|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 432 Records
-
1996 (3) TMI 576 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... pting Scheme 'C' in full and final settlement of the claim made by the petitioners. No further claim will be entertained. Under Scheme 'C the petitioners will be entitled to revised pension from August, 1994. Annual increase in pension will be allowed as per the said table of Scheme 'C. If there are intermediary scales, the pension in regard to them will be fixed by the LIC. The difference in pension paid for the month of August, 1994 and thereafter and that payable under Scheme 'C Should be worked out within two months and be paid to the pensioner or his legal representatives (if he or she is no more) within even time. Future pension should be paid as per formula of scheme 'C, which will supersede all prior arrangements in regard to the pension plan. We once again make it clear that this revised Scheme 'C pension-plan is in full and final settlement of all claims of the pensioners. The petition shall stand so disposed of with no order as to costs.
-
1996 (3) TMI 575 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nt and as umpteen authorities have been cited in support of their subtle but interesting arguments, I prepared my own compressed draft judgment which I sent to my esteemed brother (A.P. Misra, J.) for his perusal and suggestion on 1st March, 1996 who returned the same with his own draft judgment for my perusal on 11th March, 1996 reaching almost the same conclusions, which 1 recorded in my own. 197. Conclusions being the same, I have nothing to add to his draft and stick to my views and the reasons. 198. For the reasons as contained in two separate judgments, we are of the opinion that the law laid down in the case of Kamla Palace (supra) was not correctly laid down. For the reasons given above, the impugned proviso to Section 3-A of the U. P. Entertainment and Betting Tax Act, 1979, is a valid piece of legislation. The present reference is disposed of accordingly and the case is sent back to the Bench concerned for the disposal of this case on merits. 199. Order accordingly.
-
1996 (3) TMI 574 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e continued assertion of the Respondent that he was ready and willing to perform his part of the terms of Ext. A-1 agreement. Accordingly, I direct the Respondent to keep the aforesaid amount in Fixed Deposit under the account of the court below in a nationalised Bank in two installments and produce the Fixed Deposit Receipt before the said court. The first instalment of Rs. 10 lakhs shall be so deposited on or before 12th April 1996 and the second instalment of remaining Rs. 10 lakhs on or before 31st May 1996. 22. In view of the peculiar circumstances of the case, I think it would be in the interest of all concerned if I give a direction to the court below to dispose of the suit O.S. No. 1 of 1995 as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of six months from today. Therefore, there will be a direction as above. The Civil Miscellaneous Appeal is disposed of as above. In the circumstances of the case, no order as to costs. A reproduction from ILR (Kerala Series)
-
1996 (3) TMI 573 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... Uddin, JJ. ORDER Appeal dismissed.
-
1996 (3) TMI 572 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... er hand, according to the courts below, the evidence available in the case reinforced the aforesaid presumption and positively pointed out that Ext.B-2 was, in ; fact, executed, long before Ext.A-1. The High Court ignored such crucial aspects and surmised that it was "not probable" that Ex.B-2 dated 5.5.1967 would have been executed on that day in view of "the delay" in registration. The approach so made and the resultant conclusion, are totally unjustified and unsustainable in law. 12. We, therefore, set aside the judgment of the High Court and allow this appeal. The judgments and decrees passed by the learned Munsiff in OS No. 329 of 1967 dated 3.2.1969 as affirmed by the learned Sub- ordinate Judge of South Arcot in A.S. No 109 of 1969 dated 26.3.1973 will stand restored. The Appellant shall be entitled to the costs in this appeal from the Respondents, inclusive of Advocates' fee which is quantified -at Rs. 5,000/-. The appeal is allowed with costs.
