|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 467 Records
-
1997 (9) TMI 649 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e. Therefore, the sentences under these sections are maintained. 43. In the result, the appeal fails and is dismissed. The convictions of the appellants under all the three sections are confirmed. However, the death sentence awarded to appellant Ram Chandra Tewari is altered into imprisonment for life. All the sentences, shall run concurrently. 44. The reference for confirmation of death sentence awarded to appellant Ram Chandra Tewari is accordingly rejected. 45. Appellant Smt. Munni Devi is on bail. Her bail bonds are cancelled and the sureties are discharged. She shall be taken into custody forthwith to serve out the sentences awarded by the learned Sessions Judge. Appellant Ram Chandra Tewari is in jail. He shall undergo imprisonment as awarded by this Court. 46. The office is directed to send a copy of this order to C.J.M. Lalitpur within a week. The C. J. M. is directed to submit compliance report to this Court within three months of the receipt of a copy of this order.
-
1997 (9) TMI 648 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... efore, come to the conclusion that the impugned direction given by the learned Special Judge is not covered by second part of Section 311 and at best it is a direction given under the first part of Section 311, Cr.P.C. and in the facts and circumstances of the case, it was unnecessary and unjustified and is likely to occasion the failure of justice, because the prosecution has already closed its evidence, the statements of the accused has already been recorded under Section 313, Cr.P.C. and the case is fixed for final arguments and if the proceedings are permitted to be reopened, the very object, of taking a session trial in one session would be defeated. 14. For the reasons mentioned above, the petition deserves to be allowed and is hereby allowed. The impugned order directing the summoning of Heerak Mohammed is hereby quashed and set aside. The learned Special Judge is directed to hear the final arguments and then decide the case according to law as soon as may be possible.
-
1997 (9) TMI 647 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... on even by conduct by the Universities that there would be no change in the pattern of non-formal/distant education. Thus the cry of the petitioner-respondents that legitimate expectations are thwarted is not genuine.. State has a duty no doubt to see that all sections of people particularly weak and poor and women in particular are educated. Policy which would deny access to education to any such section of the people can be found to be undesirable and unreasonable but as we have noticed above there is no such denial of right to education to any section of the people except that they are required to conform to a certain modified pattern of examinations. Since we have reasons to disagree with the view of the learned single Judge we unhesitatingly conclude that the directions issued by the learned single Judge as in the impugned judgment are not sustainable. 7. For the reasons aforementioned the appeals are allowed. Impugned judgment is set aside. Writ petitions are dismissed.
-
1997 (9) TMI 646 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... efore it is imminent so that it may also take into consideration the order to be passed therein. However, such exercise of discretion on the part of the criminal court in an appropriate case will depend on the facts of each case and it is not possible to lay down any proposition that if the Settlement Commission had allowed an application to be proceeded with an order refusing to stay the criminal proceeding by the trial court under Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, on that ground will amount to an abuse of the process of the court to make it a fit case for interference by this court in the exercise of its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. 32. Thus, for the foregoing reasons I am of the opinion that the petitioners have failed to make out any case either for the quashing of the criminal prosecution or for stay of the criminal proceeding. Both the criminal miscellaneous cases are, therefore, found without merit and are dismissed.
-
1997 (9) TMI 645 - CEGAT, SOUTH ZONAL BENCH
... ...
... ... ..... a multi unit organisation and for the manufacture of certain goods, certain components are manufactured in one unit which are utilised in the other unit. These components had suffered duty in the unit from where these were transferred on stock transfer. In such a situation therefore, the matter will have to be examined as to whether in terms of section 2(h) the sale by reason of book transfer has been effected or not. This fact would be required to be gone into and in case this is so, the appellant in terms of the order of the Tribunal will be entitled (to) the benefit of Modvat credit. We, therefore, set aside the order of the learned lower authority and remand the matter to the original authority for de novo consideration and decision in the light of our observations after affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellants to adduce the evidence as required in the facts of this case. The appeals are therefore allowed by remand. (Pronounced and dictated in the open Court)
-
1997 (9) TMI 644 - ITAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... the assessee, in accordance with law. 22. In the light of our above decision, the issue as to whether the assessee has derived income from profits and gains of business, at this stage, becomes academic. This is so because even if the assessee has derived income from profits and gains of business, if it is found that the said business carried on by the assessee was incidental to the attainment of its objects and separate books of account are maintained by it in respect of such business, exemption under s. 10(21) cannot be denied to the assessee. 23. We, therefore, set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and that of the AO for the respective assessment years and remit the matter to the file of the AO for fresh decision in respect of exemption under s. 10(21), in accordance with law and in the light of our above directions. 24. No other ground has been pressed before us. The same are accordingly dismissed. 25. For statistical purposes, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed.
