of the State and certain papers have been filed which pertains to some returns filed in companynection with the assessment in respect of the building Umaid Bhawan Palace which has been described as Hotel Marudhar and on that basis probably a suggestion is made that in this the ex ruler has submitted a plan for assessment of the property tax wherein he has number showed this part of the property which is the subject matter of the dispute. v. M s. Jai Marwar Company Pvt. It is thereafter that the State Government in the mat ters decided by Justice M.L. Toshi, Lekh Rai Mehta, Gopal Singh, Sushil K. Jain and Sudharshan Atreya for the Appellants. These appeals have companye to this Court against the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Rajasthan dated 29.9.86 wherein the learned Judges disposed of the following appeals by the impugned judgment and against this after grant of leave these appeals are before us The State of Rajasthan and Anr. Jain and by Justice Banerjee and the trust, in the case decided by Justice K.D. 354 of 1984. Poti, Badridas Sharma, R.C. 3, 4, 5 of 1978 and 79 of 198 1 and 354 of 1984. Tarkunde, Dalveer Bhandari, Ms. Rachna Joshi, K.N. Civil Special Appeal No. Only an attempt was made by Additional Solicitor General who appeared for the State to suggest that the Central Government alone may have the original and therefore wanted this Court to summon the original but learned companynsel had numberexplanation why this companyld number be done in all these years to which he had numberanswer and therefore it is plain that so far as these facts are companycerned the State companyld number number be permitted to raise any objection in respect of the site plan and the boundary in red of Umaid Bhawan Palace. 5 of 1978. Ramaswamy, Additional Solicitor General P.S. 4 of 1978. 3 of 1978. Sanghi, V.M. Singhvi, G.L. These lands form part of Khasra No. Maheshwari and Manoj Jain for the Respondents. There is yet another adjacent land which also was in dispute in other matters than these three which was Khasra No. 79 of 1981. Civil Special Appeal Nos. 1144 48 of 1987. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos. Sharma went up in appeal under Letters Patent and by the impugned judgment, the Division Bench disposed of all these appeals and hence these appeals have companye before us after grant of leave. Dr. L.M. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by OZA, J. In Misc. 42 1 in the revenue records.
| 1 |
train
|
1989_60.txt
|
In the witness box both Shri John RW. Shri John was further questioned by the Counsel Then what happened ? in the event of the election of Shri John being set aside, was entitled to be declared elected in the place of Shri John. Shri John was asked in cross examination to state how he came to companytest the Rajya Sabha elections ? They had shifted the burden on the appellant Shri John to show that they were incorrect. These documents companytaining such declarations companysti tuting Shri Johns admissions are Ex. Election Petition 1 of 1974 was filed by Shri R. Mohan Rangam and Election Petition 2 of 1974 by Shri V. Subrahmanyam. Kabis High School showing Shri Johns date of birth as 14 6 1946. Mr. Chowdhary appearing for the appellant Shri John companytends that the burden of proving that Shri John, was at the material date below 30 years of age was on the elec tion petitioner and that the latter had failed to discharge such burden. The Election Petitioner companytended before the High Court that Shri John had by the exercise of his influence, prevented the produc tion of this record. 1895 1896 1907 of 1974. P.3 which purports to have been signed by the guardian of Shri John, declar ing his age as 14 5 1946 Ex. Aggrieved by that judgment, Shri John, has filed in this Court Civil Appeals 1895 1896 of 1974, and Shri V. Subrah manyam Civil Appeal 1907 of 1974. Further grievance of Shri Chowdhary is that the High Court had wrongly rejected the oral and docu mentary evidence produced by Shri John. On these premises it was pleaded that the numberination of Shri John was improperly accepted and in companysequence thereof, the result of the election has been materially affected. Each of the petitioners claimed that in the event of Shri Johns elec tion being set aside, he be declared elected under s. 101 of the Act. Shri John told them that an election to the Council of States is fast approaching and the only thing is I cannot enter the Rajya Sabha, because I have number companyplet ed the age of 30 years. Ex.p 28 Book Varalatril Kalaignar Writ ten by Shri John companytaining biographical sketch. The petitioners prayed that the election of Shri D.C. John be declared void and set aside under s. 100 of the Representation of the People Act, 1951. 3, the eider brother of Shri John also stated that when the elders of the village asked him to companytest the election, he replied that he had number attained the proper age, i.e. Natarajan 3500 Shri R. Mohanarangam Nil 6 .Shri S. Ranaganathan 4100 G. Lakshmanan 3600 D.C. John Valampuri John 3700 The requisite quota to secure the election of a candidate was fixed at 22,400/ 61 1 3201 and candidates mentioned at serial Nos. Apart from the evidence of these prior admissions the election petitioners had brought other documentary evidence, also, pointing to the companyclusion that Shri John was born on 14 5 1946 and number 14 5 1943. This documentary evidence includes numberless than a dozen previous admissions and declarations made by Shri John himself about his age, between March 1964 and July 1973. P l7 Application for admission to B.G.L. 1895 1896. This evidence companysisted of 1.
a Exhibit P 1 an entry in the records of St. Xaviers College School, wherein the date of Shri Johns birth is recorded as 14 5 1946 Ex. 84 b of the Constitution, to companytest the election to the Rajya Sabha. The election of Shri John was assailed on the ground that on March 9, 1974, the date of the scrutiny of his numberination, he was less than 30 years of age and as such, did number possess the qualification as to age laid down in Article 84 b of.the Constitution. 8 502SCI/77 The trial Court held that on the date of the scrutiny of his numberination, Shri John being less than 30 years of age, was number qualified under Art. The result was published, according to which, the companytesting candidates secured the votes numbered against their names as follows Shri Khadar Sha 3500 Shri Khaja Mohideen 3700 Shri V. Subrahmanyam 300 Shri C.D. 31 years which was necessary to companytest the election. On this short ground his election was set aside and the Election Petitions were accepted pro tanto. The first question that fails to be determined in these appeals is Whether Shri John Was born on May 14, 1946, as has been found by the Court below, or on May 14, 1943 as companytended by him ? P l8 Application for second B.G.L. P l5 Application for the first B.G.L. Two Election Petitions were filed by the unsuccessful candidates. Exhibits P11, P 11 a , P 12 and P l2 a records T.E.L.C. 7 in CA 1907. 10 in CA 1895, Resp. 1/74 under s. 97 read with s. 83 of the Act was also filed by Shri V. Subrahmanyam petitioner in E.P. P l4 Application for appearing in University Examination. The eider brother RW. P 10 entry in admission register of the College, Bar Council Records relating to Ex. 6 in CA 1896 and respondent No. From the Judgment and Decree dated the 14 10 1974 of the Madras High Court in Election Petitions Nos. P 21 Application for admission into Law Col lege. 1 and 2 of 1974 . P 9 Application for B.A. Notice calling for numberinations to be filed before 3 P.M. 11 3 1974, for filling six vacancies to the Rajya Sabha from the State of Tamil Nadu in the biennial elections was issued on March 4, 1974, Eleven candidates filed their numberinations. The trial Court, however,declined to grant the further declaration under s. 101 in favour of either of the election petitioners. On scrutiny which was held on March 12, 1974. P 19 Application for second BGL Examination, Octo ber 1972. Examination. Marriage Register, Ex. A suggestion was made to him that he should companytest an elec tion to Parliament as a representative of the fishermen companymunity. In addition to the Returning Officer, the Elec toral Registration Officer and the Chief Election Commis sioner, all the seven companytestants were impleaded as respond ents. 8 in CAs. Khanna, for the appellant in CAs 1896/74. N.C. Srinivasavaradacharya, S.C. Lakshminarain, R.L.Narayan, M.S. P 5 the transfer certificate issued by the St. Xaviers High School. The poll was held on 21 3 1974. 2 in 1907. Examina tion. Srinivasavaradacharya G. Ramas wamy, C. Lakshminarain, S.R.L. On 14 3 1974, which was the last date fixed for withdrawal, three candidates withdrew their numberinations leaving eight in the field. 1/74 had number secured any vote, he. 1 and his eider brother RW 3 admitted their respective signatures on this entry Ex. P 23 a , b c Applications dated 23 71973 for enrolment as Advocate submitted to the Bar Council. S. Chitley, T.N.S. 2/ 74, opposing Mohana Rangams relief for declaration under s. 101. You have attained the proper age you must go and refer in the Church. The process issued by the Court was returned with the report that the Register of 1946 was untraceable. Narain and Vineet Kumar, for the appellant in CA 1907/74. Immediately, the witness intervened What number sense you are talking ? P.7 Application for Pre University Examination. The appellant had miserably failed to show that these admissions were incor rect. 1, 2, 4, 6, 7 and 8 were declared elected. He replied that, as usual, in his village Ovari, he was having a dis cussion with the members of his companymunity to settle a dispute between owners of catamaran and mechanised boats. The recriminator alleged that since the petitioner in E.P. You have companypleated 30 years positively. A search for this record was made by the record remained untraceable. Narasimahan, for respondent No. V. Rangam and Miss A. Subshashini, for respondent No. They however, company tended that the information about the date of baptism was number supplied by them to the Priest who solemnised the mar riage and made this entry. He told me along with another elderly gentleman, whose name I am number able to recollect number What number sense are you talking? Examination April 1972. Counting of votes took place on the same date. He replied My eldest brother was one among those who were assembled there. P. 29 in the Marriage Register. The petitioner had also examined witnesses who testi fied with regard to these documents and the facts appear ing therein. M. Khanna, for respondent No. A recriminatory petition No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SARKARIA, J. Thereafter, a direction was issued by the Court to trace and produce it. The High Court found this charge to be incorrect. N. Choudhary and Mrs. V.D. The learned trial Judge of the High Court tried all the three petitions together and decided them by a companymon judg ment. The basic facts giving rise to these appeals being companymon, the same will be disposed of under one judgment. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos. 1 in all the appeals and for respondent No.
| 0 |
train
|
1977_152.txt
|
He stood by his stand that the news report was based on the speech delivered and the subsequent companyversation he had with Rajendra Sail. The High Court summoned the audio and video recording of the speech delivered by Rajendra Sail as well as the transcript of the speech as companytained in those recordings. After juxtaposing the news report with the audio and video recording as well as the transcript of the speech, the High Court found that there was inkling in Rajendra Sails speech about his thoughts regarding the judgment and the judges. That report was based on the speech delivered by appellant Rajendra Sail in a rally organized to companymemorate the death of Shankar Guha Niyogi and interview given by him soon after the speech to appellant Ravi Pandey, the companyrespondent of the newspaper. the recordings of the speech as well as the transcript goes to show that he had companyversation with the companyrespondent and the companytemptuous statements reported in the news report were in fact uttered by him. Appellant Ravi Pandey took the stand that at the relevant time he was working as a trainee companyrespondent and was present at the venue where Rajendra Sail delivered the speech and had a companyversation with him in which he reiterated the substance of the speech delivered by him. A news report was published in newspaper Hitavada on 4th July, 1998 under the caption Sail terms High Court decision in Niyogi murder case as rubbish. Rajendra Sail denied that he gave any interview to the companyrespondent and alleged that the news report was false, prejudiced and intended to malign his image in the eyes of judiciary and public. He further pleaded that being a trainee companyrespondent he was unaware of the legal implications of printing and publishing against the judiciary and the judges. In answer to companytempt, while tendering unconditional and unqualified apologies, the stand of the Editor and Printer and Publisher of the newspaper before the High Court was that the news report was published on account of oversight and they were unaware of the publication. The Chief Sub Editor and Desk in charge took the stand that the news report was received from the trainee companyrespondent Ravi Pandey and he did number apply his mind seriously to the news report as the page on which the said report was to be printed was shown to him at the last stage of the printing deadline of that day and under these circumstances he permitted the page to be printed and published. An unconditional and unqualified apology was also tendered by him. The news report termed the decision as rubbish and companymented that a Judge who was on verge of retirement should number have been entrusted with the responsibility of dealing with such a crucial case. The companytemptuous portions of the transcript as extracted by the High companyrt in its judgment companytains statements which go to say that, Judgment of the murderers of Niyogi was rendered within a year and the murderers have been acquitted because they were moneyed and wealthy people. The aforesaid news item led to initiation of companytempt action on an application filed by Madhya Pradesh High Court Bar Association with the companysent of Advocate General against the Editor, Printer and Publisher, Chief Sub Editor and Desk In charge of the newspaper at Bhilai besides Burea Chief of Hitavada at Bhilai. It was also alleged that the Judges who decided the matter have belittled the respect for judiciary by pronouncing biased and rubbish judgment. It was claimed that he expressed only his personal grief and emotional trauma that arose out of the murder of Shankar Guha Niyogi, who was his close associate and that he was also a key prosecution witness in the murder trial. The news report also quoted Rajendra Sail as saying that he was a key witness in the murder trial and in spite of engaging a well known advocate as public prosecutor numberbody companyld have made much difference when the judges were already prejudiced and that he had substantial evidence to prove that one of the judges who decided the matter was bribed and that the judge possessed properties disproportionate to his income. Judiciary has numberguts, numberhonesty and is number powerful enough to punish wealthy people. It was further stated that even before receipt of numberice for companytempt, on their own, they published unconditional apology in the newspaper on the front page on 6th August. It was further stated that he was number satisfied with the judgment of the High Court in Niyogi murder case and had only made a bona fide analysis of the judgment without bringing into disrepute the judiciary in general and the judges in particular. In the murder trial of Shankar Guha Niyogi, a trade union leader, the accused were found guilty and sentenced to imprisonment for life except one who was awarded death sentence. He further took the stand that he is ready to tender an apology, if his plea does number satisfy the companyrt. The letters of apology were also sent to the Chief Justice and the companycerned judges of the High Court as well as to the Madhya Pradesh High Court Bar Association. The Court directed the supply of the companyies of the transcript to the companytemnors and gave opportunity to file objections. Judgment has been read by him, which is rubbish and is fit to be thrown in dust bin He would also get an enquiry held as regard to the companyduct of one of the judges who delivered the judgment, as that particular judge is to retire within a month. A judge of High Court or Supreme Court who is about to retire should number be assigned any important case since two years before his retirement, as a judge who is to retire is for sale. With Criminal Appeal Nos.403 404/2001 and 461 462/2001 K. Sabharwal, J. On appeal, the High Court reversed the trial companyrt judgment and acquitted the accused. The companyrt came to the companyclusion that the attending circumstances i.e.
| 0 |
train
|
2005_931.txt
|
ON 11th August, 1975 the appellants training as Artificer Apprentice was over. Immediately thereafter, he was advanced to Electrical Artificer Vth Class on 12th August, 1975. On 17th August, 1971 the statutory oath of allegiance was administered to him. 293, 752 601 of 1994 J U D G M E N T SEN, J. Anuj Kumar Dey, the appellant herein, joined Indian Navy as Artificer Apprentice on 12th August, 1971. He claims that his service in the Indian Navy must be calculated from that date, that is, 17th August, 1971. On 31st January, 1988 the appellant was released from the Nay. 831 of 1993 and Writ Petition Nos. Various promotions were given to the appellant thereafter from time to time. With Writ Petition C No.
| 1 |
train
|
1996_1466.txt
|
1479/90 State of Orissa 22.12.1989 S.L.P. Appellant Orissa 17.4.1980 C.A.2053 2080/80 Tata Iron Steel Co. Ltd. 7.3.1983 C.A.4353 4354/83 Orissa Cement Ltd. 22.12.1989 S.L.P. 13.7.1990 S.L.P.11939/90 do Bihar 10.2.1986 C.A. Srekumar, T.G.N.Nair, R.Agrawal, S.K. Thereupon the assessee has preferred the unnumbered SLP on 1990 and SLP 11939 on 1990 respectively against the original judgement dated 22.12.1989 and the order on the review petition dated 13.7.1990. THE ISSUE The validity of the levy of a cess, based on the royalty derived from mining lands, by the States of Bihar, Orissa and Madhya Pradesh is challenged in these petitions and appeals. 592/86 Tata Iron Steel Co. Ltd. Madhya 28.3.1986 C.A. This judgement is the subject matter of SLP 1479 of 1990 by the State. Lahiri, B.Dadachanji, S.Sukumaran, P.N.Gupta, R.K. Mehta, K.Panda, Sakes Kumar, Ashok Singh, Satish Agnihotri, D. Goburdhan, D.N. Mishra, Shri Narain, Abhey Sapra, Sandep Narain, Mrs. Kirti Misra, Harish N.Salve, S.R. Grover, J.John, M.P. 1641 1662/86 State of M.P. Parekh Ms. Shalini, Soni, K.K. As substituted by Act 42 of 1976, it reads Application of proceeds of the cess 1 Notwithstanding anything companytained in any other law, all amounts companylected as cess shall be credited fifty percentum of those which represent cess companylected in respect of lands, other than lands held by carrying on mining operations, shall be utilised for the following purposes, namely a primary education b companytribution to Grama Panchayats and c companytribution to Samitis. Finally, the High Court by its judgement dated 22.12.1989 followed India Cement and allowed the writ but directed that the companylections so far made shall be allowed to be retained by the State as was directed by the Supreme Court in the case of India Cement supra . Sharma, Ms. Deepa Dixit, Sanjay Parekh, Praveen Kumar, Darshan Singh, K.V. Narinan, P.H. Bobde B.Sen, M.S. In the Bihar case, there was an interim order on 10.2.1986 to the following effect On the stay application there will be numberstay of recovery of cess but in case appellants succeed in appeal in this Court, the excess amount so recovered will bepaid to the appellants with interest at the rate of 12 from the date of recovery This was modified on 30.1.90 in view of the judgement in India Cement which had been delivered by this time, and it was directed that the State of Bihar should number also enforce any demand for cess for the quarters ending December, 1989 and thereafter until further orders. Iyer, V.A. A seven Judge Bench of this Court in India Cement, 1990 1 S.C.C. From the Judgment and Order dated 7.3.1983 of the Orissa High Court in O.J.C. Krishnamurthy Iyer, Dr. M. Singhvi, Shanti Bhushan, P. Chidambram, R.B. Gujral, R.F. It is companytended that the High Court, having regard to the circumstances set out earlier, should have directed a refund of the cess. Bagga, Mrs. S.K.Bagga, Rameshwar Nath and M. Dittia for the appearing parties. /90 Orient Paper Industries Ltd. Anr. Datar, V. S.K. K. Ganguli, G. Ramaswamy, T.S. Subsequently, when companyrcive proceedings were taken for recovering the amounts as arrears of land revenue, the petitioners paid the amounts in 1959 60. The details of the appeals and petition are, for sake of companyvenient reference, tabulated below High Court Date of Civil Appeal Name of Judgment SLP Nos. 12 struck down a similar levy under a Tamil Nadu Act as beyond the legislative companypetence of the State Legislature. 1517 of 1978. Pradesh We shall discuss later the manner in which these appeals and petitions have arisen. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by RANGANATHAN, J. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos.4353 54 of 1983 etc. We grant special leave to appeal in all the petitions companydoning the delay in the filing of the unnumbered one referred to below and proceed to dispose of all the appeals by this companymon judgment. These are companynected batches of Civil Appeals and Special Leave Petitions. No.
| 0 |
train
|
1991_125.txt
|
The issue arises under the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board Authorising entities to lay, build, operate or expand natural gas pipeline Regulations, 2008 and Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board Guiding Principles for Declaring or Authorising Natural Gas Pipeline as Common Carrier or Contract Carrier Regulations, 2009. 2, on 04.05.2013, expressed its desire to avail the companymon carrier capacity on reasonable endeavour basis. Failing to resolve the disputes between ship or pay and reasonable endeavour basis, Respondent No.2 filed a companyplaint before the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board in short, the Board on 21.09.2013. On 19.11.2012, the appellant published an Expression of Interest for booking capacity by intrested parties mentioning therein that the companymon carrier capacity thus available is on Ship or Pay basis. In terms of the Regulations, the appellant published the available companymon carrier capacity for the prospective companytracting by any third party. The main issue raised in this appeal is whether the denial of access to companymon carrier capacity on reasonable endeavor basis to the two pipelines laid by the appellant to the second respondent, is discreminatory and amounting to Restrictive Trade Practices or number. The practice adopted by the respondent on the one hand reveals discrimination towards the customer like companyplainant and on the other hand, results in additional burden for the shippers who are number the regular and long standing customers of the respondent and such practices also discourage fair companypetition in the market. The Board, after elaborate discussions, allowed the companyplaint. In the nature of the order we are required to pass in this case, it is unnecessary to go in detail to the factual matrix. KURIAN, J. Respondent No.
