|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 628 Records
-
2004 (1) TMI 711 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... to the plaintiff under the law. The question then arises as to whether such a suit should be allowed to continue and go for trial. The answer in our view is clear, that is, such a suit should be thrown at the threshold. Why should a suit which is bound to be dismissed for want of jurisdiction of a court to grant the reliefs prayed for, to be tried at all? Accordingly, we hold that the trial court was absolutely right in rejecting the plaint and the lower appellate court rightly affirmed the decision of the trial court in this behalf. The High Court was clearly in error in passing the impugned judgment whereby the suit was restored and remanded to the trial court for being decided on merits. The judgment of the High Court is hereby set aside and the judgments of the courts below, that is, the trial court and the lower appellate court are restored. The plaint in the suit stands rejected. 11. The appeal is allowed. The parties are, however, left to bear their respective costs.
-
2004 (1) TMI 710 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... n and the connected papers. We do not find any merit in the same. The review petition is dismissed.
-
2004 (1) TMI 709 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the effect that both the appellants and the Scheduled Tribe candidates can be adjusted in view of the fact that 29 posts are lying vacant is also not a matter which can be decided by this Court for the first time in these appeals. As noticed hereinbefore, the Bank had categorically stated that having regard to the changed situation, they are not in a position to make any further promotions to the post of 'officers'. This Court, in the aforementioned situation, cannot, thus, issue any directions upon the Bank to change its policy decision and accommodate the Scheduled Tribe candidates in violation of its own policy decision. It is for the Bank, the Sponsor Bank as also NABARD to take an appropriate decision in this matter. For the reasons aforementioned, the impugned judgments of the High Court cannot be sustained which are set aside accordingly. Civil Appeal Nos. 4593-4594 and 4595-4596 of 2002 are allowed; whereas Civil Appeal No.4597 of 2002 is dismissed. No costs.
-
2004 (1) TMI 708 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the Respondent first started he used the mark LAXMAN REKHA in cartons containing colours red, white and blue. No explanation could be given as to why that carton had to be changed to look almost identical to that of the Appellant at a subsequent stage. This prima facie indicates the dishonest intention to pass off his goods as those of the Appellants. 7. In our view on the facts extracted by the learned Single Judge this was a fit case where an interim injunction should have been granted and should have been continued. In our view the Division Bench was entirely wrong in vacating that injunction merely on the ground of delay and laches. Under the circumstances, the impugned order is set aside and that of the trial court is restored. It is clarified that all observations made by the High Court and by this Court are prima facie and shall not be taken into consideration at the time of the trial of the suit. 8. The Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to the costs.
-
2004 (1) TMI 707 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... declaration placed before the Court and the presence of the original complainant respondent no.1 today before the Court takes me to a conclusion that the say of the complainant should be accepted that he has withdrawn from prosecution because he has compounded the offence out of the Court. As per the settled legal position, the effect of compounding of the offence is that of acquittal. 12. In view of above facts and circumstances, the say of the parties is accepted. Date of offence or the first conviction is not relevant in view of the Scheme of Sec.147 of The N.I.Act and it is not necessary to discuss whether it has retrospective effect or not. Under the circumstances, the conviction and sentence imposed on the petitioner accused for the offence punishable under Sec.138 of The N.I.Act is hereby quashed and set aside the petitioner accused is acquitted of the offence for which he was convicted and sentenced. 13. Rule is made absolute accordingly. Direct Service is permitted.
-
2004 (1) TMI 706 - COMPANY LAW BOARD, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... as much as the petition is not maintainable under Section 235 of Companies Act, 1956. However, the company petition No. 46/2003 is maintainable under Section 237(b) of the Companies Act, 1956 as information being provided by the interested party to the CLB. The action to be taken on the petition is the prerogative of CLB after going through the allegations of the informant. The CLB is free to take assistance of any interested party to form an opinion as to whether the investigation in the affairs of the company as suggested, by informant is necessary or not. 18. I direct that the present petition be treated as filed under Section 237(b). The respondents are directed to file their reply to CP No. 46/2003 within a period of four weeks and rejoinder, if any to be filed by the petitioner within two weeks thereafter. The case be listed for further hearing on 14.4.2004. With above directions, the company Application No. 142/03 stands disposed off. 19. There is no order as to cost.
-
2004 (1) TMI 705 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the appellant to derive fruits of the award. We are afraid, in a case like this, when the claim of the appellant is based under Section 218 of the Indian Contract Act and there is counterclaim by the respondent in the facts and circumstances of the case, it does not seem to us in the interest of justice to direct the respondent to deposit the amount of ₹ 1,75,56,374/ -. No circumstance Justifying such order has been established by the appellant. Taking overall facts and circumstances of the case, we are satisfied that the appellant has failed to make out a case for direction to respondent to deposit the security in the sum of ₹ 1,75,56,374/- as in our view, no case for such protection by way of interim order under Section 9 (ii) (b) has been made out. We, accordingly, dismiss the appeal with no order as to costs. The parties may be provided ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by the Court associate on payment of usual copying charges. Appeal dismissed.
