|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 530 Records
-
2002 (4) TMI 1001 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... grawal, JJ. ORDER Appeal admitted.
-
2002 (4) TMI 1000 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ct and hence he is entitled to succeed in the prosecution. The impugned judgment which takes the contrary view deserves to be quashed. 21. Point No. 4 - In view of the aforesaid findings the impugned judgment is reversed and the accused (respondent herein) is convicted of the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. An effective sentence can be passed on the accused only after hearing him on that aspect. The respondent is not available in this Court today for the purpose of hearing. I therefore find it fit to remand the matter to the trial court with a direction that an opportunity should be afforded to the accused to be heard on the aspect of sentence. After such hearing appropriate sentence based on the conviction already entered by this Court, including question of payment of appropriate compensation to the complainant will be passed. The case is remanded for this limited purpose. Crl. Appeal disposed of as above. A reproduction from ILR (Kerala Series)
-
2002 (4) TMI 999 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e P4 Police Station by the police personnel who committed the acts of molestation, obscene violation and teasing on the petitioner, within one month from the date of receipt of this order. (i)It is made clear that the observation regarding the conduct of investigation by the respondent police, which is held to be mala fide, is made as against the petitioner alone and it would not apply to A1 and A2 whose complicity has been detected by them on the basis of the materials collected during the investigation. (j) The State Government may issue Circulars to all the police stations instructing the police officials that the woman accused/witness should not be brought to the police station and they must be enquired only by the women police, at the places where they reside. The Government is directed to ensure that this instruction is strictly followed by the police in future. 41. With the above observations, the revision and the petition for transfer of investigation are disposed of.
-
2002 (4) TMI 998 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Judge was of the view that the judgment of the Division Bench in 1999 (1) BomCR 107 mandated that the question of limitation be determined as a preliminary issue under Section 9-A. With a view to avoid a multiplicity of the proceedings, the learned Single Judge was of the view that it was desirable that the issue of jurisdiction be framed and decided in the first instance for if the issue was answered against the Plaintiff, it would be wholly unnecessary for the Trial Court to undertake the exercise of recording evidence with regard to the rival stands of the parties on the merits of the case. 13. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, I am of the view that the provisions of Section 9-A are not attracted and that the learned Trial Judge was justified in rejecting the application under the provisions of Order 14, Rule 2(2) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. There is, in the circumstances, no merit in the Civil Revision Application which is accordingly rejected.
-
2002 (4) TMI 997 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... 7. Mr. Chidambaram also relied upon the authority in the case of Kamlesh Kholi v. Escortract Finance & Investment Ltd. reported in (2000)1SCC324 . In this case it has been held that leave to defend could be granted to one of the defendants and not the others. It was held that the Court was not obliged to grant leave to defend to other defendants merely because leave to defend is granted to one of the defendants. We clarify that the leave to defend has been granted only to the Appellants. The 2nd Respondent is not before this Court. We have not considered the case of the 2nd Respondent. Merely because leave to defend is granted to the Appellant does not necessarily mean that the 2nd Respondent is also to be entitled as of right to leave to defend. We also clarify that all observations made herein are prima facie and that they shall not be taken into account at the final hearing of the Suit. 18. The Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
2002 (4) TMI 996 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... hin 15 days of receipt of notice of the payee enables the court to entertain a complaint. Clause (b) of Section 142 prescribes a period within which the complaint can be filed from the date of the cause of action arising under Clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138. No period is prescribed before which the complaint cannot be filed and if filed not disclosing the cause of action in terms of Clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138, the court may not take cognizance till the time the cause of action arises to the complainant. Taking cognizance of an offence by the Court has to be distinguished from the filing of the complaint by the complainant. Thus, in view of the verdict of Hon'ble the Apex Court, though the complaint was premature but the cognizance was taken after expiry of 15 days of the receipt of the notice. Therefore, this petition has no merit and is hereby dismissed. The record of the trial court be sent back within one week from today with copy of this order.