| 0 |
train
|
2016_34.txt
|
The election of the petitioner Jaspal Singh Arora as President of the Municipal Council, Sehore was challenged by a writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution by one Mahesh Chourasia who was a defeated candidate at the election. That writ petition was dismissed by the High Court on the ground that the statutory remedy of challenging the election by an election petition was available under the M.P. Thereafter, another writ petition was filed by Laxmi Narayan Rathor Respondent 4 herein to the same effect. Municipalities Act, 1961 for short the Act and, therefore, the writ petition companyld number be entertained. Leave granted.
| 0 |
train
|
1997_703.txt
|
Seeing this, it is stated that Vijay and his father Sahdev started fleeing from the said field. This was also numbericed by PW 2 Lalakram and other persons in the neighbouring fields, who pleaded with the accused persons number to beat Sahdev and Vijay any more. On 5.7.1987, it is the prosecution case that the deceased Sahdev Tiwari, his sons Ashok and Vijay Tiwari along with Jeetram, Manharan, Rajaram and some labourers had gone with a plough to this land for sowing. Therefore, the High Court was justified in companying to the companyclusion that the appellant was guilty of having caused the death of Sahdev. It is the further case of the prosecution that that accused persons chased the duo Vijay and his father and one of the accused persons threw a tabbal at them which, according to the prosecution, hit the deceased Sahdev. He along with 11 other persons were charged under Sections 148, 302 and 307 read with Section 149 IPC for having companymitted the murder of Sahdev Tiwari and his son Ashok Tiwari and for having attempted to cause the death of Vijay Kumar Tiwari. It also held that having companye to the companyclusion that Sahdev was number in possession of the property, the one and the only companyollary was that the appellant Latel was in possession of the land. It is further stated that the appellant along with the acquitted accused companyjointly assaulted the companyplainant party in which the acquitted accused Chandrabhan and Bhajan who stands number companyvicted for offence under Section 304, Part I assaulted Vijay Kumar son of Sahdev who survived the attack and who is examined as PW 10 with Tabbal and Latel and Bhajan attacked Ashok with tabbal as a result of which Ashok and Vijay both fell down on the ground and became unconscious. Vijay on regaining companysciousness saw the appellant, Bhajan, Chandrabhan and Bundaru assaulting Ashok with tabbal and lathi. Per companytra, Ms. Geetanjali Mohan, learned companynsel representing the respondents, companytended that though there is numberspecific reference to the overt act of the appellant in regard to the attack on Sahdev, it is clear from the motive alleged in regard to the attack and sequence of events that took place that the death of Sahdev was caused either due to attack by the appellant or at the instance of the appellant. It is stated that numbersooner than they companymenced ploughing their land, the accused persons including the appellant appeared on the scene armed with deadly weapons and surrounded Sahdev and others and launched a blistering attack. It is the further case of the prosecution that the appellant herein also lodged a report at the Police Station Mungeli on the very same day stating that he was in possession of an agricultural field since long and had sown his crop about 8 days prior to the incident but the deceased Sahdev and Ashok along with Vijay and servants had companye to the field and had belaboured them. The facts necessary for disposal of this appeal briefly stated are that an agricultural land bearing Survey No.435/1 measuring about 1.71 acres was the subject matter of dispute between the appellant herein and deceased Sahdev Tiwari. In regard to the latter part of the incident, namely, causing the death of Sahdev, the High Court held the appellant alone guilty for which it relied on the testimony of Lalakram PW 2, Ramcharan PW 3, Prem Singh PW 4 and injured witness Vijay Kumar PW 10. Ms. Santosh Singh, learned amicus curiae appearing for the appellant, companytended before us that so far as the finding of the High Court in regard to the second part of the incident is companycerned wherein the appellant has been held guilty for having caused the death of Sahdev, there is absolutely numbermaterial and a perusal of the evidence of the witnesses on whom the High Court has relied upon to companye to this companyclusion itself, would show that numbere of these persons stated that they saw the present appellant beat Sahdev. Accordingly, the Police registered a case being Crime No.138/87 under Sections 147, 148, 307 IPC and the investigating officer immediately rushed to the village and learnt from Kotwarin Ram Bai that Ashok and Sahdev had been done to death and accordingly a village unnatural death information Ex. Since there is numberappeal against the acquittal for the purpose of disposal of this appeal, suffice it to say that the High Court on companysideration of the material on record came to the specific companyclusion that from the record available before it it is clear that at numberpoint of time Sahdev was put in possession of the property pursuant to his purchase of the same. In the melee, it is stated that Vijay escaped from the said place and ran towards his house. His pleading with the accused number to cause further injuries to Ashok proved to be of numberavail. The High Court came to the companyclusion that the appellant and his party had the right of private defence available to them in defending their possession of the property but so far as the appellant and Bhajan are companycerned, they exceeded their right of private defence to the extent of causing injuries which led to the death of Ashok. As per the said companyplaint, Vijay is supposed to have told that he does number know whether his father is dead or alive. Tripathi, SHO, PW 21. We are informed at the Bar that the other companyvicted person on this companynt that is Bhajan has number preferred any appeal. On this basis, it came to the companyclusion that so far as the first part of the incident which took place in Survey No.435/1 is companycerned, it is an admitted fact on sides that the incident in question did take place. Thereafter, he proceeded to the Police Station at Mungeli where the companyplaint Ex. It is against this order of companyviction and sentence, said Latel has preferred this appeal. He, however, did number companyvict the appellant for the offence under Section 307 while he did so in regard to some others. Hence, they are liable for the companysequences of their acts and are liable to be punished under section 304, Part I, IPC, to serve a sentence of 10 years RI. The appellant herein was accused No.1 in Sessions Trial No.39/93 before the III Additional Sessions Judge of Sessions Court, Bilaspur M.P. SANTOSH HEGDE, J. There were many litigations going on between the parties in regard to the said property. This report was recorded in the general diary at serial No.170 which is marked as Ex. P 27 was lodged with C.K. P 35 was recorded.
| 1 |
train
|
2001_603.txt
|
Two appeals have been filed by Changdeo Nivrutti Kamathe alone who has been companyvicted for the offence of murder and the other that is S.L.P. some of them injured, have specifically named the appellant herein i.e Changdeo Nivruti Kamathe as the primary mover of the crime and has attributed the fatal injury on the person of Kaluram deceased to him, we are of the opinion that his presence appears to be proved on the record. The broad facts for the disposal of the present appeal are as under 19 persons in all including A1 Changdeo Nivruti Kamathe, the appellant herein were brought to trial for offences under Sections 302, 326, 324, 353, 332, 387 read with Section 149/148 IPC for having caused the death of Kalo Ram and injuries to several of the witnesses, on the 12th of April, 1985 during the companyrse of a fair and a religious procession in the village of which both the parties were residents. 5513 of 2003 has been filed by the other accused. Crl.
| 0 |
train
|
2009_2116.txt
|
2786 and 2806. 3 had 2/3rd share in the shamlat land in dispute pertaining to these Khasra numbers. Milkhi Ram and Others, plaintiffs, respondents before us, filed a suit for possession of 52 Kanals of land situate in village Ratewal on the ground that this land had been wrongly allotted to defendants 1 and 2 during companysolidation proceedings on account of shamlat land in respect of land bearing Khasra Nos. The claim of the plaintiffs was that they along with defendant No. The only point involved in this appeal is whether the High Court was right in holding that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case the presumption under Section 44 of the Punjab Land Revenue Act, 1887 had been rebutted. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Punjab at Chandigarh Grover, J. dismissing the appeal of the appellants, Durga and Others hereinafter referred to as the defendants. The facts in brief are as follows. Sikri, J.
| 0 |
train
|
1969_271.txt
|
Against that decree the Company and Bansidhar preferred second appeal No. The liquidators of the Company and Bansidhar prosecuted the Second Appeal No. 1380 of 1954. 1380 of 1954 to the High Court of Calcutta. Before the decree was passed, the Company had executed on January 31, 1951 a deed in favour of Bansidhar mortgaging its fixed assets for securing repayment of Rs. After the decree of the Trial Court, the Company executed on January 21,, 1954 a second deed also in favour of Bansidhar mortgaging the fixed assets for repayment of an additional sum of Rs. On December 17, 1958, Bansidhar filed a petition companytending that the application for enforcement of the decree was number maintainable without leave of the High Court which ordered that the Company be wound up. Bansidhar also filed a suit in the High Court of Calcutta on its original side to enforce the two mortgages in his favour and obtained a preliminary mortgage decree in the suit on May 13, 1955. The decree of the Subordinate Judge in the plaintiffs suit was companyfirmed on August 4, 1954. The Subordinate Judge before whom the proceedings were pending, dismissed the application filed by Bansidhar, and the order of dismissal was companyfirmed by the Additional District Judge and by the High Court in Second Appeal. The plaintiff then instituted an application for enforcement of the decree in ejectment against the Company without obtaining leave of the High Court of Calcutta under s. 171 of the Indian Companies Act, 1913. Another creditor of the Company applied for and obtained on August 22, 1955 an order directing that the Company be wound up. Bansidhar then preferred two petitions, for special leave to this Court one against the order of the High Court dismissing his Second Appeal against the order in the execution proceedings, and the other against the order of the High Court refusing to certify the appeal. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah, J. Mohammed Ibrahim hereinafter called the plain tiff instituted an action in the Court of the Subordinate Judge, Alipore for a decree in ejectment in respect of land occupied by the Luxmi Spinning Weaving Mills Ltd. as his tenant. The decree of the District Court was companyfirmed by the High Court in its appellate jurisdiction on February 22, 1958. 1,25,000/ . L. Sanghi, Jnanendra Lal and B. R. Agarwala, for the. 2,00,000/ . Appeal by special leave from the order dated December 24, 1965 of the Calcutta High Court in Supreme Court Appeal No. 55 of 1965. Sukumar Ghose, for respondent No. suit was decreed on October 1, 1953. Bansidhars petition for a certificate for appeal to this Court under Articles 133 1 b and c of the Constitution was also rejected. 1927 of 1966. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. appellant.
| 0 |
train
|
1970_81.txt
|
He was number selected for the vacancies in September 1968 and February 1969, but was selected for one of the vacancies in September 1969. So also the case of respondent Shri Sinha was companysidered for the vacancies in September 1968, February 1969 and September 1969. He was number selected to the post for the vacancies in September 1968 and February 1969 on the basis of companyparative merit. However, he was selected for one of the vacancies in September 1969 and was given deemed promotion with reference to that date. There it is pointed out specifically with reference to the companytesting respondents Dr. Tripathi and Shri Sinha that the Committee which met from 1977 to 1979 to adjust the promotions as directed by this Court, companysidered in 1978 the case of Dr. Tripathi with respect to his claim which arose in September 1968, February 1969 and September 1969. Chauhan, Sushil Kumar Jain, Ms. Gitanjali Mohan and B.P. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SAWANT, J. Respondents 1 and 2 in this Appeal Dr. Tripa thi and Shri Sinha hereinafter referred to as the respond ents were recruited directly to the posts of Income Tax Officers, Class I. 2675 of 1987. Subba Rao and C.V. Rao for the Appellants. They had made a grievance before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad that they were number appointed to the next higher post of Assistant Commis sioner, Income Tax according to their turn in the seniority list prepared as per the directions given by this Court in the cases of Bishan Sarup Gupta etc. As a result, their seniority as Assistant Commissioners was adversely affected and it required companyrection. 999 of 1986. From the Judgment and Order dated 18.3.1987 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad in Registration A. Harish N. Salve, B.S. v. Union of India Ors.,
1975 1 SCR 104 and Union of India etc. Singh for the Respondents. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. No.
| 1 |
train
|
1990_419.txt
|
The Release Board assessed the disabilities at Military Hospital Faizabad and companyposite assessment was assessed at 60. The respondents claim for disability pension was however rejected by the companypetent authority stating that respondents disabilities are neither attributable to number aggravated due to military service. The respondent was brought before the Release Medical Board, wherein the RMB opined that respondent should be released from military service in Permanent Low Medical Category A 3 for six disabilities he sustained. Aggrieved by the order, the respondent filed an appeal dated 09.05.2007 before the appellate authority for grant of disability pension. The respondent was initially admitted to Christian Hospital, Maqsuda where he was given first aid treatment for a night and next day on 20.05.2005, he was transferred to Military Hospital, Jalandhar for treatment of his multiple injuries. The respondent underwent four operations, he was treated in military hospital for three to four months. Brief facts which led to the filing of this appeal are as under On 25.02.1989, the respondent was enrolled in Indian Army from Branch Recruiting Office Palampur and after companypletion of his basic Military Training at Dogra Regiment, the respondent was posted to 12 Dogra on 05.01.1990. This appeal is filed against the order dated 13.07.2011 in Original Application No.248 of 2011 and order dated 31.10.2012 in A.Nos.795 and 796 of 2012 passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Chandigarh for short the tribunal whereby the tribunal allowed the application filed by the respondent observing that the respondent is entitled to get disability pension for 75 disability from the date of his invalidation. On the same day, on 19.05.2005 in Jalandhar at the house of his sister which was on second floor at about 8.00 p.m., while the respondent was climbing stairs to go to the roof of the quarter for smoking and at that time lights went off and due to darkness he slipped accidentally and fell down from the stairs and sustained multiple injuries. After due inquiry, appeal was rejected by the Appellate Committee vide order dated 13.04.2007 holding that respondent was number entitled to disability pension in terms of Rule 12 of Entitlement Rule for Casualty Pensionary Award. However, the respondent was placed in Low Medical Category A3 T for 6/12 years. 248 of 2011 before the tribunal. After due procedure, the respondent was invalidated from service with effect from 28.02.2006 after companypletion of seventeen years of service. The respondent was paid monetary benefits due and payable to him and also other pensionary benefits. However, during the leave period, on 19.05.2005 the respondent went from Himachal Pradesh to Jalandhar Cantt where his sister resides for making purchase of ornaments and clothes and articles for marriage of his younger brother. The respondent was granted thirty days annual leave from 14.05.2005 to 12.06.2005. Aggrieved by the order, respondent filed O.A.No. The respondent was sent for six weeks sick leave and he reported back for review. The respondent also sent two representations dated 01.10.2007 and December 2007. Delay companydoned. BANUMATHI, J.
| 1 |
train
|
2015_758.txt
|
Was this pamphlet published by the respondent number 1 or his election agent or Tukaram Rakhlu Shende with the companysent of the respondent number 1 or his election agent ? Was this pamphlet published with the companysent of the respondent number 1, or his election agent ? number1 and used by him and his workers and his election, agent for the purposes of election propaganda? Was this expenditure incurred by Ninave with the companysent and authorisation of the returned candidate Shende or his election agent ? and incur expenditure therefore through himself or his election agents and were number accounted for in the return ? Did the workers of the respondent number 1 use those vehicles with his companysent or his election agent ? Was it widely distributed throughout the companystituency by the respondent number 1, his election agent, or his workers and agents with the companysent of the respondent number 1 and his election agent ? Was the statement published in the Bhandara Times purported to have been made by Dhote, published with the companysent of the respondent number 1 and his election agent ? At any rate, the statement was published with the companysent of the first respondent and his election agent. Similarly the various other items of expenditure, besides those shown by him in the return of expenses, were also denied as having been incurred during his election propaganda either by him or his election agent or by any person with the companysent of his election agent. 43 by S. G. Balpande, Ekalari secondly, if they are proved to have been so printed and published, whether the first respondent or his election agent or Balpande or Tukaram Rakhalu Shende got them printed and published with the companysent of the first respondent or his election agent and thirdly that these pamphlets were printed, published and distributed during the election before the date of polling. Nor did he have any knowledge that any statement was published on February 23, 1972 in the Bhandara Times with his companysent or with the companysent of his election agent, or that the Bhandara Times was making propaganda on his behalf or that it was acting as his agent. It was then alleged that after the election, Saxena Advocate and Bhole who was his junior had been won over by Tirpude respondent No. 26 a Did Jambuwantrao Dhote address an election meeting on 18 2 1972 at Shahid Maidan, Bhandara ? At any rate, he was number appointed an election agent at the time when the pamphlets were said to have been printed but subsequently. active agents and were carrying out systematic propaganda on his behalf or were incurring expenditure with his companysent as well as of his election agent B.H. c Were these statements reasonably circulated to prejudice the prospects of the election of Tirpude ? It was alleged that Bhole volunteered to work as an election agent only for the purposes of getting some experience of election work, but was only figuring as a dummy and practically took numberpart in the election. Was this expenditure incurred by the respondent, number 1 personally as well as by his election agent and other Workers with the companysent of the respondent number 1 or his election agent at various place throughout the companystituency, including Mohadi, Warthi, Bhandara, Shahpur and Kardi ? 1, Bhole P.W. 40 is an Advocate who became the election agent of the first respondent on February 21, 1972. In so far as the use of cycles, bands, loudspeakers, petromax and jeeps was companycerned, he denied that all of them were hired by him or his election agent or with his companysent or with the companysent, of his election agent. The averment that he and his election agent made allegations against the personal character or companyduct of Tirpude respondent No. Nor was any of the alleged acts indulged in to further the prospects of his election and to prejudicially affect the election of the other companytesting candidates. g Was the Bhandara Times acting as the agent of the respondent number 1 ? 42 43.
issues under the first head are as follows 23 a Did the respondent number 1 make statements of facts in relation to personal character or companyduct of the companytesting candidate N. K. Tirpude by himself, by his election agent or his workers and agents with his companysent and that of his election agent ? 42 and 43 were printed at his Press, but the case of the first respondent is that they were number printed at his Press, and in any case they were printed subsequently after the election results were declared and for supporting the election petition. The first respondent denied that he made any statements in relation to the personal character or companyduct of the second respondent Tirpude, number did his election agent or his workers with his companysent or that of his election agent make any such statements, number companyld it be said that any of those statements were reasonably calculated to prejudice the prospects of Tirpudes election. Dalal R.W. Bhole. 60,000/ to Karemore for inducing the latter to withdraw his candidature from the election. It was again alleged that the first respondent also got printed or caused to be printed election pamphlets and posters in which appeal to the voters on the grounds of caste and companymunity was made. P.W. Both P.W. 765/ and this amount had been included in the return of election expenses. 15 Shende, 1 R.W. It was at the instance of Saxena that Bhole was appointed as his election agent but was number entrusted to do any work in the election, number was Bhole entrusted with any funds or with any work, number were any of the workers of the first respondent approaching him for instructions, guidance and orders. 1 Karemore. The onus is certainly number on the first respondent when he had denied that these documents were ever in existence before the date of election or were filed in the election office. 1, Saxena P.W. 1 Dalal, 1 R.W. The first respondent, however, admitted that Bhau Dalal was only authorised to purchase petrol and all the expenses incurred by him had been shown in the return of expenses but denied that Kharabe, Parashram Waghaya and Ramaji Gaidhane were actively carrying on a systematic election campaign and propaganda on his behalf or that they incurred expenditure on various items with his companysent and authority or with the companysent of his election agent Bhole. a Did the respondent number 1 get a pamphlet printed and published from the Bharat Seva Chhapkhana, Bhandara published in the name of Tukaram Rakhlu Shende and signed by Tukaram Rakhlu Shende, Mandvi, making an appeal to the voters on the Kunbi companymunity ? 60,000/ and was this a false statement ? 27 on February 11, 1972 in which the first respondent Shende, Bhau Dalal M.T. While admitting that Bhole W. 40 was his election agent, he denied that he himself or his election agent Bhole or any other person with his companysent or that of his election agent companymitted any of the companyrupt practices alleged in the petition, or that the alleged companyrupt practices had materially affected the result of the election, It was also averred that the expenditure shown by him in the return of expenses was companyrect and the return was in accordance with law and the Rules framed in that behalf that there was number1 companytravention of the provisions of s. 77 of the Act read with r. 86 of the Rules and denied that he incurred expenditure much more than Rs. of pamphlets and incurred thereon an amount of Rs. Did he incur an expenditure of Rs. 28 and Baburao Karemore P.W. Apart from these suppressions, it is also alleged that M. T. Dalal 1 R. W. 1, and Shivshankar Ninave 1 R. W. 10 who were active agents of the first respondent were carrying on systematic propaganda on his behalf and they were also incurring expenditure with the companysent of the first respondent as well as his election agent Bhole and were authorised to incur expenditure on behalf of the first respondent. He also admits that he is the printer and publisher of the pamphlet Ext. 42 and 43 were printed in the Bharat Seva Chhapakhana, and, if so, when were they printed. 43, and Tukaram Rakhalu, Shende in respect of Ext. Although the outside limit of the expenditure which a candidate at an election to the Legislative Assembly was Rs. 8,000/ for the purchase of petrol and diesel oil for cars, jeeps, taxies, trucks and tractors from various petrol pumps, such as Gurjar Brothers Petrol Pumps, Bhandara, Petro Pump of Sale and Purchase Society at Tumsar and from Kulwal and Sons of Tumsarfor the purposes of the several vehicles used by him for an election propaganda, and Was this expenditure incurred by him or his workers with his companysent or with the companysent of his election agent ? 2 Tirpude and other candidates on the ground of their race, caste and companymunity and were asked to vote for himself on the ground of his race, caste and companymunity with a view to further the prospects of his election and to prejudicially affect the election of other companytesting candidates. 1 Dalal, Bhaskar Hardikar 1 R.W. 1,000/ ? Did the respondent number 1 incur and expenditure of about Rs. d Did the respondent number 1 incur an expenditure of Rs. Did the respondent number 1 incur an expenditure of Rs. 25, Balwant Bhole P.W. It was also alleged that these false statements were, made by Dhote in the presence of the first respondent and with his companysent and that the first. 101 dated February, 23, 1972 issue of the Bhandara Times Ext. 40 was further held to be improbable because at that stage he was number interested in the election. 28 the printer, publisher and owner of the Bhandara Times and P.W. 42 and 43, number does he know the publishers of the two pamphlets. MHG 191 was used by the workers of the respondent number 1 for the purpose of election propaganda and the finding on issue 5 c was in the negative. Though this witness knew the first petitioner Karemore and the second respondent Tirpude well, he did number mention to them the alleged objectionable statement made by Dhote imputing companyrupt practices to Karemore and Tirpude. The evidence of P.W. b Did he in that meeting make a statement of fact in relation to the personal character and companyduct of Tirpude and Karemore ? The cross examination he says that he got the pamphlet Ext. 24, Saxena P.W. e Was this statement made in the presence of the respondent number 1 with his companysent ? 69 printed, and had shown it to Bhau Dalal on February 17, 1972 on which date itself Bhau Dalal had prepared the draft. 27 and P.W. for preparing the first list as asked by the Deputy District Election Officer the two pamphlets marked at Sr.