-
1996 (3) TMI 571 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... f view, the High Court held that the fact that the agreement of sale was entered into by the assessee with a housing society is of crucial relevance since it showed that the assessee had agreed to sell the land for admittedly non-agricultural purposes. The ratio of the said decision was approved in Sarifabibi. 7. We do not think it necessary to multiply the cases, since, in our respectful opinion, no other conclusion is reasonably possible in the facts of the case before us than the one arrived at by us. All the three authorities under the Act too arrived at the same conclusion. With great respect to the learned Judges of the High Court, we find their conclusion wholly unsustainable and unacceptable. 8. The appeal is accordingly allowed, the judgment of the High Court is set aside and the two questions referred under Section 256(1) are answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee. The appellant shall be entitled to their costs - Rupees ten thousand consolidated.
-
1996 (3) TMI 570 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e view expressed by the Constitution Bench in the case of R.S. Sabharwal (supra). Accordingly, the appeals are allowed and that part of the judgment of the Full Bench in the case of Jaswant Singh v. The Secretary to Govt. of Punjab (supra) is reversed. Now the case of the appellants and others similarly situated should be considered in the light of this judgment. We are not inclined to examine individual grievances and to work out the effect of the views expressed by us. That shall be done by the State Government. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no orders as to cost. 23. CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 4763-65/89. WITH 24. C.A. Nos. 3326/82, 3327/82, 3795/89, 5023/89, LA. Nos. 1 & 2 in W.P. 54/90, SLP(C) 14541/90 (C) 7259/90, 2976/83, 17374/94. N.P. Singh, J. 25. All the above matters are disposed of in terms of the judgment of this Court in the case of Ajit Singh Januja and Ors. v. State of Punjab and Ors. Civil Appeal Nos. 3792-3794 of 1989 delivered today.
-
1996 (3) TMI 569 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ing for the respondent urged that in view of the statutory provision of Rule 4(3) it was not open to the Trust to prescribe the conditions of auction referred to above. The respondent having participated at the said public auction on basis of those conditions which were in nature of supplementary provisions for holding the auction could not be questioned by the respondent. The High Court, was not justified in quashing the resolution dated 27.2.1981 of the Trust, to reinstate the plot in question in favour of the appellants on conditions mentioned in the said resolution. That decision had been taken by the Board of Trustees which power was neither challenged nor could have been challenged. As such no right had accrued to the respondent which could have been enforced by the High Court in the writ jurisdiction. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no orders as to cost.
-
1996 (3) TMI 568 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... onsideration of material placed before the Court and oral submissions advanced, I am of the view that the applicant has committed offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and both the Courts below have rightly convicted. I do not find any illegality or error in appreciation of evidence or exercise of jurisdiction de hors the law. Thus, the present revision applications being devoid of merits deserve to be rejected and are hereby rejected maintaining concurrent finding of both the courts below. Notice in both the applications is discharged. 15. At this stage, Mr. Gupta, learned advocate for the applicant, orally requests the Court to grant suitable time to the applicant for surrendering before the trial Court to serve out sentence. Since the other side has no objection, the applicant is granted time upto 25.3.1996 to surrender before The trial Court failing which the trial Court shall be at liberty to take appropriate steps in accordance with law.
-
1996 (3) TMI 567 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ed Chief Justice may either post the matter for directions before a Bench presided over by him or constitute any other appropriate Bench. After the investigation is over and reports are finalised, as indicated by the Division Bench of the High Court in the impugned judgment, expeditious follow-up action shall be taken. The High Court and the State Government shall co-operate in assigning adequate number of special Judges to deal with the cases expeditiously so that no evidence may be lost. 10. The order of the Division Bench of the High Court in paragraph 54, to the effect that investigation by the State police in cases already instituted shall remain suspended, is modified. The entire investigation now stands entrusted to the CBI as aforesaid. The CBI is directed to take over the investigation already made by the State police, inclusive of the FIRs, arrests and attachments aforementioned, and deal appropriately therewith. 11. The appeal are disposed of accordingly. No costs.