-
2002 (4) TMI 995 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... in service as on date. The existing framework under which the Force continue to operate will naturally have to undergo certain structural changes at the hands of the authority. If, however, the continuance of the Force raises any room for doubt and speculation in the minds of the authority, the concerned state authorities will ensure continuance of the employment of the members of the Force till such time that the Force remains in operation and simultaneously embark upon a package of phased rehabilitation of the members of the Force. The directions in favour of the members of the Force, as hereinabove, is naturally subject to their being found fit and eligible for continuance in active service. No time limit has been fixed to compel performance of the obligations cast upon the State authorities by this order as this Court sees no reason as to why the authorities will not carry out such obligations within a reasonable time. 10. The writ petition is allowed as indicated above.
-
2002 (4) TMI 994 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... uld not be deemed to have been proved. He also recorded that if the incident had taken place in the small room, so many persons including the witnesses and the accused persons armed with weapons, could not have used the same so freely, as had been stated. In face of the different versions, that were forth-coming, the trial court did not believe the prosecution evidence. 24. As already pointed and retention at the risk of repetition, there is a presumption of innocence of respondents and it had been verified by the judgment of the acquittal. This court would only interfere if no other view was possible or the reasoning of trial court was totally absurd. When that is not the position, we find it that it is not necessary in the facts of the case to grant leave to file the appeal. The same is refused. 25. Crl.M. No. 193/2001 seeking condensation of delay in filing application for leave to appeal, accordingly, is allowed but Crl.M.189/2001 seeking leave to file appeal is rejected.
-
2002 (4) TMI 993 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... it Pasayat, JJ. ORDER Appeal is admitted. No stay.
-
2002 (4) TMI 992 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the property in his favour under the said deed dated 31.12.1970. The submission on behalf of the respondent that it is doubtful since made on the last date of the year has no force at all. It is an agreement earlier in point of time. It lends support to case of bona- fide purchase by the defendant-vendee in pursuance of earlier agreement dated 31.12.1970. The case of the plaintiff that vendee had prior notice of agreement to sell dated 3.3.71 between plaintiff and Kankar Singh on the basis of the alleged application said to have been moved before the Sub-Registrar just before execution of sale deed is not made out. There was no good reason to upset the findingsin the Letters Patent Appeal as recorded by the learned Single Judge in the First Appeal. In the result, we allow the appeal set aside the order passed by the Division Bench in the letters patent appeal and restore the judgment and decree passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court in first appeal. Costs easy.
-
2002 (4) TMI 991 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the latter being one of preponderance of probability. 7. That apart, the second part of Rule 12 of the rules, unequivocally indicates that a departmental proceeding could be initiated if in the opinion of the court, the prosecution witnesses are found to be won over. In the case in hand, the prosecution witnesses did not support the prosecution in the criminal proceeding on account of which the public prosecutor cross-examined them and therefore, in such a case, in terms of Rule 12, a departmental proceeding could be initiated. In this view of the matter, we are of the considered opinion that the tribunal committed error in interfering with initiation of a departmental proceeding and the High Court committed error in dismissing the writ petition filed. We, therefore, set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court as well as that of the tribunal and direct that the departmental proceeding be concluded as expeditiously as possible. 8. This appeal stands allowed accordingly.
-
2002 (4) TMI 990 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... in the case of Indian Oxygen Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, 1988 (36) E.L.T. 723 (S.C.) and we find no reason to interfere with the same. The appeal is dismissed.
-
2002 (4) TMI 989 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t appears during pendency of the writ petition there arose several disputes for which the petitioner's line was disconnected and subsequently restored in terms of the Court's order. It appears Justice Barin Ghosh was pleased to pass an order directing the petitioner to deposit a certain amount as a condition precedent for restoration of the supply line which was disconnected on the allegation of pilferage of electric energy. But this interim order the petitioner deposited a sum of rupees two lakhs and odd and the rest of the claim in relation to the pilferage deposit has yet to be adjudicated by the adjudicator. Therefore, all these amounts which have already been paid in terms of the interim order after giving adjustment of costs and expenses and securities, shall abide by the decision of the adjudicator in terms of the order of Justice Barin Ghosh. Thus the writ petition as well as the other connected applications are disposed of. There will be no order as to costs.