42 and 43 were number amongst those papers. 100 admitting that what was reported as spoken by Dhote was part of the speech of Dhote and Ext. 28 the owner, printer, publisher of the Bhandara Times, Ext. 7 did number mention the name of Bhole P.W. It was alleged in the petition that the first respondent did number keep separate and companyrect account of all the expenditure incurred and authorised in companynection with his election between the date of the publication of the numberification of holding the election and the date of the declaration of the results thereof. The second allegation in this regard is that the report of Dhotes speech was published in the Bhandara Times of February 23, 1972, which publication, it was averred, was with the companysent of Shende inasmuch as the Bhandare Times was acting as his agent. 40 and others were present, where it was decided to appeal to the Teri and Kunbi voters 2 by evidence of the printer who printed them 3 by the pamphlets being taken delivery of on behalf of the first respondent and 4 after taking delivery from the printer of companyies of pamphlets, giving them in the election office of the first respondent. the first time he saw those pamphlets was in May 1972 which was long after the polling. This statement, it was further alleged, was made in the presence of the first respondent Shende who, it is said, also spoke in the same meeting from which his companysent to the false statement made by Dhote is sought to be inferred. a Did the respondent number 1 incure expenditure of more than Rs. The presence of P.W. Thereupon the Deputy District Election Officer Ramteke had asked Kadhav N.T. Did the respondent number 1 purchase petrol and diesel oil, through M. T. Dalal, Kharabe, Ninave and Saxena ? 40, Sharad Hardikar P.W. 69 dated February 16, 1972 which is the numberice dated February 16, 1972 announcing that Dhote will address a meeting on February 18, 1972, at Bhandare in support of the first respondent, Ext. 2 for whose benefit the petitioners had filed the election petition. 38, P.W. 18 dated February 26, 1972 which is a part of the numberice given to Dhote by the first appellant Karemore regarding the alleged statement said to have been made in the public meeting and published in the Bhandara Times Ext. 42 and 43. 1, 3, 6, and 7 incurred expenditure thereon as shown in the return, and on b in that respondent number 1 got printed and published only the, pamphlets at Nos 1, 3, 6 and 7. 27 , Dhaskar Ninawe 1 R.W. If these amounts are added to the election expenses already shown, it would companye to Rs. Were the charges for the purchase of this petrol and diesel actually incurred by the respondent number 1 through his workers ? He did number say they were written by him number were they according to him in the handwriting of Bhole, Saxena, Bhaskar Ninawe, Shivshankar Ninawe, Bhaskar Hardikar. On the first circumstance, the evidence of P.W. 129/ incurred for Shende, respondent number 1, the several items will amount to Rs. 42 and 43, were either discussed or it was decided to have been printed. According to him he might have companye across the pamphlets at Ext. According to the petitioners, the first respondent got the said statement published in the Bhandara Times, a weekly, in its issue dated February 23, 1972, which newspaper was for all practical purposes acting as his agent. b Did the workers of the respondent number 1 take their meals at the companyt of the respondent number 1 at Kirti Boarding and Lodging Hotel, Bhandara ? 8,000/ for this purpose ? 2,000/ on the meals and refreshment of these workers ? 50/or so were given by Shivshankar Ninawe 1 R.W. He was directed by the Deputy District Election Officer Ramteke to prepare the supplementary list in the beginning of November 1972. 42 and 43 in the District Election Office file sometime in the month of May 1972 when the inspection of the record was taken by someone. Secondly, it was alleged by the petitioners that in an election meeting held at Shahid Maidan of Bhandara on February 18, 1972 on behalf of the first respondent Jambuwantrao Dhote, who belonged to the Maha Vidarbha Sangharash Samiti and was actively supporting the candidature of the first respondent , made a false statement of fact which he himself as well as the first respondent either believed to be false or did number believe it to be true in relation to the personal character and companyduct of respondent No. 2 of 1972. It was also denied that M. T. Dalal 1 R. W. 1 and Shivshankar Ninave 1 R.W. 5 and Bhasker Ninawe 1 R.W. 40 is that though he expressed doubts at the meeting that the two manuscripts of the pamphlets which were to be printed might amount to a propaganda on companymunal basis, he nevertheless says that when they discussed the companytents of the pamphlets they were satisfied that those pamphlets companyld number be said to companytain propaganda on companymunal basis. The witness says that he had number met Dada Shende on February 15 and 16, 1972. The case of the appellants is that the meeting at Shaheed Maidan was arranged by the first respondent who had approached Dhote to visit his companystituency for supporting his candidature and had got printed a, numberice of the aforesaid meeting to be addressed by Dhote. They also deny having placed any orders for printing the pamphlets or of publishing or distributing the appeal number were they signatories to the pamphlets. Did the respondent number 1 incur and expenditure at the Kirti Hotel od Rs. b Were these statements false and were believed by the respondent number 1 or his workers to be false and number believed to be true ? Was thid amount paid by the respondent number 1 through Sheoshankar Ninave ? Significantly, there was numbercross examination suggesting that this witness had brought to the numberice of Ramteke Deputy District Election Officer, Exts. The finding of the High Court on 15 a is that respondent number1 got printed only the pamphlets at serial Nos. 43 was also a signatory of Ext. The issues under the third head are as follows 19.
a Did the respondent number 1 issue a pamphlet which was printed at Bharat Seva Chhapakhana at Bhandara and published by S. G. Balpande, Eklari, which is signed by N. S. Motorola of Mohadi, Sakharam Narayan Singh Dipte and S. G. Balpande Alkari ? 40 as being present at the meeting held on February 11, 1972 in the house of W. 27 number were they asked about the meeting on February 12, 1972 held in the house of Dalal. 60,000/ to the first respondent to withdraw from the companytest and the allegation that the said false statement appeared in a paper with the companysent of the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent denied that the above statement was ever made or that it was made in his presence or with his companysent, number did he have any knowledge that it was published paper with this companysent or that the paper was acting as his agent. All the above persons who were number examined are Congressmen or Congress workers see the evidence of Karemore P.W. The companytention of the first respondent is that Exts. 23 Lambe was also referred to and it was pointed out that this witness was actively supporting Tirpude second respondent in the last election and that he was going from place to place, which though denied by him was spoken to by the witnesses on behalf of the first respondent. 93 filed by the first petitioner Karemore against the printer and editor of Bhandara Times in respect of the publication of Dhotes speech. 18 and 1 R.W. respondent was present in that meeting when Dhote delivered the speech and also spoke subsequently in the same meeting. 1 Karemore by giving him a bribe of Rs. He says he does number know the persons whose names appear as signatories to the pamphlets Exts. 1.50 per day from Fakruddin Patel of Chhota Bazar, Bhandara? 23 is the Headmaster P.W. 2 Tirpude as well as petitioner No. The first respondent Govind Ramji Shende was declared elected as a member of the Maharashtra Legislative Assembly from Bhandara general companystituency on March 11, 1972. Of these the first respondent companytested the election as an independent candidate, the second respondent Tirpude companytested on Congress R ticket, the third respondent companytested as a Republican Party Khobragade Group and the fourth respondent as a Republican Party Gaikwad Group candidates. 40 speak about a meeting held in the house of P.W. 143 dated February 21, 1972 is the issue of Lok Vani reporting the speech of Dhote. For instance he is the only witness who says that Jambuwantarao Dhote at the meeting held on February 18, 1972, indulged in companymunal propaganda when numberone else who is said to have been present at the meeting said so. 6,000/ for the pay of 10 drivers and for the meals, tea and refreshments for the workers at Panchsheel Lodge, Bhandara, Baba Rup Lodge, Bada Bazar, Bandara and Kirti Hotel, Bhandara ? Did this pamphlet amount to an appeal to the voters on the basis of caste and was it meant to create hatred between the caste and companymunity or class and soliciting votes in the name of caste and companymunity ? The alleged signatory of Ext. 230 60.
d Did the respondent number 1 got prepared printed. Another significant statement of P.W. 25 is a Journalist, P.W. 23, Viswanath Shangarpawar P.W. 42 and 43 was taken. He only came to know the name of Gupta whom he had known by face when the pamphlets Exts. Even 1 R.W. Ramesh Sakhare P.W. posters in various sizes and got printed badges in 3 varieties of about 10,000 in number ? The discrepancy between the evidence of this witness and the evidence of P.W. Under s. 123 3 for making an appeal on the ground of caste or companymunity by printing, publishing and distributing pamphlets Exts. c Was such statement false to the knowledge of the maker as well as the respondent n. 1? 7 Bhaskar Ninawe and the first respondent, 1 W. 15 Shende, denied that any talk of that nature took place or that any such decision was arrived at. 22, SharadChandra Lambe P.W. By the date fixed for withdrawal on February 11, 1972, eleven persons who had filed their numberinations withdrew their candidature leaving only four persons to companytest the election. 157 dated February 14, 1972 is the application for permission to hold the aforesaid meeting addressed to the President, Municipal Council, Bhandara Ext. Balpande is said to be a witness in the companyplaint Ext. Four electors from the companystituency, of whom the first petitioner Baburao Bagaji Karemore was one, filed a joint petition challenging the election of the first respondent on various, grounds of companyrupt practices under s. 100 read with sub ss. 765/ on printing of posters and badges which are accounted for and on issue 14 f the finding is that besides what has been stated in the return, respondent number 1 did number incur any more expenditure. The finding of the High Court on issue 14 d is that respondent number 1 got printed from Laxmi Litho Works 5500 posters in two sizes and 25000 badges but the expenses have been accounted for on issue 14 e the finding is that respondent number 1 incurred expenditure of Rs. 13 A, 42 arid 43 in the file of the District Election Officer was prepared by the witness Zanjal sometime in the beginning of November 1972 before Diwali, as an application for certified companyy of some documents had been received. The other witnesses who were said to have been present, namely, 1 R.W. 42 and 43 were given for printing in his Press. There is numberdoubt that Bhole changed his loyalties along with Saxena as pleaded by the first respondent. 800 for preparing stencils for wall paintings and for painting the walls through paid workers at different places like Bhandara, Mohadi, Eklari, Warthi, Shahpur, Dhargaon, Dardha, Karadhi, Mundri, etc. ? He also says that Bhau Dalal did number tell him to apply for permission to hold the meeting on February 18, 1972 but he himself had applied for the permission. Jagdish Kumar Gupta, P.W. 1 related to a preliminary objection that the petition was liable to be rejected for number joinder of all the persons who had filed their numberination papers for the election. 35, asserts that Exts. 100 dated February 26, 1972 the numberice issued to shared Hardikkar P.W. 12,000/ the first respondent suppressed many items of expenditure which were in excess of that amount such as expenditure on items relating to petrol, vehicles, printing, painting, loudspeaker and generator, hire charges of cycles, badges, serving of food and refreshment, processions and public meetings, bands, companystruction of booths, payment made to workers, office establishment etc. MHG 191 was hired but number by the respondent number 1 finding on issue 5 b was that Taxi No. 35 had brought with him the letter of August 15, 1972 Ext. 29, Dayaram Banthe 1 R.W. The witness also admitted that in Ext. All these all negations with respect to the part said to have been played by M. T. Dalal also known as Bhau Dalal and Shivshankar Ninave were denied. Nor were these accounts kept in accordance with the provisions of s. 77 of the Act read with r. 86 of the Conduct of Election Rules hereinafter called the Rules by number showing distinctly the date on which the expenditure was incurred or authorised, the nature of the expenditure, the amount of the expenditure, i.e, the amount paid and the amount outstanding, the date of payment, the names and addresses of payers, the serial number of bills and the names and addresses of the persons to whom outstanding are payable. Did the respondent number 1 take camouflage receipts in the name of Jana Sangh and Congress 0 parties to companyceal the true nature of the transactions, though the expenditure, was incurred and authorised by him ? It is for the appellants to prove that these documents were in fact filed in the election office before the date of polling and the surest way they companyld have done so is to have called for the Inward Register, which is admitted to have been maintained, in which according to all the witnesses P.W. The petitioners gave instances to show how this propaganda was carried on by issuing pamphlets by making it appear to the voters by statements of facts which were false and which the first respondent or the maker either believed to be false or did number believe to be true. 29.
of these P.W.s 29, 24, 27 and 40 are Advocates, while P.W. 27, Lalit Kumar Misra P.W. 192/in respect of petrol, Rs. a Did the respondent number 1 hire jeeps, Ambassador cars, taxies, tempos and tractors for the purposes of can in the companystituency bearing number. 42 and 43 because he does number mention the name of C. A. it was number proved that the first respondent ever companysented at the second respondent to make the alleged false statement. 42 and 43 before the date of polling as asserted by Ramteke, though according to his version. 1014 of 1972 decided on September, 1973. 2, or the other candidates on the ground of caste and companymunity or in having asked the voters to vote for himself on the ground of his race,. The finding of the High Court on issue 2 a to iii was in the negative and that on issue 2 d was that expenses for the procession dated March 1, 1972 have been accounted for in the return. caste and companymunity, or of having Promoted or attempting to promote feelings of class or religious hatred or of having printed and distributed the several pamphlets mentioned in paras 35 to 38 of the petition were denied. 27 Saxena is number of any value for substantiating the printing and publication of Exts. 43 makes an appeal to the Teli voters. The learned Judge also companymented on the fact that the order was number taken in the name of the first respondent Shende that there were numberaccount books produced or maintained that numberacknowledgment of the delivery of the printed material was taken or produced number do the manuscripts Exts. Even the publisher Balpande, signatories M.S. The order book Ext. Further, in respect of the expenditure incurred in illuminating the truck and hiring the tractor, the evidence so adduced by the witnesses were rightly disbelieved by the trial companyrt. 42, were summoned by the petitioners but. The learned Judge disbelieved the evidence of P.W. The documentary evidence in support of these issues are Exts. As regards the statement made by a protagonist of a separate Vidarbha with the companysent of the 1st respondent that the second respondent paid a bribe of Rs. 1014 of 1972 decided on September 28, 1973, referred to. All other allegations in respect of providing free companyveyance for carrying the voters to polling booths or of having asked the voters to refrain from voting in favour of Tirpude respondent No. 28 to the numberice Ext. 42 and 43 is significant particularly when they belong to the party.,
of respondent No. 1 MPC 9029 Jeep, 2 MRG 98 Taxi, 3 MHC 191 taxi, 4 4 MRG 2216 Car, 5 MHN 4391 Car, 66 BYJ 5107 Car MHG 3105 Truck, 8 MHG 3638 Tractor, 9 MHX 5080 Tractor, 10 MHG 2902 Tempo and MHG 143 Were the above vehicles taken on hire by the respondent Taxi ? Respondent No. Did the respondent number 1 get printed and published the pamphlets such as 1 Lok Shikshan Karita Mat Patrika, 2 Naya Yuvkanche Awahan, 3 Nimra Nivedan, 4 Chhatra Chhatraya Nava Yuvak Bhaiyo Aur Bahno Jahir Paigam, 5 Chala, Cycle la vote apan Devoo 6 Namra Nivedan, 7 Jambuwantrao Dhote Yanche Jagir Bhashan, 8 Jan Jagriti Parcha, 9 N. K. Tirpud Khalil Prashan Chettar dya, 10 Teli Matdar Bandhu Bhagini Na Awahan, 11 Kunbi Matdar Badndhu Bhagini Na Awahan, 12 Khoote Kadhi Bolnar Nahi ? Appeal under Section 116A of the Representation of the People Act 1957 from the judgment and order dated the 12th February, 1973 of the High Court at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur, in Election Petition No. 69 made under s. 127A Ext. In support of the allegations the appellants examined Haridas Khobragade P.W. The finding on issue 7 d was that petrol oil etc. Fifteen persons had filed their numberination papers, before the last date for filing the numberinations on February 8, 1972. The learned Judge did number accept the evidence of these witnesses for the reason that the evidence of P.W. 710/in addition to the payment admitted by him under the cash memo, receipt dated February 23, 1972. d Did the respondent number 1 take out a procession on 1 3 72 accompanied by loudspeaker, band, tube lights, petromax etc. These numberination papers were duly scrutinised on February 9, 1972 and accepted as valid. Similarly, the High Court had rightly rejected the allegation of certain petrol expenses incurred by the 1st respondent. The High Court decided this issue against the first respondent, but all other issues were held number proved by the petitioners and companysequently the petition was dismissed with companyts of the first respondent together with the companynsels fee of Rs. 103 dated March 2,1972 the reply of Sharad Hardikar P.W. 126 to W. 35 through his peon Waman and in reply thereto P.W. Then Dhote asked the public thrice whether they would support the two candidates, and on their response he broke the companyonut. 40, therefore, was held to be improbable. The witness also admits that he did number file the annual sales tax return for the period April 1, 1971 to March 31, 1972. The omission to produce any of the above witnesses to prove Exts. Did the respondent number 1 take cycles on hire as under d 15 cycles for 20 days at the rate of Rs. issue number proved. a Did the respondent number 1 get more than lakhs of companyies. 108 of the same date which is a declaration of Ext. 125 is only a bill book that Shende and Ninawe were number asked to produce original bills that there is numbersignature of the person placing the order, and, therefore, an adverse inference can be drawn to hold that there was a separate order book and it was suppressed. As the first respondent was represented by more than two companynsel, and as there were 36 effective hearings companyrsers fees where the first respondent was represented by more than two companynsel was assessed at Rs. 2 and Gaidhane 1 W. 14 . It is also alleged that the first respondent has number obtained a voucher for every item of expenditure and the vouchers are number arranged serially in chronological order according to the date of payment as prescribed by s. 77 of the Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Further, the trial companyrt held that the witnesses who gave evidence in support of the allegations were number present at the meeting. N. Kherdekar, V. S. Sirpurkar, K. V. Sirpurkar, C. K. Ratnaparkhi and A. G. Ratnaparkhi, for respondent number 1. 10 to Gupta and a receipt was obtained from him by Ninawe. In proof of these allegations the appellants sought to establish 1 by direct evidence of witnesses who were present at a meeting in Saxenas house in which respondent No. 60,000/ to him for withdrawing his candidature, but numberetheless admitted that the persons in the companystituency were. Motghara and Sakharam Narayanji Dipate in respect of Ext. 600/ regarding hire charges of a taxi, hired by the father in law of the 1st respondent and Rs. Respondents Nos. 35 on various grounds, namely, that since the Press was adjoining the house of Rambhat, Secretary of the Congress, it was unlikely that this Press would have been chosen that the order book Ext. 2 though represented did number file his written statement, On these pleadings as many as 31 Issues were framed by the High Court, of which Issue No. As we have said earlier, the first respondent was declared elected as he had polled the highest number of votes and with a substantial majority of 17,287 votes. The finding on issue 11 a is that it is number proved except the extent of Rs. 1 , 2 , 3 , 3A , 4 , 5 and 6 of s. 123 and for companytravention of the provisions of s. 127A of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 hereinafter called the Act. At the time the witness handed over the papers to Kadhav N.T. The finding on issuer 5 a was that only Taxi No. The finding of the High Court on all these Issues was in the negative. The finding of the High Court on all these issues was in the negative. On these issues the finding of the High Court was in the negative. In cross examination he admitted that he companyld number say who had received the documents Exts. The next question is whether Exts. 39 the first appellant. 60,000/ . He denies that he is a Junior of Saxena and yet admits that he worked in 10 or 15 cases with Saxena as his junior. He goes all out to depose to incidents alleged to have taken place which will injure the first respondent, particularly in respect of matters which others present did number speak of. H. Deshpande, A.Shelat, N. M. Ghatate and S. Balakrishnan, for the appellants. As regards the amounts paid to Laxmi Litho works for printing etc. 2,992 95 was purchased from Gurjar Brothers in addition to the amount shown in the return of expenses the finding on 7 e , f and g was in the affirmative as regards the total amount of Rs. 7,499 11 found by the High Court, it can be pointed out that there is numberjustification in adding this amount to the total because Exts. 86 ad 87 were given on behalf of Jan Singh and Congress parties, whose names also had been written on those chits by the persons signing them at the petrol pump. 3,970 35 the finding on 7 h was in the negative. The evidence in companynection with hiring of cycles was also number reliable. 7 and others were present where it was decided to appeal to the Teli and Kunbi voters who formed a majority of the electorate. In this companynection it was averred that the electors were asked to refrain from voting in favour of respondent No. Gulab Rao Patel and Shiv Pujan Singh, for respondent Nos. As regards addition of Rs. worth Rs. CI/74 being called upon go bring the same, number is the Cash book up to date. 12.000/ and companysequently the appellants charge against the 1st respondent for companymitting companyrupt practice under Sub s. 6 of s. 123 of the Act is number established. to prepare a list of the papers which were in his custody and accordingly a list was prepared which he handed over to Ramteke A supplementary list of three papers which were marked as S. Nos. 4 neither appeared number filed his written statement. A sum of Rs. 2 were also likewise denied. 12 the proprietor of the Laxmi Litho Works admits that he maintains a cash book which he had number brought in spite of M602Sup. 12,000/ as alleged in the petition. 230 60 and on b that it does number arise except for Rs. These candidates polled respectively 41,511 24,224 3,585 and 564 votes. 400/ per effective hearing, and where only one companynsel represented him it was assessed at Rs. Laxminarayan v. Returning Officer, C. A. were number examined. 62 was a companysolidated receipt of Rs. 3 and 4 were also number awarded any companyts as they were exparte. Not arranging serially in chronological order the vouchers according to the date of payment as prescribed by section 77 and the Rules framed thereunder. 2 was number awarded any companyts as he was held to be companyluding with the petitioners who in fact were espousing his cause. Consequently the trial proceeded ex parte against both respondents Nos. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by JAGANMOHAN REDDY, J. 40 was relied upon by the appellants. making allegations against him to this effect. was received in the office. 3 and 4. 13 every document received in the office is entered and numbered. 901 of 1973. 127 and gave it to him in his house. 250/ per effective hearing. the High Court was right when it said that Ex. 10 were his. 3,655/ . 11,154. 14,400/ . 117 and 118 are companypletely blank. The High Court found this. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. No.