-
1996 (3) TMI 566 - HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... titled to execute the decree for its balance outstanding amount, however, it can only be done after it calculates the amount strictly in terms of the decree in civil suit No. 60 of 1979 without adding anything over and above to the decretal amount and after appropriating the amount paid by the judgment debtor-3 objector as detailed in this order. For the foregoing reasons, the objection petition is dismissed leaving the parties to bear their own costs of this objection petition. Decree holder-Bank is directed to place on record the statement of account strictly in accordance with the decree in civil suit No. 60 of 1979 as well as after appropriating the amounts paid by the objector as ordered herein this order, thereafter, the decree holder-bank will take further steps for executing the decree. It is hoped that the Bank authorities will look into the matter as to how and in what circumstances the amount was not worked out in terms of the decree and will be cautious in future.
-
1996 (3) TMI 565 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... en of proof of charge in a criminal case is always on the prosecution. The guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt should be established by the prosecution. But in an election petition when the election petitioner had adduced evidence to prove that the returned candidate had committed corrupt practice, the burden shifts on the returned candidate to rebut the evidence. After its consideration, it is for the Court to consider whether the election petitioner had proved the corrupt practice as alleged against the returned candidate. In view of the findings recorded earlier, it must be concluded that the respondent had established that the appellant had committed corrupt practice under Section 123(6) of the Act and thereby the declaration of the result of the election of the appellant as void is not vitiated by any error of law warranting interference. 9. The appeal is dismissed. The connected appeal filed by the respondent unsuccessful candidate is dismissed as not pressed.
-
1996 (3) TMI 564 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... with interest thereon at 12% per annum from the date of its withdrawal from this Court. If Petitioner No. 1 fails to deposit the said amount within the stipulated time, the Prothonotary and Senior Master is directed to encash the Bank Guarantee and pay the said amount to the Respondents. It is also directed that with regard to the interest, further orders will be passed if Petitioner No. 1 fails to deposit the said amount within the stipulated time. It is also ordered that on such deposit being made by Petitioner No. 1, it would be open to the Respondents to withdraw the said amount along with any other amount lying to their credit with the Prothonotary and Senior Master on the basis of the order dated 29th October, 1987. 66. With the above directions, without deciding the question whether or not Petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 are entitled to file this Petition, this Petition is dismissed. Rule is discharged with costs. 67. Issuance of certified copy of this judgment is expedited.
-
1996 (3) TMI 563 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ed the order. It would mean that though it had the knowledge of dismissal of the order passed by this Court, the Tribunal has exercised the power of review and that, therefore, it cannot be said to be illegal. We are wholly unable to appreciate the contention of the learned counsel. We could appreciate that if the Tribunal had no knowledge of dismissal of the SLP it might, in certain circumstances, review its earlier order, e.g., if it was found that the order was vitiated by any manifest error of law apparent on the face of the record. But having received the communication that this Court has already upheld its order, the Tribunal's exercise of power can be said to be audacious and without any judicial discipline. Under those circumstances, we donot think that the Tribunal is justified in reviewing its own order when this Court had confirmed the order passed earlier. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The review order is set aside. But in the circumstances without costs.
-
1996 (3) TMI 562 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the Department in decisions in 1988 173ITR708(AP) (supra) and CIT vs. Mohansingh & Sons (1995) 216 ITR 432, the question was answered in favour of the assessee and against the Department. 5. The aforesaid question thus stands concluded. Nothing substantial is urged to persuade us to take a different view in the matter. 6. Accordingly we answer the question in all these Misc. Civil Cases in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the Department. 7. These Misc. Civil Cases are thus decided in terms indicated above, but without any order as to costs. 8. Counsel fee for each side in each case is, however, fixed at ₹ 750, if certified. 9. A copy of this common order shall be transmitted to the Tribunal immediately with reference to the aforesaid cases for information. 10. Retain this order in the record of Misc. Civil Case No. 380 of 1992 and place its each copy in the record of connected Misc. Civil Cases, as particularised above, for ready reference.