-
2004 (1) TMI 704 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ts (Acts of 1910 and 1948) have made general provisions with regard to supply and use of electrical energy. The provisions regarding purchase of undertaking in the Act of 1910 would not be applicable as the appellants are not licensees within the meaning of the Act of 1910. There is not even a semblance of conflict what to talk of direct conflict between the impugned State Act and the Central Acts to bring about the situation where one cannot be obeyed without disobeying the others. Both the Acts can operate simultaneously as they do not occupy the same field. As the enactments operate in two different fields without encroaching upon each other's field there is no repugnancy. Since there is no repugnancy the question of the State Act being kept for the consideration of the President or receiving his assent did not arise. For the reasons stated above, we do not find any merit in these appeals and the same are dismissed. Parties shall bear their own costs in these appeals.
-
2004 (1) TMI 703 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s arrears of land revenue. The certificate will be issued for the recovery as arrears of land revenue only if, as required by Sub-section (3) of Section 168 of the Act the insured fails to deposit the amount awarded in favour of the insurer within thirty days from the date of announcement of the award by the tribunal. (xi) The provisions contained in Sub-section (4) with proviso thereunder and Sub-section (5) which are intended to cover specified contingencies mentioned therein to enable the insurer to recover amount paid under the contract of insurance on behalf of the insured can be taken recourse of by the Tribunal and be extended to claims and defences of insurer against insured by, relegating them to the remedy before, regular court in cases where on given facts and circumstances adjudication of their claims inter se might delay the adjudication of the claims of the victims. For the reasons aforementioned, these petitions are dismissed but without any order as to costs.
-
2004 (1) TMI 702 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s no gift as at the time of transfer of the funds, the subsidiary company was wholly-owned by the holding company and there was no taxable event. 6. The Tribunal is right in observing that if the entire transaction is taken as a composite arrangement and the corporate veil is pierced, it may be possible to consider that there was only an inter se arrangement among the shareholders for dividing the two companies between the two groups of shareholders and since they were the owners of the shareholding prior to the division, it was virtually a partition and not a transfer from one to another who had no pre-existing right in the asset. Obviously this is a peculiar case and the best course to be adopted is to direct the assessee to approach the CBDT under section 119(2)(b) so that the ITO can finalise the matter in accordance with the directions that may be given. The order of the Tribunal does not call for any interference. 7. In the result, the Tax Case is answered accordingly.
-
2004 (1) TMI 701 - CESTAT, CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... rmediate product. Simultaneously, the use of these capital goods in the overall manufacturing process of finished dutiable goods is not in dispute. 3. It is, therefore, clarified that Cenvat Credit should not be denied on the capital goods used in manufacturing of intermediate product exempt from payment of duty, which are used captively in the manufacture of finished goods chargeable to duty.' In view of our above discussion, we are of the considered opinion that Modvat Credit of duty paid on the capital goods/inputs used by the assesses cannot be denied. We, therefore, uphold the impugned Orders in Appeal Nos. 232 and 24/99 (MDU), dated 05.01.1999 and No,106/2002 (CBE) (GVN), dated 30.04.2002 and dismiss the Revenue appeals and set aside the rest of the Orders in Appeal." 5. Following respectfully, the ratio of the above noted orders, the impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed with consequential relief, if any. Dictated and pronounced in open Court.
-
2004 (1) TMI 700 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... ajesh Kumar,Adv. O R D E R Learned Attorney General seeks leave of the Court to withdraw the petitions. The special leave petitions are dismissed as withdrawn.
-
2004 (1) TMI 699 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ity created under the block assessment." 2. It is an admitted position that Settlement Commission under the IT Act, 1961, is seized of the matter and an application is also submitted to the Settlement Commission for return of the jewellery. The petitioner’s grievance is that the Settlement Commission is not deciding the matter, and looking to the value of the jewellery and the amount which is lying with Department, nothing is required to be recovered so far as the jewellery aspect is concerned. 3. Our attention was drawn by the learned counsel to section 245F with regard to powers and procedure of Settlement Commission and also to the proviso to section 132(1)(iii). We are not entering into the merits of the case but looking to the aforesaid provisions, we direct the Settlement Commission to decide the application submitted by the present petitioner for return of the jewellery within a period of three weeks. With these directions, the writ petition is disposed of.
-
2004 (1) TMI 698 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... een used in the permissible sense and does not make it obligatory. In the aforesaid background, the inevitable conclusion is that if the Appellate Court intends to award compensation an opportunity of hearing has to be granted so that the relevant aspects like the need to award compensation, capacity of the accused to pay and several other relevant factors can be taken note of. Accordingly, we set aside that part of the High Court judgment which relates to direction for payment of compensation by the accused- appellant and remit the matter back to the High Court, which shall grant an opportunity to the accused-appellant, and the adjudication shall be limited to that question particularly relating to the liability of the appellant only since others are said to have already paid the respective amount. It is made clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the issue to be decided under Section 357 (4) of the Code. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated.