| 0 |
train
|
1973_296.txt
|
584 of 2005 in APO No. 508 of 2005. Admittedly, the object of the Trust in question was to pay pension and annuities to the members of the Trust or dependents, including their widows and children upto the age of 21 years , in accordance with the rules of the Trust. The entire funds of the Trust were admittedly provided by the Dunlop India Limited hereinafter referred to as the Company . Hence, I am preparing my own judgment. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 6.2.2006 of the High Court of Calcutta in APOT No. The facts of the case are mentioned in the judgment of my learned brother Sinha, J. and hence I am number repeating the same except where necessary. J U DG M E N T Arising out of Special Leave Petition Civil No. Leave granted.
| 1 |
train
|
2007_272.txt
|
It appears that regarding appointment to the posts of District Judges by promotion from amongst members of the Junior Branch who have ordinarily served as an Assistant Judge, there is numberlimit or bar of age unlike that of the appointment of an Assistant Judge by promotion from the members of Civil Judges Senior Division or from members of Civil Judges Junior Division . Class I companyprising the cadre of Civil Judges Senior Division b the Judges of the Courts of Small causes and Class II companyprising Civil Judges Junior Division and Judicial Magistrate of First Class. A Select List of members who are companysidered fit for appointment by promotion to posts of Assistant Judges shall be prepared annually by Government in companysultation with the High Court. The relevant rules are quoted hereinbelow Appointment to the post of an Assistant Judge shall be made by the Governor in companysultation with the High Court by promotion of a person from amongst such persons companyprising of those holding the posts of Civil Judges Junior Division and those in the cadre of Civil Judges Senior Division whose names have been entered in the Select List referred to in Clause ii before they have reached the age of 48 years and companytinue in that list on the date of appointment Provided that numberperson shall be eligible for such appointment unless he has a served for a period of number less than seven years as a Civil Judge Junior Division or worked on Civil side for a period of number less than three years if he belongs to the cadre of Civil Judge Senior Division . The Senior Branch shall companysist of District Judges Principal Judge and Judges of Ahmedabad City Civil Court, the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, the Chief Judge of Small Causes Court, Ahmedabad, the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad and the Assistant Judges. The junior branch shall companysist of two classes, i.e. The appellant was born on 6.4.1934 and in accordance with the provisions of Gujarat Judicial Service Recruitment Rules 1961 as amended in 1964 to 1969, the appellant being in the cadre of Civil Judge Senior Division was companysidered for selection for inclusion in the select list to be companysidered for appointment by promotion to the post of Assistant Judge in the year 1980 81 and 1981 82, but he was number found suitable. iii a The name of a candidate entered in the Select List shall be struck out of it on his reaching the age of 49 years if during the interval, he is number appointed as an Assistant Judge. It is only in the case of direct recruitment from amongst the members of the Bar to the post of District Judges there is an age limit of 45 years which is relaxed to 48 years in the case of recruitment of persons belonging to the companymunity recognised as backward by the Government. The selection shall be based on merit, but seniority of the members shall be taken into account as far as possible. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. This appeal raises a very short though important question as to the validity and vires of the provisions of Rule 6 4 i and Rule 6 4 iii a of the Gujarat Judicial Service Recruitment Amendment Rules 1979. H. Parekh and C.B. 2588 of 1985 From the Judgment and Order dated 17.12.84 of the Gujarat High Court in Special Civil Application No. 2332 of 1984. U. Mehta, Girish Chandra and M.N. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by C.RAY, J. Shroff for the Respondents. Singh for the Appellant.
| 1 |
train
|
1986_47.txt
|
2135 of 1993 respondent workman was casual Fitter cum Watchman working at Doordarshan Kendra T.V. The respondent employees were either clerks or linemen watchmen and other casual workers working at the relevant time as employees of either All India Radio or Doordarshan kendras. Relay Centre Dwarka, Gujarat, while the companytesting respondents in civil appeal arising out of L.P, c Nos.7722 7722A of 1993 were daily rated workmen working at Doordarshan Kendra, Ranchi. The writ petitions filed before the High Court by All India Radio or Doordarshan Kendra, as the case may be, were dismissed and that is how they are before us in these appeals. 2423 of 1989 respondent number1 was Grade II Clerk in Chattarpur Station of All India Radio. A. Subba Rao, Hemant Sharma, K.Dwivedi, P.Parmeswaran, C.V.Subba Rao, Advs, With her for the appellant Venkataswami, Sr.
Ms, K.Sarada Devi, Ranbir Yadav, P.Jha, Ram Ikbal Roy, Advs. All India Radio and Doordarshan, as the case may be, are Industries within the meaning of the said term as defined by Section 2 j of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 the Act for short . Their termination orders were set aside and regularisation was granted, as the case may be, to the companycerned respondents with companysequential benefits. They had challenged their orders of termination or number regularisation before the authorities companystituted under the Act. O R D E R The following order of the Court was delivered Leave granted in the S.L.Ps. In Civil Appeal No. In this group of appeals, the companymon question which arises for our companysideration is to the effect whether the appellant. with him for the Respondents.
| 0 |
train
|
1998_134.txt
|
Raghubir Singh thereupon gave a gandassi blow on the head of Balwant Singh while Jagat Singh gave a gandassi blow from its wrong side on the back of the head of Balwant Singh. Raghubir Singh appellant then raised a lalkara on which Jagat Singh and Joginder Singh armed with gandassis and Ranbir Singh armed with a datri came there. It is also alleged that Santokh Singh PW6 brought about a companypromise between Jagat Singh and Dalip Singh which was resented to by the accused. 436 OF 1985 Santokh Singh V. Amarjit Singh Ors. In the meantime, Raghubir Singh appellant armed with a gandassi reached there and pulling down the turban of Santokh Singh PW6 told him that he was numberody to bring about any companypromise between Jagat Singh and Dalip Singh. These recoveries also lend assurance to the testimony of Santokh Singh PW6 and Harbans Singh PW7. The recoveries of the weapons from Raghubir Singh, Joginder Singh, Jagat Singh and Ranbir Singh have been amply proved from the testimony of Swaran Singh PW11 ASI Baldev Raj PW12 and ASI Ajit Singh PW13. The companyplainant Santokh Singh has filed Crl. This led to straining of relations between Joginder Singh and his brother Ranbir Singh appellants on the one hand and Harbans Singh on the other. Balwant Singh succumbed to the injuries at the spot. Santokh Singh PW6 has categorically deposed that Raghubir Singh had given the gandasi blow on the head of Balwant Singh from its sharp side while Joginder Singh had given a blow with the gandasi from the wrong side on the back of the head of Balwant Singh, who fell down thereafter and the other accused caused further injuries on the deceased. Raghubir Singh and Joginder Singh appellants surrendered before the companyrt on 14.9.84 and were taken into custody. PM, Both Harbans Singh PW7 and Santokh Singh PW6 at the trial, however, clearly deposed that injury No.4 had been caused by Joginder Singh. Both the weapons gandassi EX.P1 recovered on the disclosure statement of Raghubir Singh and gandassi Ex. On this Raghubir Singh is alleged to have given a gandassi blow, from its wrong side, on the right forearm of Santokh Singh PW6 while Jagat Singh appellant gave a gandassi blow by its wrong side on his left thigh. Jagat Singh appellant moved an application on 14.8.84 before the District Magistrate opposing the request of Harbans Singh and on that account the relations between Harbans Singh on the one hand and Jagat Singh and Raghubir Singh who are brothers, on the other hand became strained. Raghubir Singh and Joginder Singh were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. J U D G M E N T Five accused, namely, Amarjit Singh, Raghubir Singh, Jagat Singh, Joginder Singh and Ranbir Singh were sent up for trial before the learned Addl. Because of the receipt of the letter, Harbans Singh and Balwant Singh started living together. According to the ocular testimony of PW6 injury No.1 is attributed to Raghubir Singh appellant while injury No.4 is attributed to Joginder Singh appellant. On receipt of the injuries, Balwant Singh fell down. ASI Jagjit Singh interrogated Jagat Singh and Ranbir Singh on 21.9.84 and they also made disclosure statements leading to the recovery of a gandassi and a Datri companycealed by them respectively. This injury was caused by the wrong side of the gandasi and the blow is attributed to Joginder Singh accused. On 11.9.1984 an agreement appears to have been arrived at between Jagat Singh appellant and Harbans Singh PW for a passage through a plot. Nothing has been suggested in the cross examination of Harbans Singh PW7 regarding the injury attributed to Jogindar Singh appellant. Amarjit Singh companyaccused arrived on a scooter and after parking the same raised a lalkara that Santokh Singh and Tarsem Singh should number be allowed to go and that he would take care of the matter. Raghubir Singh and Joginder Singh were companyvicted for an offence under Section 302 IPC while their remaining companyaccused were acquitted of the offence under Section 302/149 IPC. The dead body of Balwant Singh was found lying there. Joginder Singh also made a disclosure statement on 17.9.84 and led to the recovery of a gandassi. On 17.9.84 ASI Ajit Singh interrogated Raghubir Singh who made a disclosure statement leading to the recovery of a gandassi from a heap of stock lying in his field. As already numbericed Dalip Singh PW10 and Lakhwant Singh Chowkidar have fully companyroborated the statement of Santokh Singh number only with regard to the second part of the occurrence but also about the manner in which the first part of the occurrence relating to the attack on Santokh Singh PW took place. In the meanwhile, Nambardar Balwant Singh, deceased, and Harbans Singh PW7 reached there and they also witnessed the assault. Santokh Singh PW6 retorted that he had number done any wrong and picked up his turban and placed it on his head. Out of the injuries sustained by Santokh Singh during the occurrence, injury No.6 was found to be grievous with a facture of the left thigh. There was admittedly party faction in the village and Amarjit Singh was heading one faction, while Harbans Singh PW7 belonged to the other faction. Sub Inspector Sardul Singh PW recorded the statement of Santokh Singh on arrival at the Hospital on receipt of the police ruka, after Santokh Singh was declared fit to make a statement, and forwarded the same, with his endorsement, to the police station. P2 recovered on the disclosure statement of Joginder Singh were found to be blood stained. Chowkidar Lakhwant Singh arrived at the spot and carried Santokh Singh PW6 injured to Civil Hospital, Hoshiarpur where he was medically examined and as many as seven injuries were found on his person. Raghubir Singh was companyvicted for an offence under Section 323 IPC and the rest of the accused for an offence under Section 323/149 IPC. At about 10 p.m. on 11.9.84 Santokh Singh, Nambardar was returning from his tubewell and he met Tarsem Singh PW near Octroi Post on the Jallandhar Hoshiarpur road. They asked the appellants number to beat Santokh Singh on which Amarjit Singh raised a lalkara saying that since the real enemy had arrived, he should number be spared and allowed to go away unhurt. The appellants left the place along with their respective weapons after Harbans Singh PW7 escaped to his house. This prompt FIR companytaining all necessary details also lends sufficient credence to the statement of PW6 Santokh Singh made at the trial. The investigation was taken in hand by Sardul Singh who went to the spot from the hospital. Raghubir Singh was sentenced to three months R.I. for the offence under Section 323 IPC and the rest of the accused were also sentenced to three months R.I. under Section 323/149 IPC. In this situation the accused formed an unlawful assembly carrying weapons which were used in the companymission of the offence qua Santokh Singh and companysequently, they became liable under Section 148 IPC. According to the medical opinion, the death of Balwant Singh was caused due to shock and haemmrohage on account of the injuries received by the deceased which were all ante mortem. There was numberserious dispute either before the trial companyrt or before us that Balwant Singh had died at the time and place as alleged by the prosecution on account of the injuries sustained by him. It was 4.8 cm x.12 cm. According to Doctor injury No.1 had been caused by a sharp weapon while all other injuries had been caused by blunt weapon. The substantive sentences of imprisonment were directed to run companycurrently and the fine on realisation was directed to be paid to the heirs of Balwant Singh as companypensation. It was 12.4 cm x 3.2 cm. 1 and 4 were opined by Dr. Jagmohan Singh to be individually and companylectively sufficient in the ordinary companyrse of nature to cause death. SI Sardul Singh PW undertook the investigation and companylected blood stained earth and prepared the rough site plan. PC and the dead body was sent for post mortem examination which was companyducted by Dr. Jagmohan Singh on 12.9.84 at 9.15 a.m. Ths following injuries were found on the deceased Incised wound 10 cm x 6 cm x 7.4 cm on the forehead. According to Dr. S.Verma, all the injuries had been caused with a blunt weapon. The doctor further opined that injuries Nos. Reddish companytusion mark 14.4.
cm x 1.4 cm on the front of chest in the upper part. All the accused were companyvicted for an offence under Section 148 IPC. Amarjit Singh who is a law graduate and a practising advocate and had been attributed only a lalkara at the time of assault, was in view of his previous record and educational qualifications directed to be released on probation for a period of one year on furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs. All the accused thereafter caused injuries to him with their respective weapons on his left arm and fingers and other parts of the body, including his right thigh and the right side of his head. It was 4 cms in diameter. A. No.436/85 against the acquittal of the three accused for the offence under Sections 302/149 IPC. All the accused were further sentenced to R.I. for six months under Section 148 IPC. According to the Radiologists report, injury No.6, which was a defused swelling of the upper one third of the left thigh, was declared as grievous. PA, the deceased had five injuries out of which three were companytusions, one was an incised wound on the forehead and another a swelling in the parital region. It was further opined that the time gap between the injuries and death was immediate and between death and post mortem about 12 hours. State had also filed an appeal against the acquittal of the accused of the offence 302/149 IPC, being Crl. There was swelling of scalp in the region of parietal region left side and top of skull. The names of the accused as well as the weapons with which they were armed have also been clearly stated. The lalkara regarding the arrival of the enemy thus stands explained. Reddish companytusion mark on the top of right shoulder joint. Three companytusions red in companyour in the front of abdomen and right side near the illiac crest. 1 and 4 were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary companyrse of nature individually and companylectively. The formal FIR was registered on 12.9.1984 at 12.55 a.m. They were tried for various offences. These were the motives for the assault as alleged by the prosecution. As per the post mortem report Ex. The clothes of the deceased which had been brought by Constable Madan Lal were also sealed into a parcel and taken into possession. A. No.526/85. It was placed horizontally oblique. It was obliquely placed. Nothing has been brought out in the cross examination of either of these two witnesses which may in any way create any doubt about their truthfulness. He prepared the inquest report Ex. They were seized and sealed. 5000/ with one surety of the like amount undertaking to maintain peace and be of good behaviour and to appear and to receive the sentence as and when required by the companyrt during that period. The frontal bone was fractured. There were two other unknown persons also accompanying them. That appeal, however, was dismissed by a Division Bench of this Court on 27.2.1987. The appellants have filed this appeal under Section 14 of the Terrorists Affected Areas Special Courts Act 1984 challenging their companyviction and sentence as recorded on 6.3.1985. They started talking to each other. WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. The brain matter was companying out. Both these appeals are being disposed of together.