-
1997 (9) TMI 643 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ner. On this ground alone, this civil revision petition is liable to be dismissed. 11. I may add that even on facts, it is clear that the defendants 1 and 2 filed joint written statement in the suit; no plea was taken in the suit by defendant No. 2 separately that he was not liable to pay the amount in the absence of liability being fixed on defendant No. 1; the decree passed against the petitioner has become final as the petitioner did not challenge the said decree. Plain reading of the decree passed against the defendant No. 2 does not show that the decree was passed against him only as a surety. The fact remains that the defendant No. 2 was also the legal representative of the defendant No. 1. Further, the second de-fendant is none other than the son of the first defendant. Under the circumstances, the Court below was right in rejecting E.A. No. 511 of 1993. 12. In the result, for the reasons stated, the civil revision petition is dismissed, but with no order as to costs.
-
1997 (9) TMI 642 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... liability if it is proved that the offence was committed with the consent, connivance or was attributed to any neglect on their part. This clearly will indicate that all the partners or directors need not be impleaded in the complaint. 11. Admittedly, in this case no such averment whatsoever is made to implicate the third, petitioner as required under section 141 of the Act. The presumption of his being guilty cannot at all be inferred by virtue of his position in the company. So, in view of the above, this O.P. is allowed in part. The proceedings in so far as the third petitioner/accused in C.C. No. 7377 of 1996, on the file of the XIVth Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai, are concerned are quashed and the proceedings as against the other petitioners/accused shall continue, and the learned magistrate shall dispose of the same with respect to the other petitioners/accused, in accordance with law, consequently, no further order is necessary in Crl. M.P. No. 1789 of 1997.
-
1997 (9) TMI 641 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... then there would be some justification for imposition of penalty. In this case, the AO did nothing beyond insisting on the production of donors. Since assessee had furnished primary evidence which was not found false, and there is no evidence either direct or circumstantial to establish or even suggest that the income offered for taxation by the assessee represented concealed income, penalty for concealment under s. 271(1)(c), in our view, is not called for in this case. 11. Considering the facts and circumstances of this case in totality, we are of the view that penalty under s. 271(1)(c) is not justified in this case, for the asst. y₹ 1986-87 and 1988-89. The penalty of ₹ 1,50,000 for the asst. yr. 1986-87 and ₹ 92,221 for the asst. yr. 1988-89 is accordingly deleted. The decisions cited at the bar are on their own facts but principles laid down have been kept in view in arriving at the decision. 12. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed.
-
1997 (9) TMI 640 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ccording to the revised standard, the sample in no way was adulterated or sub-standard. The only requirement now "presence of Synthetic Vitamin 'A' in the Vanaspati Ghee' should show the presence of Synthetic Vitamin 'A' to the extent of 25 I.U. per gram at the time of packing and not at the time of its sale at (sic). There is no reason that the petitioner cannot be given the benefit of the revised or substituted standard of the presence of Synthetic Vitamin 'A' in Vanaspathi Ghee. The courts below have erred in not extending the benefit to the petitioner, to which he was legally entitled. 9. No other plea or point was contended, which needs any reference. 10. In view of the observations above, this revision petition is allowed. The order of conviction and sentence under Sections 7/16 of the Act, passed by the courts below are set aside. Petitioner, if on bail, his bail bonds are discharged. If he is in jail, shall be set at liberty forthwith.
-
1997 (9) TMI 639 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e the interest which accrued on the aforesaid loan, but that contention was rejected and the matter was not further pursued by the assessee in appeal. The question is whether the assessee having followed the mercantile system to include the interest income in the past, can shift to the cash system during the accounting period, relevant to the assessment year in question. 4. In Shiv Prasad Ram Sahai vs. ITR (1966) 61 124 (M) , this Court held that, if the assessee has once chosen the mercantile system for a transaction and has regularly employed that system, it is not open to him unilaterally at any time during subsequent accounting years to change that system. The variation could be only by mutual consent. The assessee has not shown that she had changed over to the cash system from mercantile system by mutual prior consent of the AO. Following the said authority, we answer the aforementioned question in the affirmative, i.e., against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.
-
1997 (9) TMI 638 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... asserted that Bhagirath (A-5 since dead) was telling the appellants that Peera Singh should be punished and his head should be severed. This was the direction of Bhagirath (A-5 since dead) and in compliance thereof, the appellants with a common object to commit the murder of Peera Singh, laid a murderous assault on him and caused as many as 14 incised injuries on his person. The evidence on record shows that the appellants chased Peera Singh until the field of Bhagirath and then they again assaulted him with deadly weapons. It is thus clear that the appellants formed an unlawful assembly and the object of the said assembly was to commit the murder of Peera Singh. 11. After careful consideration of the oral and documentary evidence on record, we are satisfied that the impugned order of conviction and sentence of the appellants does not suffer from any infirmity. 12. For the foregoing conclusions, we do not see any merit in these appeals and the same are accordingly dismissed.
-
1997 (9) TMI 637 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Wadhwa, JJ. ORDER Appeal admitted.
-
1997 (9) TMI 636 - CEGAT KOLKATA
... ...
