|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 644 Records
-
2005 (1) TMI 754 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... to the States of Bihar and Jharkhand on the premise that they are bound to pay the salaries of the employees of the public sector undertakings but on the ground that the employees have a human right as also a fundamental right under Article 21 which the States are bound to protect. The directions, which have been issued by this Court on 9th May, 2003 as also which are being issued herein, are in furtherance of the human and fundamental rights of the employees concerned and not by way of an enforcement of their legal right to arrears of salaries. The amount of salary payable to the concerned employees or workmen would undoubtedly be adjudicated upon in the proper proceedings. However, these directions are issued which are necessary for their survival. Undoubtedly, any amount paid by Justice Uday Sinha Committee pursuant to these directions shall be duly credited for. 38. These applications are disposed of with the aforementioned directions. Put up the matter after six months.
-
2005 (1) TMI 753 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the factum of a certificate being issued by the concerned authority under the Act of 1993. We are also satisfied as the High Court was satisfied, that no proper inquiry preceded the issuance of such a certificate and such a certificate was issued merely on the say so of the appellant. We have, therefore, no hesitation in overruling this argument raised on behalf of the appellant. 12. Before we part with this case, we wish to express our dismay at the extent to which a person could go to sustain her seat in the legislature. The appellant brands her five siblings and herself as bastards and her mother a concubine. We desist from making any further observations on this aspect. 13. on an anxious reconsideration of all relevant aspects, we are satisfied that the High Court was right in declaring the election of the appellant to the concerned Legislative Assembly of Andhra Pradesh invalid. We, therefore, confirm that decision of the High Court and dismiss these appeals with costs.
-
2005 (1) TMI 752 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ns of the Division Benches of the Kerala High Court referred to hereinabove namely in the case of Bhaskaran Chandrasekharan v. Radhakrishnan (1998 (1) KLT 881) and Malhotra Handlooms &Ors. v. Hari Om Yarns (P) Ltd. (2003 (2) DCR 616) . In my view cases like this cannot be termed to be a case where there is a material alteration. Material alteration will presuppose a change of something which is there to something which was not there. In cases like this there is a tacit or implied consent by the drawer to fill in the details of the amount and date of the cheque. However, as already seen, as far as the facts of this case are concerned, it certainly could not be ruled out that the figures and the date of the cheque were first written by the complainant and then the accused signed the cheque and again handed it over to the complainant to recover the amount due thereon. Being so, I find there is no merit in this revision. Consequently the revision petition is hereby dismissed.
-
2005 (1) TMI 751 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... unal to so remit. We, therefore, set aside the impugned order. The Tribunal must decide the matter on merits on the material available before it. The Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
-
2005 (1) TMI 750 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... consideration by the appellate authority. The Division Bench of the High Court, under the impugned order, has held that the reference to larger bench made by the learned Single Judge was not called for and directed the writ petition to be placed for hearing on merits before the learned Single Judge. Since we have held that the appeal filed by the appellant against the decision of the Rent Control Court could not be rejected only on the ground that the admitted arrears of rent had not been paid or deposited, the hearing of the writ petition now by the learned Single Judge would entail waste of public time. We, therefore, direct that the appeal preferred by the appellant be heard and decided in accordance with the direction issued by the learned District Judge, West Tripura, by the judgment and order dated 26.4.1997 in Civil RCC Revision No. 2 of 1996 and in accordance with law. The appeal is disposed of in terms of these directions. 13. The parties shall bear their own costs.
-
2005 (1) TMI 749 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e defendant No. 1 or his agent who could have deposited the same in the loan account. Since it is found that respondent No. 1 has executed the document Ex. P/20. which is document relating to confirmation of balance, therefore, there is no necessity to take the assistance of Section 19 of the Limitation Act, for extending the period of limitation. So far as the grant of subsidy is concerned, the appellant cannot be blamed for it because the subsidy is being granted by the Government and if the subsidy is not granted, then it cannot be said that respondent No. 1 is absolved from its liability to repay the loan. In view of aforesaid facts and circumstances, the appeal stands allowed and the Judgment and decree passed by the Court below is set aside. The respondents are directed to pay a sum of ₹ 43,506/- along with interest @ 10% per annum from the date of filing of the suit till its realisation. Respondents are further liable to pay the cost of the litigation throughout.
-
2005 (1) TMI 748 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... h Court, Alipore is accordingly set aside. The criminal case is sent back on remand to the learned Magistrate for fresh trial and fresh decision in accordance with law. Liberty is granted to the learned Magistrate to record fresh evidence, if required for the ends of justice and, the learned Magistrate may exercise jurisdiction under Section 311 of the Code to examine any witness or recall any witness already examined for the just decision of the case. The learned Magistrate is directed to complete the trial within four months from the date of communication of this order. 13. In the result, the criminal appeal is allowed and the matter is sent back to the learned Magistrate concerned for retrial in the light of the observations made above. 14. Send a copy of this order along with Lower Court record to the learned Judicial Magistrate, 5th Court, Alipore for information and necessary action. 15. Urgent xerox certified copy be given to the parties, if applied for, expeditionsly.