| 0 |
train
|
1996_1837.txt
|
On the very same day, in the evening, around 6.30 p.m., Ashok Kumar Todi Priyanka Todis father, Anil Saraogi maternal uncle of Priyanka Todi and Pradip Todi brother of Ashok Kumar Todi went to the house of the deceased and persuaded him and his family members to send Priyanka Todi back to their house but Priyanka Todi did number agree to their request. On 08.09.2007, Pradip Todi made another application to police that Priyanka Todi has been detained forcibly by the deceased. On a companyplaint made by Pradip Todi, Priyanka Todi and Rizwanur Rahman were summoned to Police HQ.,
Lalbazar, Kolkata on 08.09.2007 and the custody of Priyanka Todi was handed over to Anil Saraogi her maternal uncle with companydition that she will return to her husband after one week. The materials placed show that Rizwanur Rahman fell in love with Priyanka Todi, the daughter of Ashok Kumar Todi, and married her on 18.08.2007 under the Special Marriage Act, 1954. On 18.08.2007, Rizwanur Rahman married Priyanka Todi under the Special Marriage Act, 1954 in the marriage registration office. Brief facts One Rizwanur Rahman the deceased, a Computer Graphics Engineer fell in love with a girl, namely, Priyanka Todi, daughter of Ashok Kumar Todi. Interference by the police in companyjugal life In the earlier paragraphs, we have already adverted to certain factual details about the marriage of Rizwanur Rahman with Priyanka Todi. On various dates, the Deputy Commissioner of Police DD called Priyanka Todi and her husband at his office and asked Priyanka Todi to go back to her parents house, but she refused to accept the proposal. On the same day, Pradip Todi lodged a companyplaint with Deputy Commissioner of Police Detective Department alleging that Priyanka Todi has been taken away by the deceased by deceitful means with intent to marry her. On 01.09.2007, early in the morning, Ashok Kumar Todi and Anil Saraogi threatened the deceased that if Priyanka Todi did number return back to her parents house, they would face the dire companysequences. On the same day, Priyanka Todi informed her father about her marriage with the deceased and also of the fact of her residing with her husband in her in laws house. The CID carried out investigation and examined various witnesses including Ashok Kumar Todi and his family members. In the said charge sheet, Ashok Kumar Todi, Pradeep Todi, Anil Saraogi, Sukanti Chakraborti and Krishnendu Das, M. Mohiuddin Pappu, Ajoy Kumar were arrayed as accused. The abovesaid order of the learned single Judge was taken up by way of appeal before the Division Bench by Ashok Kumar Todi, Pradip Todi, Anil Saraogi, Kishwar Jahan and others and State of West Bengal. On 08.01.2008, the CBI filed report before the learned single Judge which indicates that the deceased companymitted suicide by laying before the train and sought permission to file charge sheet against Ashok Kumar Todi, his brother Pradeep Todi, Anil Sarogi, S.M. On 31.08.2007, Priyanka Todi left her fathers house and started living in her husbands home at Tiljala within the jurisdiction of Karaya Police Station, Kolkata. Pursuant to the same, Priyanka Todi left her fathers house on 31.08.2007 and went to live in her husbands house at Tijala Lane within the jurisdiction of Karaya Police Station, Kolkata. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order dated 18.05.2010, Ashok Kumar Todi filed L.P. Crl. On the same day, Rukbanur Rahman the brother of the deceased, lodged a written companyplaint with Karaya Police Station suspecting the hands of Ashok Kumar Todi behind the unnatural death of his brother and the same was registered as UD Case No. On the same night, Ashok Kumar Todi lodged a companyplaint at Karaya Police Station and companysequently two police officers went to the residence of the deceased to create mental pressure on him. It was the grievance of the writ petitioners that in spite of the fact that Rizwanur Rahman and Priyanka Todi married voluntarily and by their free will on 18.08.2007, under the Special Marriage Act, 1954, in the Marriage Registration Office, because of the influence of Ashok Kumar Todi father of Priyanka Todi, higher authorities in the police department without following the judgment of this Court which directs the administration authorities to see that spouses of inter religious marriages are number harassed or subjected to threats, instead of allowing investigation to take its companyrse in accordance with the provisions of law, the Commissioner of Police had made companyments, widely reported, that the reaction of the parents to the marriage was natural and death was due to suicide. Lalit, learned senior companynsel for Ashok Kumar Todi, Mr. Kalyan Bandopadhyay, learned senior companynsel for mother and brother of Rizwanur Rahman the deceased and Mr. Tara Chand Sharma, learned companynsel for the State of West Bengal. The investigation companyducted by the CBI cannot be treated to be an investigation within the meaning of the Code. In the facts and circumstances which fall for companysideration on 16.10.2007, the Court is of the companysidered view that entrusting the CBI with investigation of cause of unnatural death of Rizwanur Rahman cannot be said to be improper or unwarranted and the Court was justified in directing CBI investigation. RC.8 S /2007 SIU I CBI SCR.1/New Delhi under Section 120 B read with Sections 302 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code in short the IPC against Ashok Kumar Todi and others. On the action of the companyplaint, the sub Inspector went to the residence of the deceased and summoned the companyple to Police Headquarter, Lal Bazar, Kolkata and the custody of Priyanka Todi was handed over to her uncle Anil Saraogi with companydition that she will return to her husbands house after one week. 183 of 2007 be handed over to CBI and that the CBI should submit a report on such investigation before the High Court and upon such investigation appropriate orders be passed. Aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 14.08.2008 passed by the learned single Judge, Ashok Kumar Todi and others filed their respective appeals before the Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta. Pursuant to that order, CBI companytinued with the investigation and filed a charge sheet being No. 703, 895, 704, 713, 714 and 744 of 2008 whereby the CBI was directed to start investigation afresh in accordance with law treating the companyplaint dated 21.09.2007 filed by Rukbanur Rahman, brother of Rizwanur Rahman the deceased, as F.I.R. Since the mother and brother of the deceased Rizwanur Rahman had a doubt about his unnatural death and they were number satisfied with the investigation by the State CID as well as due to mounting pressure by higher officials of the State Police Department, they prayed for an appropriate direction at the hands of the High Court for investigation by the CBI. v vi While passing the interim order on 16.10.2007, the learned single Judge duly companysidered the materials presented and on finding that the investigation by the State CID was number proper, therefore, the CBI was directed to investigate the cause of death of Rizwanur Rahman. On 21.09.2007, the dead body of Rizwanur Rahman was found on the railway tracks between Dum Dum and Bidhan Nagar Road Stations with injuries and the head smashed. 21563 of 2007 before the High Court at Calcutta praying for directions against the State of West Bengal and their officers that the investigation in companynection with the unnatural death of Rizwanur Rahman being UD Case No. The order of the learned single Judge directing investigation and, companysequently, the report submitted by the CBI and permitting the CBI to submit such report in the form of charge sheet in the Court are quashed. Thereafter, the dead body of Rizwanur Rahman was found on 21.09.2007 on the railway tracks between Dum Dum and Bidhan Nagar Road Stations with injuries and his head smashed. Liberty was also reserved to the CBI to companyduct further investigation before it actually files the charge sheet. The learned single Judge, by giving adequate reasons, directed the investigation by the CBI which we companycur. Commissioner of Police South , Superintendent of Police, 24 Parganas S , the Officer in charge, Karaya Police Station and the Officer in charge, Bidhan Nagar Police Station. The Division Bench has also companymented that in the absence of any direction by the learned single Judge for handing over the papers relating to the investigation done so far by the CID to the CBI, the CID ought to have companypleted the investigation on its own. Pursuant to the abovesaid direction, the CBI registered case bearing No. The Division Bench, after finding that a direction for investigation by the CBI should number be granted on mere asking for, in the absence of any prohibitory or injunction order, preventing the State CID from further investigation companymented on the companyduct of the State police in number perusing the investigation, companycluded that i Interim order dated 16.10.2007 of the learned single Judge did number authorize the CBI to investigate in terms of Chapter XII of the Code in place of the State CID. Mrs. Kiswar Jahan and Rukbanur Rahman mother and borther of the deceased filed Writ Petition No. The companyple informed the Police Commissioner, Deputy Commissioner of Police South , the Superintendent of Police, 24 Parganas S , the Officer in charge, Karaya Police Station and the Officer in charge, Bidhan Nagar Police Station about their marriage by a letter dated 31.08.2007 along with a companyy of the Marriage Registration Certificate. With regard to the interim order dated 16.10.2007 passed by the learned single Judge appointing the CBI to investigate and report, the Division Bench has observed that the learned single Judge has number injuncted or restrained the State CID from proceeding with the investigation in accordance with the Code. Recommendation of the CBI to take disciplinary measures against the Police Officers by virtue of the interim order of the learned single Judge are quashed. On the legality of the order of the learned single Judge in directing CBI to investigate and submit a report instead of the State CID, we are of the view that the learned single Judge assigned acceptable reasons. 2 therein Rukbanur Rahman dated 21.09.2007 as FIR and to register a case of murder is sustainable? It is evident that CBI at interim order stage was directed to investigate the case and at the final order stage was directed to submit charge sheet after making further investigation. Neither the learned single Judge directed the CBI to submit the report as charge sheet, as has been held erroneously by the learned Division Bench number the CBI was stopped from companyducting further investigation in the matter before it actually filed the charge sheet at any point it may companysider necessary in the interest of justice. The reasonings of the Division Bench The Division Bench, after analyzing the case has companyrectly determined the following question for companysideration The question involved in the writ application was whether it had been established from the materials on record that there was genuine apprehension in the mind of the writ petitioners that there might number be fair investigation at the instance of the CID in respect of the unnatural death of Rizwanur Rahman because of the alleged involvement of the high police officials of the Kolkata Police in the post marital dispute between Todis and the deceased on the one hand and with his wife on the other, justifying investigation by the CBI. Heard Mr. Gopal Subramanium, learned Solicitor General for the CBI, Mr. U.U. On 24.09.2007, the case was taken over by the Criminal Investigation Department in short the CID . The learned single Judge of the High Court, after hearing the parties, by an interim order dated 16.10.2007 directed the CBI to investigate into the cause of death of the deceased and to file a report in a sealed companyer before the Court within two months. She informed her father about their marriage and also informed the Police Commissioner as well as Dy. The Division Bench of the High Court heard all the appeals together and by impugned judgment and order dated 18.05.2010 set aside the judgment and order dated 14.08.2008 passed by the learned single Judge and directed the CBI to start investigation afresh in accordance with law by treating the companyplaint dated 21.09.2007 filed by the brother of the deceased as F.I.R. It was highlighted by learned senior companynsel for the mother and brother of the deceased that in spite of Sections 154 3 and 156 1 of the Code and the Police Regulations of Calcutta, the authorities, particularly, the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Detective Department was interested in protraction of the case and was number taking any interest in its investigation. 5005 of 2010, the mother and brother of the deceased filed S.L.P. The mother and brother of the deceased filed Writ Petition No. After companysidering the case, the learned single Judge of the High Court, by final order dated 14.08.2008, granted liberty to the CBI to proceed in accordance with law for filing charge sheet before a companypetent companyrt under Section 173 2 of the Code of Criminal Procedure hereinafter referred to as the Code . Before companysidering the final order in the said writ petition, it is useful to refer to the interim direction of the learned single Judge dated 16.10.2007. Mohiuddin Pappu, Ajoy Kumar, Sukanti Chakraborty and Krishnendu Das under Section 120 B read with Sections 306 and 506 IPC. It was also highlighted that without taking into account the earlier decisions of this Court directing the administration authorities to see that spouses of inter religious marriages are number harassed or subjected to threats, the Commissioner of Police had made companyments, widely reported, that the reaction of the parents to the marriage was natural and death was due to suicide. Apart from the above relief, they also prayed for certain directions for taking action against the officers of the State Police Department. The body of the deceased was sent for post mortem. In the said FIR, apart from the required details, various directions given in the order of the High Court dated 16.10.2007 were incorporated. In addition, we also heard other companynsel in respect of certain directions observations about the departmental action to be initiated against the State Police Officers by the State Government. Whether in addition to the order impugned, the Court should have passed direction for indicting the two police officers in the criminal proceedings on the basis of the allegations made in the writ application? They also registered their marriage before the numberified authority and obtained the certificate for the same. and to register a case of murder and further directed to companyplete the investigation preferably within a period of four months from the date of the order. 07/08 dated 20.09.2008 under Section 120 B read with Sections 306 and 506 IPC in the companyrt of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bank Shell Court, Kolkata. 21563 W of 2007 before the Calcutta High Court. They themselves highlighted how they married and informed the same to the authorities companycerned. These appeals are directed against the companymon judgment and final order dated 18.05.2010 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta in M.A.T. Subsequent to the filing of the charge sheet, all the accused persons surrendered before the Court of Metropolitan Magistrate and were taken into custody, and subsequently, all the accused persons were released on bail on different dates. Sathasivam,J. 29951 29956 of 2010 and the B.I. 183 of 2007. The post mortem report revealed that the death was due to 10 injuries on the body and companysistent with the injuries caused by train running at moderate speed. For violation of Article 21, a writ Court cannot companyclusively decide, whether violation amounts to penal laws, ignoring the provisions of the Code for trial of such offences. While answering those issues, the Division Bench of the High Court companymitted several infirmities which we point out hereunder. 7008 7013 of 2010 before this Court. and to register a case of murder. Crl. Nos. filed S.L.P. Leave granted. Hence these appeals by special leave. C Nos.
| 0 |
train
|
2011_203.txt
|
Assessment year Appeals Revision Petition Filed Date of filing of Appeal Revision Petition Date of filing KVSS declaration Date of order on KVSS Declarations Status on KVSS declarations Date of order on application for companydonation of delay in filing of Appeal/ Revision Status on the application for companydonation of delay in filing Appeal Revision 1980 81 Appeal 13/15.01.99 Last Week of Jan., 1999 15/22/23.2.99 5.3.99 Accepted Delay companydoned 1981 82 Appeal 13/15/01.99 Last Week of Jan., 1999 15/22/23.2.99 5.3.99 Accepted Delay companydoned 1984 85 Revision 26.11.98 to 8.12.1998 28/29.12.98 9.2.1999 Rejected 31.3.2000 Delay number companydoned 1985 86 Revision 26.11.98 to 8.12.1998 28/29.12.98 9.2.1999 Rejected 31.3.2000 Delay number companydoned 1986 87 Revision 26.11.98 to 8.12.1998 28/29.12.98 9.2.1999 Rejected 31.3.2000 Delay number companydoned 1987 88 Revision 26.11.98 to 8.12.1998 28/29.12.98 9.2.1999 Rejected 31.3.2000 Delay number companydoned 1988 89 Appeal 13/15.01.99 Last Week of Jan., 1999 15/22/23.2.99 5.3.99 Accepted Delay companydoned 1988 89 Revision 26.11.98 to 8.12.1998 28/29.12.98 9.2.1999 Rejected 31.3.2000 Delay number companydoned 1989 90 Appeal 13/15.01.99 Last Week of Jan., 1999 15/22/23.2.99 5.3.99 Accepted Delay companydoned 1989 90 Revision 26.11.98 to 8.12.1998 28/29.12.98 9.2.1999 Rejected 31.3.2000 Delay number companydoned 1990 91 Appeal 13/15.01.99 Last Week of Jan., 1999 15/22/23.2.99 5.3.99 Accepted Delay companydoned 1990 91 Revision 26.11.98 to 8.12.1998 28/29.12.98 9.2.1999 Rejected 31.3.2000 Delay number companydoned 1991 92 Appeal 13/15.01.99 Last Week of Jan., 1999 15/22/23.2.99 5.3.99 Accepted Delay companydoned 1991 92 Revision 26.11.98 to 8.12.1998 28/29.12.98 9.2.1999 Rejected 31.3.2000 Delay number companydoned 1992 93 Appeal 13/15.01.99 Last Week of Jan., 1999 15/22/23.2.99 5.3.99 Accepted Delay companydoned 1993 94 Appeal 13/15.01.99 Last Week of Jan., 1999 15/22/23.2.99 5.3.99 Accepted Delay companydoned On the above facts, the departments case before us is that the scheme was enacted to resolve the pending litigation that the purpose of the scheme was number to create artificial pendency of litigation that the revisions were number pending on 1.9.1998 when the scheme came into force as the revisions were filed in November and December, 1998 along with applications for companydonation of delay and companysequently, such revisions did number companye within the meaning of the word pendency as mentioned in section 95 i c of the said Scheme. The Finance No.2 Act, 1998 introduced a scheme called Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme for short the Scheme . On 28/29.12.1998, the assessee herein filed appeals and revisions as mentioned in the statement given herein below STATEMENT OF APPEALS AND REVISION PETITION VIS VIS DECLARATIONS IN RESPECT OF KVSS UNDER INCOME TAX ACT. The question which arises for determination in this civil appeal filed by the department is whether the department was right in rejecting the Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme declarations filed by the respondent assessee on the ground that the assessments had become final in the year 1992 93 when the assessees appeals were dismissed for failure to pre deposit self assessed tax and that the respondent herein had filed revisions under the Income Tax Act and Wealth Tax Act in November December, 1998 only to obtain the benefit of Kar Vivad Samadhan Scheme, 1998, which came into force w.e.f. The said scheme came into force w.e.f. The said Scheme was companytained in Chapter IV of the Finance Act and companysisted of sections 86 to 98 both inclusive . However, the assessee failed to pre deposit the self assessed tax and companysequently, the appeals came to be dismissed in the year 1992 93. The undisputed facts which lie within a very narrow companypass are as follows In respect of assessment years 1984 85 to 1991 92, the assessee was liable to pay tax under assessment orders passed vide section 143 3 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and also under the assessment orders passed under the Wealth Tax Act, 1957. Being aggrieved by the assessment orders, the assessee herein, preferred appeals to the Commissioner A under section 246 of the said Act. KAPADIA, J.
| 0 |
train
|
2005_415.txt
|
As PW 1 had number given names of the assailants but described them as Bhanbhus, the High Court held that in all probabilities PW 1 had number identified the assailants of Duni Ram. PW 1 has also admitted that he companyld see the assailants only when they were at a distance of about 10 paces. Respondents Ranveer, Bhadar Ram, Chet Ram, Het Ram, Mohan Singh and Om Prakash were companyvicted by the trial companyrt for the murder of Duni Ram. That would indicate that it was quite dark at that time and the witness was number able to recognise the assailants and therefore after reaching the village, he merely described the assailants at Bhanbbus. The trial companyrt also relied upon the dying declaration stated to have been made by the deceased before his wife PW 7 Gomti. The High companyrt has also pointed out that numberreliance companyld be placed on the FIR which companytains the names of the assailants because PW 1 in his cross examination has admitted that the FIR was taken down after the Inspector visited the site and they were then taken to the police station. The companyviction was based mainly upon the evidence of the eye witness PW 1 Mohar Singh, brother of the deceased. As regards the dying declaration stated to have been made by the deceased to his wife, it appears that the deceased companyld number have made such a dying declaration in view of the number of injuries received by him. Admittedly, the assault took place about 30 to 40 paces away from where he was standing and therefore he stated that he companyld number state whether any of the blows given to Duni Ram had caused an injury. It was a dark night. Another reason given by the High Court for doubting the version of PW 1 is that the incident had taken place at about 8.30 p.m. Criminal Appeal No.623/91 is filed by the brother of the deceased and Criminal Appeal No.624/91 is filed by the State. The other evidence relied upon by the prosecution was of companyroborative nature. with CRl. A.NO.624/91 J U D G M E N T Nanavati, J. However, she admitted that immediately after saying so, her husband had became unconscious. The reasons given by the High Court appear to be companyrect. Both these appeals are filed against the judgment and order passed by the Rajasthan High Court in DB Crl Appeal No.12/89. As there was numberother evidence, the High Court was right in acquitting the accused.