... ... ..... eg it is either from Reddington Singapore to Redington (India) or from manufacturer to their sole-selling agents in India. There is no evidence of sales to independent buyers in India. As further pointed out by the appellant's ld. consultant that the imported goods do not carry any warranty, nor has any testing been done on the imported goods as is apparent from the purchase order placed by the appellant, we agree that the prices relied upon by the Revenue cannot be the basis of valuation. 7.1 In view of the foregoing discussion, valuation of goods adopted by the adjudicating authority is not on any firm, sound and acceptable basis. Valuation as adopted by the Assistant Commissioner of Customs and agreed to by the appellants is sustained. Confiscation of the goods is set aside and consequently fine in lieu of confiscation is set aside. Penalties imposed are also set aside as not warranted in the facts and circumstances of the case. 7.2 Appeals disposed of in above manner
-
1997 (9) TMI 635 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... ndonation of delay. Application for condonation of delay is dismissed. Accordingly the Civil Appeals are also dismissed. o p /o p
-
1997 (9) TMI 634 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... any payment or incur any expenses through some Court or under some mutual compromise, the Corporation shall be able to recover such amounts from the owner of the bus after deducting the same from the amounts payable to him" in the later part of condition No.15 leave no ambiguity in that behalf and clearly go to show the intention of the parties. Thus, RSRTC cannot escape its liability under condition No.15 of the agreement either. Thus, both on facts and in law the liability to pay compensation for the accident must fall on the RSRTC. Thus, for the additional reasons noticed by us above, we find that both the Motor Accidents Claim Tribunal and the High Court of Rajasthan, committed no error in fastening the liability to pay compensation to the heirs of the deceased passengers on the appellant. There is no merit in these appeals, which consequently fail and are dismissed but since the claimant respondents have remained unrepresented before us, with no order as to costs.
-
1997 (9) TMI 633 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s to whether the High Court should interfere with the order of the Land Tribunal must be guided by considerations of prejudice and likelihood of miscarriage of justice. 10. The authority relied on by the learned Counsel for the petitioner is not applicable to the facts of the present case because the procedure adopted by the Land Tribunal in not administering oath and recording the evidence is prima facie illegal. 11. For the aforesaid reasons the writ petition is allowed and the impugned order dated 24-12-1988 is quashed. 12. The matter is remanded to the Land Tribunal, Haven, with a direction to issue notices to all the parties and proceed to dispose off the matter according to law by holding further enquiry, if necessary. 13. The Land Tribunal is directed to dispose off the matter as expedition sly as possible. 14. Communicate this order along with the records to the Land Tribunal, Haveri. 15. The writ petition is allowed and the matter remanded as stated above. No costs.
-
1997 (9) TMI 632 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ence. In this view of the matter, it is necessary to leave all other points open while quashing the impugned orders and to remand the matter to the Dy. Collector, Ponda to be decided afresh and in the light of the above observations. 11. In the result, the petition is allowed. Rule is made absolute in the above terms. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on any of the points sought to be raised except that there is no presumption in law that all lands are agricultural lands, unless they are classified as ‘non-agricultural by order of Government or converted for non-agricultural purpose with the permission of competent authority’ as well as there is no presumption that each and every land found located within the Municipal limits of the city would, by itself, be an indication that the land is ‘non-agricultural land’. The petition is, therefore, accordingly disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs. 12. Petition Allowed.
-
1997 (9) TMI 631 - COMPANY LAW BOARD NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ns. Another supervening fact which is also significant is that all this information was available to the petitioner as a member of the company as it was reflected in the annual accounts and the petitioner had full liberty to discuss these transactions in the internal forum in the circumstances, we feel that the petitioner cannot make any grievance nor can we invoke our powers to order investigation on these allegations. 41. We have also considered the prayer for removal of respondent No. 2 and other directors. On going through the limited issues pressed before us there is no case made by the petitioner justifying the removal of respondent No. 2 or the other directors. As such we refrain from passing any such order. 42. In view of the above we consider it appropriate to dispose of this petition only with the direction with regard to payment of interest on the loan granted by respondent No. 1 to respondent No. 3-company and without conceding any other prayer of the petitioner.
-
1997 (9) TMI 630 - COMPANY LAW BOARD, CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... ll the meeting within the above mentioned time limits, the requisitionists representing not less than one-tenth of the total voting rights of all the members, may themselves convene a meeting within three months of depositing the requisition. It is beyond doubt that the applicant possessing the requisite shareholding has a right to convene a meeting in the light of Sub-section (6) of Section 169 of the Act. I am not, therefore, inclined to appreciate the applicant's contention that it was "impracticable" to call an extraordinary general meeting. As it was practicable on the part of the applicant to convene an extraordinary general meeting in exercise of his right under Sub-section (6) of Section 169, this application under Section 186 must fail. 15. In view of the foregoing, without going into the merits of the other contentions of the applicant, the application is dismissed. There is, therefore, no need to go into the case law cited by counsel for the company.
........
|