-
1996 (3) TMI 561 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... rial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court relied upon by the learned counsel as reported in AIR 1990 SC 1017 (supra) as also the decision reported in (1986) 50 CTR (SC) 250 (1986) 157 ITR 665 (SC) (supra). We have also seen the order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court made in the writ petition filed by the assessee and which is placed at Annex-I to the stay application. After considering all the facts we feel that it is a fit case for grant of stay of outstanding demand of ₹ 5,48,726 against the assessee till the disposal of the reference application No. 123 (Del) 96 in ITA No. 647 (Del) 95 for the asst. yr. 1991-92 filed by the assessee. The stay is, however, subject to the condition that the assessee will not seek adjournment of hearing of the reference application as and when it is fixed, as otherwise, it will run the risk of exposing itself to this stay being vacated. 6. The stay application is allowed as above.
-
1996 (3) TMI 560 - AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS , NEW DELHI)]
... ...
... ... ..... custodian) once he ceases to be non- resident in India. The first question is answered accordingly. For the reasons discussed above, the Authority pronounces the follow- ing ruling on the three questions raised by the applicant in paragraph C of his application RULING (1) The principal constituting withdrawals by the applicant from his IRA account in the US and deposited in the NR-NR-RD account in India will not be liable to tax. The interest earnings therefrom credited from time to time to the account will, however, be liable to Indian income-tax at the rates applicable to an individual from the previous year in which the applicant ceases to be a non-resident; and (2) The IRA withdrawals by the applicant will not constitute taxable income and will not be liable to tax in India; and This Authority declines to give any ruling on the question pertaining to the gift-tax liability in respect of any gifts that may be made by the applicant from the IRA funds to a resident in India.
-
1996 (3) TMI 559 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e auditors. That again is not conclusive. This is a taxation Act and what is allowable as a deduction is set out in the Act. The taxation authorities, in any view, are entitled to look at the resolutions and look at the provisions of the Articles of Association providing for the directors' salary, but they are not bound by them. They are entitled to consider the fact that the accountant passed the amounts allotted, but they are not bound by that fact. They are entitled to consider what payments are made for similar services in similar businesses. It is a question of fact in each case as to whether the sums allotted to directors are or are not incurred solely for the purpose of earning profits or gains in a business. In my view no real question of law arises in this matter. The question is whether the Commissioner of Income-tax has or has not properly appreciated and applied the law. In my view he has properly appreciated and has also properly applied the law in this case.
-
1996 (3) TMI 558 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... succeeds in such auction, they shall be given the benefit of 10 percent, of the bid amount offered by them; (i) Out of the amount realised by sale or lease on account of the price/premium, the erstwhile allottees shall be paid the amount spent by him/it in raising construction of the building at his own risk and responsibility during the pendency of the writ petition as calculated by Expert Committee along with the amount already paid to the H.U.D.A. such a provision would not be applicable where the allottee exercises his option to remove the construction raised by him/it at his/its own risk and responsibility; (j) The process be initiated within two months and completed within four months; (k) Till the process of fresh allotment is completed, the private respondents shall be permitted to remain in possession of the school sites allotted to them. The appellants are held entitled to the payment of costs which are assessed at ₹ 2,000/- per appeal. 39. Order accordingly.
-
1996 (3) TMI 557 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ation urged that the ratio of 2 1 fixed under the Placement Scheme infact works out gross injustice. The interest of the employees of the Punjab National bank should not be jeopardised by bringing the employees of the New Bank of India and no credit should be given to the employees of the New Bank of India for their past services rendered. We do not find any force in the aforesaid contention and, as discussed earlier, the ratio of 2 1 was fixed in the Placement Scheme in consultation with the Reserve Bank of India and after a comparative study of the business of the two banks, the rate of promotion, the higher productivity and larger measure of responsibility and higher average business per branch of the Punjab National Bank as compared to the New Bank of India and all other germane considerations. The submission of Mr. Sharma, therefore, is rejected. 33. In the premise, as aforesaid, all the appeals are dismissed but in the circumstances, there will be no order as to costs.
........
|