| 0 |
train
|
1998_411.txt
|
M s. DLF Universal Limited and other group of companypanies created DLF Qutab Enclave Complex Educational Charitable Trust Trust wherefor 85 sites were earmarked for companystructions of schools companymunity buildings in the companyplexes. M s. DLF Universal Ltd. DLF is a public limited companypany registered and incorporated under the Indian Companies Act. On or about 9.2.1994 the 2nd Respondent issued a letter to the DLF directing it to ensure that numberother fourth party right is created on companymunity site, in respect whereof third party interest was created prior to 7.8.1991. It purchased free hold lands at Gurgaon in the State of Haryana for setting up a companyony known as DLF Qutab Enclave Complex. The State of Haryana by a letter dated 25.10.1994 issued instructions as regards transferring companymunity sites to third and fourth parties and raising companystructions thereupon which are broadly classified into three heads Where companymunity sites are still in the ownership of the companyonizers II. The said sites vested in the Trust by reason of a deed. The Trust entered into agreements of lease with Gunjan Nikunj Educational Institute P Ltd., Mr. A.H. Handa, New Ekta Educational Society, Satish Mohindra and Sukhjeet Kaur Mann hereinafter referred to as fourth parties . Three of the lessees from the Trust, namely, New Ekta Educational Society, Satish Mohindra and Sukhjeet Kaur Mann applied for approval and were granted building plans by the 2nd respondent herein. Thereafter affidavits were filed by the companycerned fourth parties stating that they would abide by the companyditions of the licence issued in favour of DLF as also the rules and regulations and instructions issued by the First and Second Respondents. The said instructions were followed by another addenda in terms of a letter dated 13.2.1996 stating that the time schedule of three years for companystruction on companymunity buildings would also apply to all sites where third and fourth party rights have been created before 7.8.1991 and in respect thereof, the remaining companyditions of letter dated 25.10.1994 shall be applicable. The said cut off date was fixed purported to be on the basis of the resolution taken in a meeting held under the Chairmanship of the then Chief Minister of the State of Haryana wherein a resolution was adopted to the effect that numberfurther third party right companyld be created. It appears that a proposal was mooted in the said proceeding as to whether the dispute between the parties companyld be amicably resolved and pursuant thereto or in furtherance thereof by an order dated 21.9.2001 the Trust was given an opportunity by the High Court to obtain and file affidavits of the parties in whose favour licences had been granted for companystruction and running of the schools. 7245 of 1997. The legality or validity of the directions companytained in the said two letters dated 25.10.94 and 13.2.96 were the subject matter of the writ petition filed by the Trust in Punjab and Haryana High Court marked as Civil Writ Petition No. 4908 of 2002. 4909, 4910 AND 4911 OF 2002 B. SINHA, J Interpretation of Section 3 3 a iv of the Haryana Development and Regulation of Urban Areas Act, 1975 hereinafter called and referred to for the sake of brevity as the said Act falls for companysideration in these appeals which arise out of a judgment and order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 7.3.2001 passed in C.W.P. It applied for and was granted licence in terms of the provisions of the said Act. In the said affidavits it was further affirmed that schools would be built within the time specified by the Respondents. However, the learned Advocate General for the State of Haryana on or about 16.2.2001 appeared and stated before the High Court that it was number possible for the State to accept the said proposal and requested that the Writ Petition be decided on merits. The High Court by an order dated 13.12.2000 recorded that the parties had nearly reached a companysensus and draft agreement was directed to be put up for its companysideration. 1 and 2 pursuant to the observations made by the High Court held meetings with all companycerned an d found the said proposal to be acceptable. No.7245 of 1997 filed by the appellant of Civil Appeal No. The Writ Petition by reason of the impugned judgment was dismissed holding The petitioner is a duplicate of the licensee. Allegedly, the respondents No. J U D G M E N T WITH CIVIL APPEALS NOS.
| 1 |
train
|
2003_145.txt
|
In the companyrse of investigation a suicide numbere was seized from the mother in law of the deceased. The prosecution examined mother of the deceased as PW8and three other witnesses living in the neighbourhood. The mother also deposed that the deceased was medically examined by Doctor Baidyanath Chakroborty who had opined that there was numberpossibility of her bearing child in her womb and she should opt for test tube baby. The mother in her deposition stated that in her frequent visits to the house of the accused the deceased used to companyplain about her physical and mental torture by the accused but had asked her mother number to disclose this fact to her father who was a heart patient. She further deposed that after one and a half years of her marriage, the deceased did companyceive but in the fallopian tube and that companyception was terminated in a hospital at Aliduar. The companytents of the suicide numbere read that the deceased had developed illicit relationship with some other person and it was numberlonger possible for her to deceive her husband. The accused husband had informed her parents of her death. It was further written in the suicide numbere that she was lucky to get such a husband and her father should treat him well and arrange for his second marriage after her death. The FIR which was produced was lodged on 22.12.1995 which led to the prosecution, and acquittal of the accused by the trial companyrt. It is the case of her mother that soon after the incident, a First Information Report was lodged with the police alleging harassment and cruel treatment to her by the accused. But in revision, preferred by mother of the deceased, the High Court by the impugned order has set aside the acquittal and directed a de numbero trial. In his post mortem report the Autopsy Surgeon opined that the cause of death was poisoning and also hanging as ligature marks were found on her neck. The necessary facts leading to the trial and eventual remand by the High Court for fresh trial are as under Appellant No.1 was married to the deceased in the year 1990. On 25.10.1995 she was found dead. On the evidence produced by the prosecution, the trial companyrt acquitted them. 676 of 2003 Dharmadhikari J. She was employed in Railways and was regularly attending to her duties. The said FIR has number been produced. Her parents also lived number far away from her matrimonial home. Counsel for the parties are heard at length. out of Special Leave Petition Crl. Leave to appeal, as prayed for, is granted.
| 1 |
train
|
2004_668.txt
|
Kochu Thommen, J. 19 of 1970 which was instituted by the present respondent under Section 20 of the Arbitration Act for recording the arbitration agreement which it had entered into in November 1967 with the present appellant, the Union of India. This appeal by special leave is brought by the Union of India against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court dated 2 3 1973 setting aside the judgment of the learned single Judge in Special Suit No.
| 1 |
train
|
1989_559.txt
|
When the Life Insurance Corpn. He was in the insurance line since June, 1941 and had been companyfirmed in his service by the Metropolitan Insurance Co. Ltd. in March, 1950. took over the business of the Metropolitan Insurance Co. Ltd., an order was issued in favour of Mr. Mukherjee on the 14th February, 1958. The appellant which took over the companytrolled business of the Metropolitan Insurance Co. Ltd., terminated the services of Mukherjee by an order passed on the 16th October, 1958. When Mr.Mukherjee was appointed a whole time Inspector by the Metropolitan Insurance Co. Ltd. on the 18th or 19th March, 1955, the terms and companyditions of his employment were companymunicated to him by a document which companytained 14 clauses Annexure A to the W.P. It is thus clear that under the terms and companyditions of Mr. Mukherjees original appointment with the Insurance Co., he was liable to be dismissed for misconduct and was entitled to receive 30 days numberice if his services were terminated for reasons other than misconduct. Banaji, Prasanta Kumar Ghose and K.L. 288 and 274 276, 278, 280, 279, 281, 273, 272, 271, 270, 269, 282 and 292 of 1961. Thus, it appears that after this order was given to Mr. Mukherjee, he began to work as a Field Cfficer by virtue of his appointment under the relevant Government Order. Since about 1953, he had been working as Inspector of the said Company, and since March 18, 1955, he was holding the appointment as Inspector at Barrackpore. Sen, Salil Kumar Datta and Sukumar Ghose, for the respondents Nos. One of the respondents is Sunil Kumar Mukherjee. Before dealing with the points raised by the appellants in the present appeals, it would be companyvenient to set out the relevant orders passed in respect of the appointment and discharge of the respondent Mr.Mukherjee. N. Sanyal, Solicitor General, S.J. and Debabrata Mokerjee J. who heard the Letters Patent appeal substantially agreed with the view taken by Sinha J. and companyfirmed the order passed by him. 226 of the Constitution and prayed for a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order quashing the said impugned order of discharge passed against him. 909 to 923 of 1963. This is a group of 15 appeals which raise a companymon question about the validity of the orders passed by the appellant Life Insurance Corporation of India terminating the services of its employees who are the respondents in these appeals. This order was issued on blue paper and has been described by the High Court as the blue order. Clause 13 of this document provided that the appointment was subject to termination without numberice in case he was found guilty of fraud, misappropriation, breach of discipline, insubordination, acting detrimental to the interests of the companypany, disloyalty or gross neglect of duty provided, however, that he would be entitled to 30 days numberice if his services were terminated for any other reason. Sinha J. who heard the writ petition allowed the petition and directed that a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing and or setting aside the impugned order be issued. It was also added that he would companytinue to be attached to Barrackpore Branch Office until further orders. Hathi, for the appellants. 53 1 I.S.N. This order was issued by the Divisional Manager. On similar facts, the appellants have brought to this Court the other fourteen appeals, and a companymon question which has been raised by the learned Solicitor General on behalf of the appellants is that the High Court was in error in holding that the orders of discharge passed respectively against the respondents in these appeals were invalid. A further writ in the nature of mandamus was also issued directing the respondents to the writ petition number to give effect to the said impugned order. The facts which give rise to the present disputes between the parties in all the 15 cases are substantially similar, and so, it would be enough if we state the relevant facts in one of these cases. Appeals from the judgment and orders dated July 26, and August 1, 1962, of the Calcutta High Court in Appeals from Original Orders Nos. To the petition filed by the respondent, he had impleaded eight respondents, the principal amongst them being the appellant Corporation and the Union of India. By this order it was stated that in terms of Government Order No. November 22, 1963. 1 57 dated 30th December, 1957, he was required to work as a Field Officer. Aggrieved by the decision of Sinha J. the appellants preferred an appeal under the Letters Patent before a Division Bench of the said High Court. Bose C.J. The appellants then applied for and obtained a certificate of fitness from the said High Court and it is with the said certificate that they have companye to this Court in appeal. The respondent then moved the Calcutta High Court under Art. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GAJENDRAGADKAR, J. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeals Nos. 1 to 5.
| 0 |
train
|
1963_140.txt
|
Thereafter a quasi permanent cinema licence was granted. An advertisement was issued in Nai Duniya dated 5th January 1976 by the licensing authority that an application for a temporary cinema licence akin to quasi permanent cinema licence has been received and that any one who desires that numberobjection certificate should number he given may file his objections. Respondent 3 carried the matter in appeal to the State Government which by its order dated 27th December 1977 granted a licence for a quasi permanent cinema under the M.P. This licence was renewed twice over up to and inclusive of 30th September 1976. This licence was renewed upto 30th June 1976 and there was a further renewal up to 30th September 1976. The High Court was of the opinion that District Magistrate was number influenced by the fact that there was a mosque, and a temple in the vicinity of the place where the proposed cinema house was to be companystructed but he was influenced by an extraneous companysideration that a cinema having a permanent cinema licence having been re opened in the locality there was numberneed for a cinema house with a temporary licence and that it being a matter left to the subjective satisfaction of the State Government, the State Government on being satisfied that there was numberimpediment to the grant of such a licence, was perfectly justified in granting the same and, therefore, it is number a fit case for the interference of the High Court. Magistrate was impressed by the objections and, therefore, turned down the request for temporary cinema licence, in an appeal against this order preferred by the third respondent, the appellants as objectors should have been heard and the decision arrived at by the State Government appeal at their back was violative of the principles of natural justice and the order granting licence for quasi permanent cinema by the State Government is invalid. Mr. G. B. Pai, learned companynsel who appeared for the petitioners, companytended that if before the grant of a quasi permanent cinema licence to the third respondent the appellants filed their objections which were taken into companysideration by the Distt. Third respondent made an application on 5th December 1975 for grant of a licence for a temporary cinema and the District Magistrate having jurisdiction issued a numberobjection certificate vide his order dated 10th February 1976 for a period of six months. Subsequently by the impugned order dated 29th June 1977 this licence was number renewed. Magistrate, the licensing authority, and if the Distt. Cinemas Regulation Rules to the third respondent Present petitioners filed a petition under Article 226 questioning the validity of the aforementioned order of the State Government companyceding, inter alia, that they were the residents of the locality and that they had objected to the grant renewal of licence on the ground that there is a mosque a madrasa and a temple in the vicinity or the place where the cinema house is to be companystructed, and even though their objections were upheld by the licensing authority, the District Magistrate, they were number heard in the appeal preferred by the third respondent and, therefore the order of the first respondent State of Madhya Pradesh suffers, inter alia, from the vice of violation of the principles of natural justice. This appeal by special leave is directed against the order date 27th December 1977 made by the State of Madhya Pradesh granting a licence for a quasi permanent cinema to respondent number 3 Prem Narayan son of Ganpatlal Chouksey, proprietor, Chitra Talkies, Lalbagh, Burhanpur P. against which a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution by the petitioners was dismissed in limine by a speaking order by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur on 6th March 1978. A subsequent application for renewal was turned down by the Distt. After companysidering those objections numberobjection certificate was granted by order dated 10th February G. 1976. A perusal of this particular order would show that initial application for numberobjection certificate was made by the third respondent on 5th December 1975. The order impugned by the third respondent in the appeal before the State Government is Annexure E dated 29th June 1977. 1199 of 1978. 109/78. Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and order dated 6 3 1978 of the Madhya Pradesh High Court in M.P. Simultaneously, a certified companyy of the original order in Hindi was shown to us at the hearing of the appeal which clearly H. shows that a number objection certificate was granted limited to the duration of six months. B. Pai and S. S. Khanduja for the Appellant. K. Gambhir for Respondents 1 and 2 L. Sanghi, R. K. Jain and R. Ramachandran for Respondent No. Original file was called. 3 The following Judgments were delivered DESAI, J. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. The appellants thereupon filed this appeal by special leave. No.
| 0 |
train
|
1979_332.txt
|
This resulted in protest by Kesar Singh and attack by appellant in which Kesar Singh died. 351 was filed by Jaswant Singh, Joga Singh and Bhinder Singh who were tried and companyvicted under Section 302 for murder of one Kesar Singh. Kesar Singh trespassed over two karams against which Jaswant Singh filed an application before the Revenue Authorities which was allowed and Kesar Singh was directed to remove the encroachment. 353 of 1981 has been filed by companyplainant Gurdeep Singh against allowing of appeal of Joga Singh and Bhinder Singh. Fields of Kesar Singh, deceased and Jaswant Singh, appellant, were adjacent to each other. Joga Singh and Bhinder Singh were companyvicted under Section 302/34 IPC and were sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and fine of Rs. The injuries of the appellant were explained to have been caused by Gurdeep Singh while saving his father Kesar Singh from the attack of the appellant. But the companyviction of Joga Singh and Bhinder Singh under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC was set aside. Jaswant Singh and Joga Singh were companyvicted under Section 324/34 also and were sentenced to undergo imprisonment for three months and fine of Rs. Bhinder Singh was further sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. The companyviction and sentence of Jaswant Singh under Section 302 IPC was maintained. Joga Singh was companyvicted under Section 27 of Arms Act and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months. On 22nd October 1978 at about 4.00 p.m. the appellants armed with weapons went on a tractor and after ploughing the field of Jaswant Singh had started ploughing on the portion which was said to have been encroached upon by Kesar Singh. 5 and examining the different versions one given by the prosecution claiming that the appellant were aggressors and the other by the appellant that they had caused injuries in exercise of their right of self defence found it as a fact that even though Kesar Singh had encroached upon the companymon path and the Revenue Authorities had directed him to remove the encroachment yet it were the appellants who were the aggressor and had caused injuries to Kesar Singh without any provocation or justification. Their companyviction and sentence under Section 324 and 324/34 were maintained. They were companyvicted under Section 326/34 but keeping their age in view they were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years only. All the sentences were to run companycurrently. All the sentences were directed to run companycurrently. He, however, did number remove the encroachment. In between the two fields there was a passage. Against their companyviction and sentence the appellants filed appeal in the High Court which was allowed in part. 4 and P.W. 354 and 355 were filed by State of Punjab against the accused. 2000/ . 3, P.W. 200/ . Both the High Court and the Sessions Judge after companysidering the evidence on record particularly of P.W. 1000/ each. 100/ each. M. Sahai, J. These four appeals are directed against the judgment and order passed by Punjab and Haryana High Court. Appeal No. The Criminal Appeal No. Appeal Nos. Aggrieved by the order of the High Court the appellants approached this Court. All the appeals are being disposed by this order.
| 0 |
train
|
1992_627.txt
|
This mistake was companyrected by the pay Revision Committee whose recommendations were accepted at the same time it was thought that taking away the said higher pay scale form the five persons to whom it was already given would number be proper and advisable and, therefore, the said higher pay was treated as personal pay to the said five storekeepers. By Notification dated November 1, 1966 issued by the Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, the Administration of the Union Territory of Chandigarh was required to follow the pattern of Punjab Government with respect to the nature of the post, pay scale and the revision of pa scales. 570 1080 to them also this was rejected where upon they approached the Tribunal. The Tribunal has upheld their claim. This appeal is preferred against the judgement of the Central administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh allowing the Original application filed by respondents 1 to 5 herein. P. JEEVAN REDDY, J.
| 1 |
train
|
1997_353.txt
|
The Import Export Policy 1988 1991 also companytains in para 214 and 215 provisions for grant of Additional licences to Export Houses. In para 215 of the said Policy certain additional facilities have been given in the matter of imports by Export Houses under Additional licences issued to them. value of the exports of select products made by the Export House in the year 1977 The petitioners submitted application for registration as Export Houses and for grant of Export House Certificate which would have entitled them to the grant of such Additional licence. The Import Export Policy for the period April 1978 to March 1979, in para 174, made provision for grant of certain import facilities to Export Houses which were registered in accordance with the provisions of the said Policy. 459 460 of 1988. 460 of 1988 herein were granted the Export House Certificate and an Additional licence dated August 31, 1987. The petitioners in both these writ petitions are partnership firms carrying on business of import of rough diamonds and export of cut and polished diamonds. With effect from April 1, 1988, the Government of India issued the revised Import Export Policy for the period April, 1988 to March 1991. 459 of 1988 herein were granted the Export House Certificate and were also granted an Additional licence dated November 16, 1987. These petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution raise a companymon question as to the validity of sub para 10 of para 218 of the Import Export Policy for the period April, 1988 to March, 1991. These licences were valid for a period of 12 months and they companytained the following endorsement This licence in valid for import of items permissible to Export Houses under the Additional Licence category as per para 176 of Import Policy for the period 1978 79 excluding those items which were banner in the policy for the period 1978 79 and those which have been specifically banned in the prevailing Import Policy, 1985 88, pursuant to and subject to the decision of the Supreme Court dated 5.3.1986 in M s. Raj Prakash Chemicals case civil appeal No. xxx It appears that the petitioners were number able to make imports under the said Additional licences till March 31, 1988. One of the said facilities was grant of an Additional licence in terms of para 176 of the said Policy for an amount to be calculated at one third the f.o.b. The said applications of the petitioners were rejected by the authorities on the view that petitioners had failed to diversify their export of Other Products during the year 1977 78. The said order refusing the Export Certificate was challenged by the petitioners by filing writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution before the Bombay High Court. One of those writ petitions filed by the petitioners in writ petition No. Shroff for the Petitioners. Similarly, the petitioners in writ petition No. 2924/1984 and the decision dated 15.4.1987 in the writ petition No. writ petition No. While the said appeal and the other writ petition filed by the petitioners viz. 4978 of 1985 the decision dated 15.5.1986 in the case of M s. Indo Afghan Chamber of Commerce writ petition No. v. Collector of Central Excise and Customs, 1991 1 Scale 33. 459 of 1988 herein were pending in the Bombay High Court, this Court decided Civil Appeal No. 3418/1986 the decision dated 12.9.1986 in the case of M s Star Diamonds Company of India in civil misc. v. Collector of Central Excise and Customs, 1991 1 Scale 33 held inapplicable. P. 1000 In accordance with the directions given by the Bombay High Court the petitioners in writ petition No. 460 of 1988 herein was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court and the said petitioners filed an appeal before a Division Bench of the High Court. Raj Prakash Chemicals Ltd. Anr. ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition No. 199 of 1986, the decision dated 12.9.86 in the case of M s Godrej Soap Pvt. petitions No. Kamdar and M.N. Under Article 32 of the Constitution of India . The goods were number cleared by the customs authorities and the Collector of Customs imposed penalty and passed orders for companyfiscation of the goods and permitted the appellants to take delivery of good on payment of redemption fine. 1483 of 1987 filed by M s. D. Naveen Chandra Company. K. Goswami, Additional Solicitor General, Kailash Vasdev and Ms. A Subhashini for the Respondents. 20021 22 of 1986 in civil appeal No. Harish N. Salve, S.V. v. Union of India Ors.,
Vijay Kumar Co. etc. While giving the said direction the High Court imposed a companydition in the same terms as laid down by this Court in its order dated April 18, 1985, referred to above. Ltd. civil appeal No. The Judgement of the Court was delivered by C. AGRAWAL, J.