-
2002 (4) TMI 988 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nterfering or substituting the finding of fact by the revisional court. Hence the decision in the case of Ubaiba (supra) relied upon by the learned counsel for the appellant would not be of any assistance to it. 14. In view of the discussion held above, we find no reason to interfere with the order passed by the High Court setting aside the orders of the appellate authority and upholding the orders of the trial court, refusing to draw any inference of implied consent on the basis of inaction or conduct of the landlord. The consent as envisaged under Section 11 (4) (i) of the Kerala Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act 1965 would mean consent with some positive act which may lead to inference of conferring right on the tenant to sub-let the premises and mere inaction would not be sufficient to amount to implied consent on the part of the landlord. 15. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. However, there would be no order as to costs. A reproduction from ILR (Kerala Series)
-
2002 (4) TMI 987 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... should be uniformity, and a further column be added to indicate where the cause of action has arised. We may clarify that cause of action' means the bundle of facts which give rise to a right or liability. 14. Let copy of this order be placed by the Registrar General before Hon'ble the Chief Justice and also sent to the Senior Judge of the Lucknow Bench and the Registrar at Lucknow Bench so that this practice which has been going on for quite some time may be effectively rooted out, 15. The Registrar General of this Court is also directed to make investigation into the matter in collaboration with the Registrar of Lucknow Bench regarding cases which have been filed at Lucknow in which the Lucknow Bench has no territorial jurisdiction and the records of such cases should be transferred to Allahabad. A list of such cases should be prepared by the Registry within three months from today, and a report be placed before Hon'ble the Chief Justice for appropriate orders.
-
2002 (4) TMI 986 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ng pension. It is only after considerable period of satisfactory service a member of armed forces becomes entitled to pension. The mere fact that after such long period of service he voluntarily quit the service with the consent of the employer should not place him in a dis- advantageous position for claiming the benefit of reservation for ex-serviceman. Therefore, the expression 'retirement' should be given wider meaning in order to effectuate the objective behind the Rule. On the discussions in the foregoing paragraphs the appeals are allowed. The judgment of the High Court dated 20.9.1999 in CWP No.19084/98 is set aside. It is stated at the bar that the appellants in these appeals have appeared in the competitive examination but their results have not been declared. The respondents will take steps to declare their results forthwith and consider their case for appointment in terms of the service rules and in accordance with the law. There will be no order for costs.
-
2002 (4) TMI 985 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... sh all such elections and direct holding of fresh elections under the supervision of the Court, will be contrary to democratic functioning of the employees Union. Furthermore, Courts in the present situation of exploding dockets can ill afford to stand time in such an exercise. 11. In the result, the appeal is allowed. The judgment/order dated 27th February, 2001 in C.O. No. 2264 of 1999 which is under challenge in the appeal is set aside. Miscellaneous Appeal No. 179/99 pending before the Additional District Judge, 3rd Court, Alipore, or any other Court to which it might have been sent on transfer, will be dismissed as infructuous. Title Suit No. 105/ 98 on the file of the 6th Civil Judge (Senior Division), Alipore, South Calcutta will be heard and disposed of expeditiously as far as possible within three months of receipt of intimation of this order. The interim orders passed by the Courts below in the suit and the appeal are vacated. Parties to bear their respective costs.
-
2002 (4) TMI 984 - CEGAT NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ugned Order the appeals were decided. 2. The contention of the Appellants is that the Commissioner has no power to review the Order passed by the Sub-ordinate Authority and they relied upon the decision passed by the Tribunal in the case of Navin Chemicals Enterprises, Dewas, Final Order No. 48/2002-D, dated 8.2.2002 (2002 (102) ECR 721 (T)) and the Tribunal held as under -- We have heard the learned SDR. We note that under Section 84 of Chapter V of the Finance Act, 1994 there is no provision for review of Order and directing the Deputy Commissioner to file appeal before Commissioner (Appeals). In the circumstances, the appeal filed by Deputy Commissioner and the order passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) on that appeal is a nullity and hence the Stay Petition and Appeal are allowed. Consequential benefit, if any, shall be admissible to the appellant(s) in accordance with law. In view of above Order of the Tribunal the impugned Order is set aside and the appeals are allowed.
-
2002 (4) TMI 983 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... learned Counsel for the appellant, the civil appeal is dismissed as withdrawn. No order as to costs.
-
2002 (4) TMI 982 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... JJ. ORDER Delay is condoned. Appeal is dismissed.
........
|