-
2004 (1) TMI 697 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ot see any infirmity in the impugned order. The Acts and Rules are made to be followed and not to be violated. When the Statute prescribes the norms to be followed, it has to be in that fashion. Converse would be contrary to law. If there is any allegation of violation of statutory rules which have been brought to the notice of the authorities and if the concerned authorities do not perform their statutory obligation, as in the present case, any aggrieved citizen can always bring to the notice of the High Court about the inaction of the statutory authorities and in such event it would always be open to the High Court to pass an appropriate order as deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. In the present case, the facts as alluded above, would clearly reveal that the High Court was clearly justified in issuing a writ of mandamus, which cannot be faulted. These two appeals are dismissed being devoid of merits. Parties are asked to bear their own costs.
-
2004 (1) TMI 696 - ITAT KOLKATA
... ...
... ... ..... and as such, the addition on account of construction cost cannot be made on the basis of the report of the DVO without pointing out any defects or irregularities in the books. In this view of the matter, the Assessing Officer was not justified in making an addition merely on the basis of the valuation report of the DVO. 12. Since the addition made by the Assessing Officer merely on the basis of a report of the DVO without rejecting books maintained by the assessee and without pointing out any defects therein, has been held unjustified and not sustainable, it is not necessary to go into other pleas or the contentions raised by the assessee, inasmuch as they would serve the academic purpose only. 13. In the result, the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of cost of construction of the property stands deleted in each of the assessment years, by reversing the orders of the authorities below. 14. In the result, all these appeals, filed by the assessee, are allowed.
-
2004 (1) TMI 695 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... sub-article (2) of Article 285, for that is a sphere in which the State legislation operates. The reasoning of the High Court to oust the applicability of Section 135 of the Indian Railways Act on the test of sub-article (2) of Article 285 was totally misplaced, as also in not venturing to create room for it in sub-article (1) of Article 285. The interplay of the constitutional and legal provisions being well cut and well defined requires no marked elaboration to stress the point. Accordingly, we allow this appeal, set aside the judgment and order of the High Court and issue the writ and direction asked for in favour of the Union of India restraining the respondent council from raising demands on the railway in regard to service charges." The same view was reiterated in (1996) 7 SCC 542 Union of India & Anr. v. Ranchi Municipal Corporation & Ors. For the aforesaid reasons, the appeal is devoid of merits and it is accordingly dismissed with no order as to costs.
-
2004 (1) TMI 694 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... avour of the assessee even in this case. (g) The plea of the appellants that electricity manufactured in the EOU is not covered under the Central Excise Tariff is well founded. When the goods are not covered under the Central Excise Tariff there can be no levy on the removal of such goods from the EOU. Especially when it is found that there is no contravention of the Notification under which the consumables were received. No excess consumables are found to have been utilised in this case to call for denial of the said Notification and consequent duty demands. 27. In view of the findings arrived hereinabove, I would concur with the findings of ld. Member (Judicial) and answer this reference accordingly. The matter may now be placed before the original Bench for orders. Sd/- (S.S. Sekhon) Member (Technical) MAJORITY ORDER 28. The impugned order is set aside and the appeals are allowed. Sd/- (C. Satapathy) Member (Technical) Sd/- (Jyoti Balasundaram) Member (Judicial)
-
2004 (1) TMI 693 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... three years may be continued for the same period but negotiations may be held for reducing the liability which may be not less than 5 . The plaintiff appellant M/s.Babulal had never agreed to any such suggestion. Once the measure of damages has been accepted as the amount of monthly rent of the plinths, unless there was some logical and cogent reason to reduce the same, it could not be done. The order of modification of the decree passed by the Trial Court was not called in question. In our view, the decree has been modified without assigning any cogent reason for the same. Hence, that part of the judgment passed by the High Court is liable to be set aside. In the result, Civil Appeal No.3484 of 1997 titled Food Corporation of India & Ors.Vs. M/s.Babulal Agrawal is dismissed and Civil Appeal No.3485 of 1997 titled M/s.Babulal Agrawal Vs. Food Corporation of India & Ors. is allowed and the decree passed by the Trial Court is restored. Parties to bear their own costs.
-
2004 (1) TMI 692 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... he project in accordance with the permissions granted to it under the WPA, FCA and EPA. The State Government will issue the authorization in the requisite format under Sections 29 and 35 within a fortnight. We therefore allow the appeals to the extent stated with no order as to costs. SLP (C) No.22137 OF 2001. Leave granted. In so far as this appeal involves issues of law which have been decided in the above judgment, such issues stand concluded. However, the matter is remanded back to the High Court for determining whether there are, and if so to decide, any outstanding factual controversies in accordance with the observations in our judgment. The appeal is accordingly disposed of with no order as to costs. TRANSFER CASE (C) No.39 of 2001. In view of our judgment delivered today in Essar Oil Ltd. v. Halar Utkarsh Samiti & Ors., the transferred case is remanded back to the High Court to decide the Special Civil Application No.4779 of 2001 in accordance with our judgment.
........
|