| 0 |
train
|
1991_46.txt
|
An ex parte assessment was made by an Assessing Officer and in the appeal which was filed, it was companytented on behalf of the Respondent that the ex parte assessment had been made because numbernotice before passing the assessment order was issued. N. Kirpal and S.S. Mohammed Quadri, JJ. The submission was accepted and the Assistant Commissioner, Sales Tax, Kanpur, while allowing the appeal set aside the assessment order and directed the officer to decide the case again on merits. Aggrieved by this order a revision was filed and the High Court, five years after the filing of the petition, by a cryptic order, held that numbersubstantial question of law arose and that the Tribunals decision involved a finding of fact and companyld number be interfered with. Special leave granted.
| 1 |
train
|
2000_1111.txt
|
6/North 5546 1 1A situated at Mogul Lane, Tulsi Pipe Road, known as Senapati Bapat Marg, Mahim, Mumbai 400 016. III of Mahim Division, Ward No. 268, T.P.S. The Petitioner defendant Company was a monthly tenant of the suit premises. 560 and 561, final Plot No. 48/62/2009 before the Court of Small Causes, Mumbai Trial Court for possession and injunction against the Petitioner. The Respondents terminated the tenancy by numberice to quit dated 11.02.2009 and subsequently filed Suit No. The facts giving rise to this application are as follows The Respondents plaintiffs claim to be the lessors of suit premises being C.S. The Respondents averred in their suit that the Petitioner is a public limited companypany having a paid up share capital of more than Rs. 1 crore hence it would number be protected under the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999. No.
| 0 |
train
|
2020_303.txt
|
At the trial a further point was raised that even if any marriage between Padmavathi and Sadagopa did take place that was number a valid marriage as Padmavathi was a Brahmin girl and Sadagopa a Shudra. The main companytention of the companytesting defendants is that there was never any marriage of Padmavathi and Sadagopa and that Bhakthavathsalam is number Sadagopas son. His case is that Padmavathi and Sadagopa were validly married on June 24, 1948 and of that marriage he was born. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DAS GUPTA J. Thirteen month old Bhakthavathsalam brought this suit for partition on a claim that on his birth he became a member of the joint Hindu family which his father R. Sadagopa Naidu, the first defendant, in the suit, formed with the other nine persons impleaded as defendents 2 to 10. 316 of 1959. N. Sanyal, Solicitor General of India, K. Jayaram and R. Ganapathy Iyer, for respondent number 1 Panchapagesa Iyer, M.P. Ramchandra, J.B. Dadachanji, C. Mathur and Ravinder Narain, for the appellants. Swami and R. Thiagarajan, for respondent number 2. S. Pathak, B. Dutta, T.R. 282 of 1952. The validity of the Act was unsuccessfully challenged. The validity of the Act itself appears to have been challenged before the Trial Court, but, this was rejected. On both these points the Trial Court found the plaintiffs case proved and rejected the defence pleas. Accordingly, the High Court affirmed the judgment and decree passed by the Trial Court and dismissed the appeal. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and decree dated August 22, 1959 of the Madras High Court in Appeal No. Against this decision of the High Court the present appeal has been filed by the defendants with special leave. December 11, 1963. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
| 0 |
train
|
1963_150.txt
|
N. Kirpal and S.S. Mohammed Quadri, JJ. 3 companypany which permitted them to provide service of cellular phones. 1 and 2 herein were stated to be the subscribers. Learned Counsel for Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 makes a statement that he has instructions to ask for withdrawal of the Writ Petition in the High Court. Respondent Nos. In this case, the Appellants had granted a licence to Respondent No. Special leave granted.
| 1 |
train
|
2000_1130.txt
|
1445 1448/68. 1445 1448/68 and RR in C.A. 1720A 1722/68. 1445 48/68. 12,169.20 for the Fasli year 1370. The challenge was upheld by the High Court and the appeal filed therefrom by the Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras, was dismissed by this Court in The Commissioner, Hindu Religious Endowments, Madras, v. Sri Lakshmindra Thirtha Swamiar of Sri Shirur Mutt. 1445 1448 of 1968. The Madras Legislature passed an Act called the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 19 of 1951 the Madras Act of 1951 , to provide for the better administration and governance of Hindu Religious and Charitable Institutions and Endowments in the State of Madras Section 76 1 of the Act, as it stood originally, provided that in respect of the services rendered by the Government and their officers, every religious institution shall, from the income derived by it. 12,724.60 for the Fasli year 1367, Rs. The appellant who is the Mathadhipati of Shri Admar Mutt in the South Kanara District received a numberice dated April 24, 1964 from the Commissioner, Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments, Mysore demanding payment of companytribution for Fasli years 1367 to 1370 which companyrespond to calendar years 1957 to 1960. 11,270.70 for the Fasli year 1369 and Rs. 12,274.60 for the Fasli year 1368, Rs. 1575, 1576, 1579/65 and 1439/66. Nos. 200/ per annum and 1796 institutions with an income of less than Rs. These Writ Petitions were filed by the appellants under article 226 of the Constitution praying that the demand numberices issued by the Commissioner for Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments of Mysore be quashed and for a writ of mandamus restraining the respondents from taking any action in pursuance thereof. The latter class of smaller institutions requires and receives services from the Department as much as the former class of bigger institutions does. CHANDRACHUD, C.J. 1575, 1576 and 1579 of 1965 and Writ Petitions No. A. Dr. Sayed Mohamad and N. Nettar for RR 1 3 in A. Nos. 1649/64, 1650/64 and 1651/64. The rules framed under the Madras Act of 1951 prescribed a fee varying from 3 to 5 per cent of the annual income of the institutions. 1649, 1650 and 1651 of 1964, Writ Petitions Nos. By the numberice, the Commissioner demanded a sum of Rs. was delivered by Chandrachud, C.J. B. Datar, R. B. Datar and A. K. Srivastava for the Appellants in C.A. 1720 1722 of 1968 From the Judgment and Order dated 25 8 1967 of the Mysore High Court in Writ Petition Nos. K. Srivastava and Vineet Kumar for the Appellants in A. Nos. If directions are issued by the Central Government, they have to be companyplied with by the body companyporate. From the Judgment and Order dated 25 8 1967 of the Mysore High Court in Writ Petition Nos. The appellant disputed his liability to pay the companytribution on the ground that the Commissioner was number entitled to make any demand for the period subsequent to November 1956, that even assuming that he had the lawful authority to make the demands, the amount demanded was excessive bearing numberrelationship with the services rendered by the Department and that the expenditure which was incurred on the maintenance of the office and staff of the Commissioner and the Deputy Commissioner companyld number wholly or in part be recovered from the appellant by way of companytribution under section 76 1 of the Madras Act of 1951. The amounts companylected by the levy of fees on these institutions was just enough to balance the bulk of the expenditure incurred, at least during the period under review, for financing the companyduct of affairs of a Department which is charged with the duty and obligation of rendering services to the institutions directly and to the public which patronises or visits them indirectly. Until November 1, 1956, when the States Reorganisation Act, 37 of 1956, came into force the District of South Kanara was a part of the former State of Madras. 200/ per annum. Since the Commissioner did number accept the appellants companytention, the appellants filed the Writ Petitions in the Mysore High Court asking that the demand numberices be quashed as illegal. pay to the Government annually such companytribution number exceeding 5 per centum of its income as may be prescribed. P. Bhat and Girish Chandra for RR 4 in C.A. The Judgment of Y. V. Chandrachud, C.J., V. R. Krishna Iyer, N. L. Untwalia and A. D. Koshal, JJ. But the power of the body companyporate to function under the parent Act is number companyditional on the issuance of directions by the Central Government. AND Civil Appeal Nos. These seven appeals by certificate are directed against the judgment dated August 25, 1967 given by the High Court of Mysore in Writ Petitions Nos. It is number without significance that though the total demand made on the Mutts during the said period was in the sum of Rs. 7,54,160/ . In other words, the body companyporate has to function within the scope of and in accordance with the directions issued by the Central Government from time to time. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos. 1439 of 1966. P. N. Shinghal, J. gave a separate Opinion. The facts of the other appeals are in material respect similar.
| 0 |
train
|
1979_279.txt
|
1215 of 2004 the telephone companynection from his old residence to the new residence. The companyplainant handed over those papers to one Mrs. Remedios at Calangute Telephone Exchange who told him that the work of shifting would take about two weeks. The companyplainant thereafter companytacted the appellant who told him that there were numberspare lines to provide companynection but promised to do his best to shift his telephone companynection as early as possible. The companyplainant pleaded that he needs shifting of the telephone companynection urgently whereupon said Mrs. Remedios told him that all relevant papers regarding shifting have already been handed over to the appellant and it was for him to take further action in the matter. The said Advice Note for shifting the telephone companynection was marked to the appellant on 5th May, 1999. Appellant at the relevant time was posted as Junior Telecom Officer at the Calangute Telephone Exchange Goa and according to the prosecution PW.1, Francis M. DSouza hereinafter referred to as the companyplainant had applied on 6th April, 1999 for shifting of his telephone companynection from his old residence at House No.445 at Saligaon to his new residential premises at Calangute. Complainant asked the appellant as to whether he would get telephone companynection soon to which the appellant replied in the affirmative and on demand made by the appellant the companyplainant handed over a sum of Rs.2,000/ to the appellant. As the companynection was number given on 28th June, 1999, companyplainant spoke to the appellant over telephone and he replied that there being numberadditional line and further due to the shortage of the staff the work had number been executed. The prosecution has further alleged that the appellant came to the residence of the companyplainant between 1.30 P.M. to 2 P.M. and as soon as he was spotted near the companypound gate the audio and video systems were switched on and the members of the raiding party companycealed themselves in the bedroom of the companyplainant. After following the necessary procedure a raid was organized and companyplainant along with PW.2, Anand Naik came to the house of the companyplainant where the appellant had promised to companye at 1.30 M. on 29th June, 1999. The companyplainant introduced PW.2, Anand Naik to the appellant as his friend who was interested in opening a S.T.D. Further case of the prosecution is that on 30th June, 1999 the companyplainant spoke to the appellant from the shop of one Alfran and the companyversations between them have been tape recorded and after having companye to know that the appellant would companye to the house of the companyplainant the Central Bureau of Investigation arranged to have audio and video recording. Complainant being aggrieved by the delay in shifting of the telephone companynection and demand of illegal gratification by the appellant met the Deputy Superintendent of Police of the Central Bureau of Investigation and gave his companyplaint. Therefore according to the prosecution, the companyplainant along with the raiding party returned to the office Crl. In order to verify the explanation given by the appellant companyplainant companytacted the local Lineman who told him that additional lines were available and it was for the appellant to get work executed. The Commercial Officer, Goa Telecom Division issued Advice Note dated 4th May, 1999 for shifting of Crl. 1215 of 2004 of Central Bureau of Investigation and returned the amount of Rs.2,000/ which was kept ready to be paid to the appellant. However, the appellant did number turn up on the said day and when companytacted by the companyplainant he told him that he was held up but promised to companye on the next day at about 1 P.M. 1215 of 2004 The appellant accepted the money and thereafter signal was given whereupon the raiding party came out from the bedroom and caught hold of the appellant and the amount was recovered from him. Thereafter, the solution of sodium carbonate was prepared and the appellants hands were rinsed in the solution which turned pink. After usual investigation and obtaining the sanction the charge sheet was submitted and the appellant was put on trial. In order to bring home the charge the prosecution altogether examined 10 witnesses and a large number of documents were also exhibited. booth in the name of his wife. He denied to have companymitted the offence and claimed to be tried. Hence, appeal. A. No.
| 0 |
train
|
2010_1191.txt
|
B. Bhasme and A.S. Bhasme for the Appellant. Mrs. Karanjawala and Ms. Meenakshi Arora for the Caveator. 969 of 1984. Nor companyld it ever have been companystrued as exhibiting disrespect for the High Court. Chitale and R.S. 707 of 1988. 16 who is present by caveat. The Charity Commissioner of State of Maharashtra has approached this Court by way of Special leave in order to seek redress in respect of the observations made by the Division Bench of the High Court casting reflections on the companyduct of the officials of the organization and in regard to their companypetence to decide matters in their quasi judicial capacity. Dr. Y.S. 16 in so far as relief claimed against Respondent No. Nariman for the Respondent No. From the Judgment and Order dated 13.10.87 of the Bombay High Court in A. Besides, an appeal to the Division Bench was pending. The following order of the Court was delivered O R D E R Special leave granted against Respondent No. He has also sought a direction against Respondent No. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. No.
| 0 |
train
|
1988_419.txt
|
B1 and Ext. B1 the plaintiff had executed an agreement in favour of the defendant agreeing number to enforce the specific performance of the agreement. The defendant further pleaded that on 15.2.1978 itself, Ext. Plaintiffs suit for specific performance was decreed. His case is that the defendant executed Ext. A1 agreement in favour of the plaintiff, it was executed only as security for the amount paid by the plaintiff to him. 15.2.1978. B1 agreement was sent for expert opinion and Ext. A1 agreement for sale. After remand Ext. The defendant resisted the suit companytending that though he executed Ext. The trial Court found that the plaintiff was number the author of Ext. B1 document. 2 to 5 respondents herein is essentially as follows The suit was filed by the plaintiff for specific performance of Ext. A1 agreement was number executed as security for the repayment of the amount advanced, as companytended by the defendant. A1 agreement in his favour agreeing to sell the suit property for a companysideration of Rs. The factual background as highlighted by the original plaintiff, who after his death was substituted by additional plaintiffs number. Though the plaintiff was ready and willing to perform his part of the companytract, the defendant was number prepared to execute the sale deed. 8,000 was paid on the date of the agreement i.e. But, the trial Court denied the relief of specific performance of the companytract on the ground that the plaintiff has failed to plead and prove that he is still ready and willing to perform his part of the companytract. The defendant in a suit for specific performance of companytract questions companyrectness of the judgment rendered by a Full Bench of the Kerala High Court holding that the plaintiff respondent number1 is entitled to a decree in the manner prayed for. It was also companytended that the property companyered by the agreement is owned by the defendant and his wife jointly and since the property has number been partitioned, the defendant had numberlegal right to enter into an agreement for the sale of the entire property. 8,000 paid as advance with 6 interest per annum from 15.2.1978. However, the plaintiff was given a decree for realization of a sum of Rs. On these companytentions, the defendant wanted the suit to be dismissed. It was held that the plaint companytains essential facts which lead to inference of plaintiffs readiness and willingness. On appeal filed by the defendant as A.S. No. Dissatisfied with the decree, the additional plaintiffs 2 to 5 filed appeal before the High Court. Though the Trial Court held that the requirements of Section 16 c of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 in short the Act were number companyplied with and plaintiff was entitled only to the money paid, in appeal by the plaintiff, learned Single Judge of the High Court as well as in appeal before the Full Bench of the High Court, held otherwise. 227/1980, the High Court set aside the decree and judgment of the trial Court and remanded the case for the purpose of companysidering the genuineness of Ext. The period fixed for the execution of the sale deed was six months from the date of the agreement. The suit was originally decreed by the trial Court. An advance of Rs. 12,000. C1 report was obtained. Ultimately, however, the challenge was restricted to the question whether the learned Single Judges view in the background of Section 16 c of the Act was companyrect. In the appeal before the Full Bench of the High Court several points were raised. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. The High Court held that the same was in order.
| 0 |
train
|
2005_750.txt
|
Alipore and renumbered as Matrimonial Suit No. 428/97 titled S.K. Ghosh v. Shymali Ghosh, pending before the District Judge, 24 Parganas South at Alipore West Bengal . 45/ 98. The petitioner prays for transfer of the said case on the ground that she is employed in Delhi and it is very difficult for her to attend the day to day proceeding at Calcutta. The said suit has subsequently been transferred to the IVth Court of Additional District Judge. No companynter affidavit has been filed to deny the allegations stated in the petition.
| 1 |
train
|
2000_1129.txt
|
To the companytrary, the staircase leading from the hall on to the roof of that kotha and the steps from the roof of that kotha leading to the roof of the hall and to the room on a portion thereof, show that the said kotha is an integral part of the shop itself. I companysider this kotha to be an integral part of the shop because there is numberindication at the spot that it was an essential part of the residen tial house. apartments on account of the arched companyumns inthe middle, and the kotha immediately behind the said half. The Trial Court held that the entire building companysists of two distinct units, the one opening in the chowk of themandi being distinct business premises as a shop while theother structure on the back thereof is exclusively a residence hours The unit which is a shop has the, main hallwhich has two. The creditors also companytended that the property in dispute is a shop and number a residential house, even though the appellants were admitted to be using the back portion of the shop as their residence. for placing water was given in trust to the petitioners for residential purposes at the time of taking the possession of the shop. K. Mehta, K. R. Jagaraia and M. Qamaruddin, for the appellants. They companystituted a firm called Jahangiri Mal Kalu Ram. 1248 of 1967. K. Puri, R. L. Roshan and S. K. Dhingra, for respondents Nos. 296 of. On 19 11 1956 they were declared insolvents and the Official Receiver took possession of all their properties including the building in dispute. This is an appeal by certificate against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Punjab High Court in a Letters Patent Appeal. Appeal by certificate from the judgment and order dated April 7, 1966 of the Punjab High Court at Chandigarh in Letters Patent No. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ALAGIRISWAMI, J. The appellants are two brothers and their sons. The facts giving rise to this appeal are as follows. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. 3 5, 9 10.
| 1 |
train
|
1973_158.txt
|
at the Central Office the Clerk had simply to do the work of posting Bonus or Provident Fund in respective form or register. Grade I Rs. The Tribunal held that before the new system had been introduced of getting the work of posting of Bonus and Provident Fund etc. 36.3.75 Grade II Rs. 45.3.78.4.82 Grade II Rs. Chariam which showed that even after the declining of Provident Fund claim from Bonus scheme it was made obligatory on the part of the employers to maintain Bonus register in Forms, and also to submit monthly returns of the annual Provident Fund membership. The scales of salary under the said award were fixed as follows Grade III Rs. Till 1959 Provident Fund account of the workers were maintained at different companylieries but bonus accounts and leave with pay and railway fare accounts were being maintained at the Central office which was at that time situated at Digwadih. Moreover two of the clerks in the Central Office who had been performing same duties as the companycerned clerks had been given Grade I. In this award, companymonly known as the Mazumdar Award the wage structure was fixed interalia for the clerks employed in the various companylieries including those belonging to the appellant companypany. Their duties were number so companyplex as were being performed by the companycerned clerks in the Central Office which were getting more and more companyplicated by the various charges in the enactments relating to bonus, Provident fund and the rules and regulations relating thereto and introduction of new type of forms and statements which were number within the companytemplation of the Mazumdar Tribunal. The appellant had fixed its own grades according to which the salaries were being paid at the time of the implementation of the Mazumdar Award and, therefore, it suitably raised the Award scales of pay as follows without disturbing the categorisation Grade III Rs. He did number have to perform the multifarious duties companynected with Bonus, Provident Fund, leave with pay and railway fare besides drafting letters for Government authorities as had to be done after the introduction of the new system. The only question was whether they were entitled to the higher scale of Grade I. In the year 1956 an All India Industrial Tribunal known as the Mazumdar Tribunal gave an award in respect of companyliery disputes. The appellant companypany owns and manages, interalia, seven companylieries in the distinct of Dhanbad. 60.5.100. 87.7.115.8.131.9.158. The said scales were fixed by companysent on the statements placed before the Tribunal by the Indian Mining Association and the then Principal Labour Federation. The Tribunal relied on the evidence of Shri Shivam and Shri P.C. This is an appeal by special leave from an award of the Industrial Tribunal cum Labour Court, Jabalpur. The explanation given by Shivram was that they were doing additional work like supervision etc. They had further to attend to odd jobs including going to government authorities for explaining the entries. Grover, J.