-
2005 (1) TMI 747 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... that he has settled the matter with the respondent and paid the entire amount due to him. The respondent has also filed an affidavit in support of the compromise. In view of the circumstances, the offence is compounded and the appellant is acquitted of all the charges framed against him. 4. The appeal is disposed of.
-
2005 (1) TMI 746 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rs are directed to be expeditiously destroyed by incineration as per the recommendations of the Monitoring Committee and under its supervision subject to and in terms of this order. The cost of incineration shall be deposited by the importers with the Monitoring Committee within four weeks. The Monitoring Committee will ensure the timely destruction of the oil at the incinerators mentioned in its report. After the destruction of the oil in question, a compliance report shall be filed by the Monitoring Committee. All concerned are directed to render full assistance and cooperation to the Monitoring Committee. In regard to the consignment of Eleven Star Esscon, in case option for recycling is exercised by the Government, the recycling would be done under the supervision of the Monitoring Committee. If the request for recycling is not received by the Monitoring Committee within four weeks, the said consignment would also be destroyed in the same manner as the other consignments.
-
2005 (1) TMI 745 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... he season 1973-74. It may be mentioned here that under sections 3 and 4 of the Levy Sugar Equalisation Fund Act, 1976 the respondent-assessee was liable to pay interest at the specified rate. It is not in dispute that the aforesaid amount relates to the liability of interest which has accrued during the accounting year relevant to the assessment year in question. In view of the decision of this court in the CIT v. Dhampur Sugar Mills Ltd. (IT Reference No. 18 of 1983 dated 5-3-2003) the liability for interest which has accrued on account of the statutory provisions of the Levy Sugar Equalisation Fund Act, 1976 is allowable during the year in which it has accrued. 3. In this view of the matter, the Tribunal was justified in accepting the claim of allowability of ₹ 2,14,694 on account of interest. We accordingly answer the question of law referred to us in affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. 4. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
-
2005 (1) TMI 744 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... not lie in the mouth of the defendant-judgment debtor how to turn around and say that filing and dismissal of the Second Appeal should not be taken account of. 12. In the said circumstances, I hereby hold that the decree of the Courts below became enforceable after the second Appeal, which was filed against it and which had kept the matter sub-judice, was dismissed on 16.9.1988 and that from that date the period of limitation of twelve years, as prescribed in Article 136 of the Limitation Act, would begin to run and hence the execution case filed on 24.9.1998 was well within the period of limitation. 13. This aspect of the matter has been completely over-looked by the learned Court below and the provision of law with respect thereto have been misconstrued in the impugned order, which is thus set aside and the learned Executing Court is directed to proceed with the execution case till its logical conclusion in accordance with law. 14. Accordingly, this civil revisions allowed.
-
2005 (1) TMI 743 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... used is accepted by the Court below, that is sufficient for upholding the order of acquittal. However, if the Appellate Court comes to the conclusion that the findings of the Court below are wholly unreasonable or perverse and not based on the evidence on record, or suffers from serious illegality including ignorance or misreading of evidence on record, the Appellate Court will be justified in setting aside such an order of acquittal. We find this case to fall under the latter category. We find no rational justification for the conclusion reached by the High Court. The High Court has misread the evidence on record and has completely ignored the relevant evidence on record which was accepted by Trial Court. We, therefore, allow the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and order of the High Court and restore the judgment and order of the Trial Court. The respondent shall be taken into custody forthwith to serve out the remainder of the sentence. His bail bonds are cancelled.
-
2005 (1) TMI 742 - ITAT AGRA
... ...
... ... ..... ision of Tribunal Indore Bench in the case of Mohan Karkare (supra), decision of Tribunal Ahmedabad Bench in the case of Shrepak Enterprises (supra) and the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Hindustan Steels Ltd. (supra), are of the opinion that the assessee's case is fully covered by the proposition of law, laid down in the aforesaid decisions and consequently, following these decisions, cancel the penalty. (iv) So far as other decisions relied upon by the counsel for the assessee are concerned, the same, if not directly, indirectly support the assessee's case that it was not fit case for levy of penalty under Section 271D of the Act. 14. In the totality of facts and circumstances of the case, we, after following the decision relied upon by the counsel and the fact that the Revenue has not disputed either the facts of applicability of these decisions, cancel the penalty imposed in this case. 15. In the Result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed.