| 0 |
train
|
1973_148.txt
|
On 21.6.1982 at the Annual General Meeting of Mettur Beardsell Ltd. shareholders authorized entering into of an arrangement on behalf of Mettur Beardsell Ltd. and Mettur Textile Pvt. On 14.12.1982 a partnership firm called Mettur Textiles was formed between the Textile and Beardsell evidenced by a partnership deed. Ltd. For the sake of companyvenience they are described as Beardsell and Textile hereinafter. On 13.5.1983 letters were written by the respondent Employees Association to Beardsell admitting the transfer to Mettur Textile and requested for an option for retention retransfer to the rolls of Beardsell. Beardsell was paid Rs.1,74,00,000/ by Rukmini Investments for divesting all rights and assets in the Integrated Textile Division. On 6.4.1984 Mettur Beardsell Employees Association wrote to Labour officer companytending that they were employees of and paid by Mettur Textile Industries limited from July, 1983. On 3.3.1983 an agreement was entered into amongst Beardsell, Textile and one Rukmini Investments Pvt. On 16.7.1983 Beardsell wrote a letter to the Labour Officer informing him that all the employees working in the Integrated Textile and Thread Division had become employees of Textile and indicated that the said employees have left its service on 31.12.1982. The office of Beardsell was on 47 Bose Road which is different address. On 12.4.1984 a letter was sent by Mettur Textile Industries Ltd. intimating each workman that he was being retrenched. On 30.11.1982 circular was sent to the employees that employees allocation has been companypleted, Beardsell was to become a partner of new formed subsidiary Textile to ensure that Textile Division companyld be treated separately. Factual background as highlighted by the appellant Management of Mattur Beardsell Ltd. is as follows Mettur Beardsell Ltd. started business in 1936 and companyducted operations successfully till 1970, when it faced financial problems. By judgment dated 22.7.1991, the Writ Petition was allowed holding that the workmen should be treated as employees of Beardsell with all companysequential benefits. On 22.6.1983 several unions entered into settlement under Section 12 3 of the Act agreeing to companytinue as employees of Textile and number of Beardsell. D. Case No.8 of 1984 was registered on the basis of grievance by the respondent workmen asserting that they companytinued to be workmen of Beardsell. Department will also be treated as a part of the Integrated Textile Division. On 17.6.1983 the respondent workmen through their Association wrote a letter to the Labour Officer that they may be taken back as on the date of transfer of the partnership by Beardsell. On 23.4.1984 employees replied that they may be companytinued in service of Mettur Textile Industries Ltd. On 14.11.1984 respondents raised I.D. On 29.11.1982 individual letters numberices were sent to employees, who have been in the Textile Division, that they were being treated as part of the Integrated Textile Division with unaltered terms and companyditions of work. On 9.2.1982 information about Integrated Textile Division companysisting of manufacturing and marketing divisions of the Textile Division in all locations including Madras with necessary support staff was given. On 24.3.1983 numberices were sent to the workmen informing them that Beardsell had retired from partnership and that the terms and companyditions of work would number be any way less favourable than the prevailing situation. Later Rukmini took over entire partnership business and incorporated it as Mettur Textile Industries Ltd. On 25.1.1983 employees of the Integrated Division were informed individually about the arrangement and their absorption with effect from 01.01.1983 without change in the companyditions of service. By order dated 11.12.1992 learned single judge hold that there was companytempt and sentenced the Managing Director of Beardsell to two weeks imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000/ . Ltd. in short Rukmini . A Writ Petition No.11956 of 1987 was filed by the respondents workmen against the Award in I.D. Ltd. was formed. Writ Appeal No.760 of 1997 was filed by the respondent workmen. On 31.1.1983 employees were informed that their services would be absorbed by Textile and that terms and companyditions which would be uninterrupted would companyer salary, wages, benefits, retrenchment and retirement. In the meantime the Contempt Petition No.366 of 1992 was filed by respondent workmen alleging that the direction by the learned Single Judge on 22.7.1991 to the effect that the workers should be treated as employees with all companysequential benefits had number been companyplied with. Respondent workman filed writ petition No.1063 of 1988 against the said Award. 22724 of 2004 and 5071 of 2005. The E.D.P. The third appeal before the Division Bench was Contempt Appeal No.13 of 1992 directed against order dated 11.12.1992 in Contempt Application No.336 of 1992 passed by learned Single Judge. By an Award dated 5.12.1986 Industrial Tribunal rejected the claims of the workmen. Writ Appeal No.761 of 1992 was against order dated 22.7.91 passed in Writ Petition No.11956 of 1987 passed by a learned Single Judge, while Writ Appeal No.760 of 1997 was against the order dated 24.2.1997 in Writ Petition No.1063 of 1988 passed by a learned Single Judge. Department was to companytinue to operate from 49, Rajaji Road where the Integrated Division was situated. Contempt Appeal No.13 of 1992 was filed against the order of learned single judge and the companytempt matter was stayed. No.8 of 1984. On 22.9.1982 numberice to workers was given that E.D.P. By order dated 24.2.1997 learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition. Writ Appeal No.761 of 1992 was filed by the appellant which has been dismissed by the impugned judgment. 22724 OF 2004 AND CIVIL APPEAL NO. The workmen have objected to companysideration of these documents on the ground that they were number before the Labour Court or the High Court. 5071 OF 2005 And CIVIL APPEAL NO. The workers were informed about the transfer. The Labour Court directed payment of Rs.44.5 lacks. 89 of 1984 challenging the retrenchment. 2258 OF 2006 Arising out of SLP C NO. By order of this Court dated 16.11.2004 the direction of the Labour Court for payment was stayed. 2259 OF 2006 Arising out of SLP C NO. However, by the impugned judgment the Contempt Appeal was dismissed. By its award dated 19.6.1987 Industrial Tribunal rejected the claim. It appears that a claim petition under Section 33 C 2 of the Act for the period 1984 to 1992 was filed which was numbered as C.P. Leave granted in SLP C Nos. By the impugned judgment the High Court allowed the Writ Appeal. No.2242 of 1991. By the impugned judgment rendered by a Division Bench of the Madras High Court three appeals were disposed of. Thereafter certain letters appear to have been written to the Provident Fund Commissioner. 7152 OF 2003 ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. With CIVIL APPEAL NOS. These appeals have a companymon matrix.
| 0 |
train
|
2006_230.txt
|
2144 of 1990. The Chancellor, after setting aside the appointment of the appellant further directed that the Vice Chancellor Syndicate shall re advertise the post and companyduct the selection afresh to fill up the vacancy to the post of Professor SBI Chair . 2144 of 1990 to the extent it set aside the orders of the Chancellor directing re advertisement and directing the appointment of the 5th respondent. The 5th respondent, being aggrieved by the order of the Vice Chancellor dated 21.5.1990 in so far as it directed re advertisement, filed OJC No. The said order was passed by the chancellor on a representation filed by the 5th respondent, Dr. Mrs. Bedabati Mohanty. The Chancellor, by the said order, had set aside the appointment of the appellant dated 3.2.1990 as Professor of Economics State Bank of India Chair hereinafter called SBI Chair , holding that the recommendation of the Selection Committee dated 29.2.1984 was invalid. By that judgment, the High Court dismissed the said writ petition filed by the appellant challenging the orders of the Chancellor of the Utkal University dated 21.5.1990. 1910 of 1990. These appeals are against the judgment and order dated 19.4.1983 passed by the High Court of Punjab Haryana in Civil Writ Petition Nos.2621 and 2622 of 1976. Jagannadha Rao. The appellant, Dr. Kumar Bar Das has filed this appeal against the judgment of the High Court of Orissa dated 30.9.1993 in O.J.C. The appellant who was the petitioner before the High Court, filed the aforesaid writ petitions challenging an order made by the second respondent herein appointing the 3rd respondent as an arbitrator under the provisions of the Punjab Cooperative Societies Act, 1961 for short the Act which petitions came to be dismissed by the Full Bench of the High Court, following an earlier Full Bench judgment of the same High Court which is since reported as Mam Raj v. State of Haryana Ors. Santosh Hegde, J. There is also an application for companydonation of delay. J. No.
| 0 |
train
|
1998_1004.txt
|
There was companyrespondence between the Air Force Authorities and the State of Himachal Pradesh in regard to the land occupied by the Air Force and ultimately on March 31, 1964, a numberification under s. 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, was published numberifying that the area of land including the land of the respondent was likely to be needed by the State Government for a public purpose. The Collector of Mahasu then served numberices under S. 9 of the Land Acquisition Act in June 1964. The Deputy Commissioner, Mahasu, apparently acting on the request of the Air Force authorities took possession on December 23, 1963, of an area of land in village Galu Chak. On October 5, 1965, the Government of Himachal Pradesh published an order cancelling the numberification dated March 31, 1964, and May 16, 1964, for acquisition of land for a public purpose. The record does number disclose the authority under which possession of the land was taken and delivered over to the Air Force. The petition was granted by the Judicial Commissioner. The respondent then presented a petition before the Judicial Commissioner, Himachal Pradesh, for a writ quashing the numberification dated October 5, 1965, withdrawing and cancelling the previous numberifications and for a writ of mandamus directing the authorities of the State Government to act according to law and discharge the duties cast by law upon them in the matter of determination of companypensation for companypulsory and urgent acquisition. Bishan Narain and O. N. Mahindroo, for the respondent. Jagadish Swarup, Solicitcr General, V. C. Mahajan and R. N. Sachthey for the appellants. 30 of 1965. Against the order of the Judicial Commissioner, this appeal has been preferred with special leave. 514 of 1967. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated September 27, 1966 of the Judicial Commissioners Court at Simla and Civil Writ Petition No. That area included 8 14 0 bighas belonging to the respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shah, J. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
| 0 |
train
|
1970_155.txt
|
The prosecution case was that the deceased and Ram Sewak PW2 who are residents of village Bibiapur alongwith Tarun Kumar PW1 son of the deceased, Ram Avtar Yadav PW3 and their party people came to the village Padarial Tula in a bullock cart on 25.4.1972 for the purpose of filing the numberination papers of Ram Sewak PW2 for the election of Pradhan of Gaon Sabha. PW2 Ram Sewak as also the first appellant Bhupendra Singh had companye there to file their numberination papers along with other party people. On seeing the party of the deceased arrive Bhupendra Singh enquired Ram Sewak PW2 , whether he had companye to file numberination paper against him. The charges were that they were members of an unlawful assembly, in prosecution of the companymon object of namely to deter Ram Sewak PW2 , from filing the numberination paper for the post of Pradhan Gaon Sabha Tikhra and to companymit the murder of his associates including one Gajendra Singh Yadav deceased , a resident of village Bibiapur and in furtherance of that companymon object did companymit the murder of the said Gajendra Singh Yadav and live cartrides belonging to the deceased. Bhupendra Singh, the first accused was also a candidate for the office of Pradhan of Gaon Sabha. Thereafter the accused dragged the deceased to a small mound on the west of the scene of occurence and then loaded the dead body on the trolley of a tractor belonging to the first accused, which had been used by the accused to reach at the scene and which driven by the first accused and the deceased was taken away. This resulted in verbal altercation between the first accused and the deceased. He had also companye for filing the numberination along with the other accused who were his supporters. The first accused then fired a shot with his rifle at the deceased and on receiving the bullet injury the deceased fell on the ground. At that time Gajenddra Singh, deceased intervened and challengingly told the first accused that he should ask him. They left the bullock cart and the bullocks in a nearby place to the west of the eastern pathway about 50 paces away from the school where the numberination papers had to be filed. The investigating officer had made certain recoveries from the scene of occurrence along with bullock cart and the two bullocks in which the deceased and his party had companye to the sense. The prosecution case further was the six other accused had also guns and they also fired at the deceased. PWs 7,8,9 and 10 are stated to have seen the first accused driving the tractor to which the trolley was attached and the three other appellants and 15 or 16 more people sitting on the tractor and going towards a revolt shouting that they are taking the body of Gajendra Singh and that the will be burnt and thrown into the river. He seized burnt earth, ashes and burnt pieces of bones under recovery memo in the presence of Rajendra Prasad PW4 and Durga Prasad PW5 . He was assisted by the Gram Sewak Verma CW1 and Rajendra Prakash PW14 among others. On the 14th of May, 1972 in Village Mudia he interrogated Ram Autar PW3 , Ram Sewak PW2 , Gaua Din PW6 and others submitted the charge sheet on 4th December, 1972. The other accused who were armed with lathis and ballams, physically assaulted the deceased. They were also charged that in furtherance of the said companymon objects and knowing that the murder of the said Gajendra Singh was punishable with death or imprisonment for life and caused the evidence of the said offence to disappear by scraping the blood stained earth at the scene of occurrence and burning it and taking away the dead body of Gajendra Singh and thereafter burning it with the intention of screening of evidence. All the accused got into the trolley and shouting loudly that they are going to burn the body and throw its remains in the water drove the tractor towards the numberth. they reached around 10.30 A.M. the Mela Maidan near the companypound of school cum temple in village Padaria Tula. On the 27th of the April, 1972 he interrogated Asharfi PW7 , Chhotanney PW8 , Reoti Prasad PW9 and Lalji PW10 and accompanied by them he reached the jungle at the outskirts of village Daulatpur where he found burnt leaves near a Shisham tree. Rama Nand Tewari PW17 took up the investigation reached the scene of occurrence at 5.30 P.M. and seized some blood stained earth at a point market A in the plan and also some ashes, besides 55 pellets wads, teeth and some buttons on the spot under Mahazars which were attested by Rajendra Prasad PW4 and Durga Prasad PW5 and another. 264 of 1973 acquitted all the accused persons of all the charges on the ground that there are many infirmities rendering the prosecution evidence unworthy of belief. They had stated in their evidence that they were inside the school premises and that around 10.30 A. M. they heard gun shots near the school. R. Lalit, Sobhag Mal Jain, Sudhanshu Atreya, Ms. P. Jain and S.K. The four appellants along with 15 others were charged for offences punishable under Section 302 read with section 149 and also section 201 read with section 149 and section 147 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code. Jain for the Appellants. Vijay Bahuguna, Prashant Chaudhary and D. Bhandari NP for the Respondent. 564 of 1974. The High companyrt also acquitted the other 15 appellants of all the charges. The first Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kheri in Sessions Trial No. The acquittal of the appellants under the remaining charges were companyfirmed. PWs 1 to 6 are stated to be eye witnesses to this part of the occurrence. 654 of 1974 before the Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court. The High Court also set aside the acquittal of the second, third and fourth appellants A4, 7 and 8 in part, companyvicted them under section 201, IPC and sentenced them to a term of seven years rigorous imprisonment under that section. From the Judgement and Order Dated 18.7.1979 of the Allahabad High Court Crl. The Judgement of the Court was delivered by RAMASWAMI, J. 512 of 1979. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal appeal No. The State of Uttar Pradesh preferred Criminal Appeal No. The four appellants have filed the above criminal appeal against this companyviction and sentence of the High Court.
| 1 |
train
|
1991_118.txt
|
The ,a appellant joined the University as a lecturer in 1945 and he was appointed a temporary Reader in Sanskrit under the University Grants Commission Scheme which was distinct from other University appointments. It appears that in 1967 an appointment had to be made as Professor in the University Grants Scheme, the top position in the department. This was later approved of by the ,Chancellor of the University on June 29, 1967. He was appointed a permanent Reader in the University under the said Scheme in April 1960. He was appointed a Reader ,under the University Grants Scheme in January 1961 i.e. The first respondent had joined the University as a lecturer in 1938 i.e. In this appeal by special leave the appellant challenges the decision of the Mysore High Court quashing his ,appointment as a University Grants Professor in Sanskrit by the Board of Appointments on the sole ground of number compliance with Rule 5 of the Supplementary Rules promulgated under the Mysore University Act, 1956. It appears that the Board of Appointments re companystituted after the decision of the High Court had advised the appointment of the first respondent as Professor and the Chancellor, in the circumstances of the case felt that he should number companye to any decision during the pendency of the matter before this Court. On the application being moved on September 22, 1969 the respondents were directed to show cause why special leave should number be granted but an interim stay was granted to the effect that the matter of a fresh appointment as a result of the quashing of the order of the appellants appointment was number to be placed before the Chancellor for his approval under s. 26 4 of the Mysore University Act. The Chancellors order was made on November 11, 1970. They were also interviewed by the Board and on June 9,1967 the appellant was given the said appointment. 2241 of 1970. 1970 to the effect that the Chancellor was free to deal with the matter numberwithstanding that the application for special leave was pending in this Court. This was occasioned by the fact that the University had taken steps to make another appointment necessitated by the order of the Division Bench of the High Court and had asked the appellant to appear at an interview for the purpose fixed on September 21, 1969. 2071 of 1967. The ,claims of the appellant, the first respondent and two other persons were companysidered by the Board of Appointments. The first respondent filed a Writ Petition in the High Court challenging the appointment of the appellant under Art. In December 1965 the appellant was placed as the Head of the Department of Sanskrit. On affidavits being filed this Court after hearing the parties passed an order on November 14, 1969 modifying the earlier order of stay to the effect that the order of the High Court was to remain suspended till the disposal of the special leave petition and as soon as the Chancellor had decided the case, the parties were to be at liberty to mention the matter to this Court and in the meanwhile the appellant was to companytinue as Professor. This judgment was rendered on April 15, 1969. On December 11, 1970 this Court granted special leave to the appel lant and directed the stay to companytinue till the disposal of the appeal. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated April 15, 1969 of the Mysore High Court in Writ Petition No. The appellants application for a certificate being turned down by the High Court, he filed an application for special leave before this Court on 9th September 1969 along with a petition for stay of the order of the High Court. The appellant and the main company testing respondent have the same academic qualifications. R. L. Iyengar and A. G. Ratnaparkhi, for respondent No. C. Setalvad and R. V. Pillai for the appellant. On a clarification of the Courts order being sought for, an order was passed on August 26. 226 of the Constitution on various grounds but the infraction of, rule 5 set forth above was number one of them. The first respondent filed an appeal which was heard by a Division Bench of the High Court. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Mitter, J. seven years before the appellant. several months after the appellant. CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No. The facts are as follows.
| 1 |
train
|
1971_112.txt
|
began to strike Abdul Sheikh with a lathi. Jarahim was armed with a ballam and he started to hit Abdul Sheikh on his legs with the ballam. While he was, so employed, two of the appellants, Afrahim and Jesed, appeared on the scene, and Afrahim asked Jesed to catch hold of Abdul Sheikh. All this, while, the sixth appellant, Makid, held Abdul Sheikh by the legs and Afrahim and Jesed held him down by his head and shoulders. Dr. Bashiruddin stated on oath that Abdul Sheikh narrated to him the incident and named all the six appellants. Abdul Sheikh was seriously injured both his legs below the knee were fractured and one arm above the wrist was also fractured. The appellant, Manu, arrived with a sabal crowbar , and began to strike Abdul Sheikh and the appellant, Mesher. Later, Abdul Sheikh was removed to Nalhati Health Centre, and while arrangements were being made for recording his dying declaration, he succumbed to his injuries. Abdul Sheikh took to his heels and was chased by these two appel lants, who overtook him and threw him down on the ground Immediately thereafter, there appeared on the scene the re maining appellants. 156 of 1963. 134 of 1963. He was examined by one Dr. Bashiruddin, who gave him first aid. The six appellants who have appealed to this Court by special leave were companyvicted by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Birbhum under s. 304 Part II read with s. 34 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to six years rigorous imprisonment each. other witnesses, to whom reference is unnecessary, that the learned Assistant Sessions Judge, Birbhum, came to the company clusion that the offence was companymitted in the manner described above. When the appellants applied for a certificate in the High Court they made it plain that the only point which was required to be companysidered by this Court was whether s. 34 companyld be read in companyjunction with Part 11 of s. 304, Indian Penal Code. K. Chakravarti and P. K. Bose, for the respondent. He had also some incised wounds and some bruises. N. Mukherjee, for the appellants. This was on the morning of March 13, 1962. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated March 5, 1963, of the Calcutta High Court in Criminal Appeal No. January 7, 1964. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by HIDAYATULLAH J. Their appeal to the High Court was summarily dismissed.
| 0 |
train
|
1964_295.txt
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.