-
2005 (1) TMI 741 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... led at a lonely place when he was coming after attending the call of nature. In the circumstances of the case the prosecution version is not reliable. The evidence which has been brought by the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond all reasonable doubt. The judgment and order of conviction passed by the trial Court is not fit to be maintained. 19. Accordingly the impugned judgment and order of conviction passed by the trial Court is set aside and both the appeals are allowed. The appellant in Cr. Appeal No. 576 of 2001 and in Cr. Appeal No. 601 of 2001 are acquitted of their charges under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code, and Kamlesh Rai appellant in Cr. Appeal No. 601 -of 2001 is acquitted of the charge under Section 27, Arms Act. All three appellants namely Deopujan Thakur, Sarbjeet Thakur and Kamlesh Kumar Rai are in jail as such they are directed to be released forthwith if not wanted in any other case. Both appeals are allowed. M.L. Visa, J. 20. I agree.
-
2005 (1) TMI 739 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rvice profile is concerned. Therefore, it is well settled that although the Court cannot moderate the appraisal and grading given by an officer while exercising the power of judicial review but as the entries for the period indicated above had an element of adverse reflection and for that purpose his seniority has been down graded, the ACRs ought to have been communicated to the petitioner, which has not been done in the instant case, therefore, reliance placed by the Tribunal on the decision of Punjab and Haryana High court in Union of India and Ors. vs. M.S. Preet and Anr. In Civil Writ Petition No. 13024/CAT/2002 rendered on 22.11.2002 would not come into play. We set aside and quash the order of the Tribunal and the ACRs for the years 1992-93, 1993-94 and 1994-95 and remand the case back to the respondent to reconsider afresh within a period of three months the seniority of the petitioner in terms of the above observations qua the respondents. Petition stands disposed of.
-
2005 (1) TMI 738 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... Sinha, JJ. ORDER Appeal dismissed.
-
2005 (1) TMI 737 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the question raised by the petitioner necessarily involves disputed questions of facts, it is more appropriate that the petitioner avails the remedy of appeal to determine as to what is the nature of the contract and whether it is one figuring in any one of the entries in the VI Schedule and if not what can be the consequences of the tax liability under Section 17(6) which are all mixed questions of facts and law. 5. In the circumstances, it is more appropriate for the petitioner to avail the remedy of appeal and urge all points before the Appellate Authority taking advantage of the appellate remedy provided under the Statute and without prejudice to any of the points urged in this writ petition. 6. Writ petition is dismissed accordingly. It is open to the Appellate Authority to take note of the pendency of this writ petition while considering the question of limitation in the appeal. 7. Learned Government Pleader is permitted to file har memo of appearance within six weeks.
-
2005 (1) TMI 736 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... xtra-judicial confessions was rejected without any valid reasons. The report of the ballistic expert also was not appreciated in the correct perspective by the High Court. In our view, the Division Bench seriously erred in acquitting the respondent-accused Paltan Mallah. 39. In the result, we reverse the acquittal of the respondent-accused Paltan Mallah. The incident leading to these appeals had taken place as early as 1991. As there is a long lapse of time, we do not think that the sentence of death imposed upon him by the Sessions Court is justified in the circumstances. We set aside the acquittal of respondent-accused Paltan Mallah and find him guilty of the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC and sentence him to undergo imprisonment for life. 40. The appeals preferred by the State and also by the Chhattisgarh Mukti Morcha are allowed to the extent indicated above. All other appeals shall stand dismissed. The acquittal of other accused by the High Court is confirmed.
-
2005 (1) TMI 735 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tisements may be made in local language for the local newspaper but the advertisements in the national newspaper shall be made only in English. The terms and conditions of sale shall specify that the lowest acceptable offer for the purchase of the property in question is ₹ 1 crore. Both the parties before us will also be entitled to participate and bid for the property. If there are bids over and above ₹ 1 crore, the sale will be made to the highest bidder. If on the other hand the bids do not reach ₹ 1 crore, the appellant shall be obliged to purchase the property at a price of ₹ 1 crore. The parties are at liberty to withdraw any amount which they may have already deposited with the authorities concerned, if they so desire. As far as Respondent 1 is concerned, the earnest money deposited shall be returned, after defraying the cost of the sale. The advertisements shall be made within a period of three weeks. 11. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
-
2005 (1) TMI 734 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... hese loopholes and in the interest of revenue, the State under the impugned notification referred only CL-2 and CL-9 licensees and excluded the other categories of licensees This classification by the State can neither be said to be arbitrary nor discriminatory. To achieve the object which is expedient, the State in its wisdom included the CL-2 and CL-9 licensees in the impugned notification. It is clear that the differentiation has a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the impugned notification. Therefore, the contention of respondents that the impugned notification is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution is liable to be rejected. 13. With respect, we disagree with the findings of learned Single Judge and we cannot sustain the impugned Judgment in these writ appeals. In the result, we allow these appeals, set-aside the common Order of learned Single Judge dated 18.7.2003 and consequently the Writ Petitions are dismissed with no Order as to costs.
........
|
