|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 293 Records
-
1988 (3) TMI 466 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... erse remarks made against respondent No. 1 which were subsequently set aside did not exist in the records and consider the question as to whether he would have been appointed or Respondent No. 11 Shri Sardar Pradeep Kar would have been appointed on the basis of the categorization to which each of them was entitled having regard to the C.C. Rolls (ignoring the adverse remarks against Respondent No. 1 which were subsequently quashed) and pass appropriate orders in the light of the decision taken on this point. If the Respondent No. 1's claim is accepted upon reconsideration in the light of the aforesaid exercise, the order of appointment should provide for his appointment with effect from the date on which he would have been appointed if he was selected when the original selection was made in 1983 and he should be given all the benefits. The Selection Committee shall complete its exercise within two months from the date of this order. There will be no order regarding costs.
-
1988 (3) TMI 465 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... gation brought before it for adjudication. The manner of functioning of the Court in accord with the Rule of Law has to be dispassionate, objective and analytical. The Judges who preside over these courts do not act with a sense of superiority; nor do they look down upon others in the community. In order that the system may efficiently work and the purpose for which the courts are established is duly served, it is necessary that everyone within the framework of the Rule of Law must accept the system, render due obedience to orders made and in the event of failure of compliance, the rod of justice must descend down to punish. We hope and trust that everyone within the system realises this situation and does not unnecessarily get into a confrontation. 8. The apologies tendered by the respondents are accepted and the contempt notice is discharged. Respondent No. 6 is directed to pay to the petitioners the costs of the proceedings which are assessed at Rs. 2,000 within one month.
-
1988 (3) TMI 464 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... full advantage of the compromise decree. The matter was fully considered and decided by the order dated 17.8.1981 as mentioned by the High Court in the above quoted passage. In the situation the counsel who represented the plaintiffs in the appeal could not have been held to have continued to represent them specially when they informed the court that he had no further authority and that notice should be directly sent to the plaintiffs. However, we do not consider it necessary to remand the matter to the High Court for fresh consideration as we have considered all the relevant materials and have come to a final conclusion on merits in favour of the plaintiffs. 10. For the reasons mentioned above, the order dated 31.8.1981 passed by the Orissa High Court in First Appeal No. 184 of 1972 is set aside and the application filed by Gostha Gopal Dey for extension of time is rejected. The appeal is accordingly allowed with costs payable to the appellants by the contesting respondents.
-
1988 (3) TMI 463 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... y to refer to the several decisions relied on by the learned counsel for the appellant The Courts below were therefore quite right in holding that the first respondent had established that the suit properties were allotted to Pattammal in the partition under Ex. A. 3 and that she in turn bequeathed those properties to Linga Pillai under her will Ex. A.6, dt. 15-4-1968. It follows therefore that Linga Pillai was competent to execute the settlement deed under Ex.A.4 dt. 24-9-1971 with reference to the suit properties in favour of the first respondent. Neither the appellant nor respondents 2 and 3 can have any claim therefore over the suit properties. The Courts below were therefore right in upholding the title of the. first respondent to the suit properties, on the strength of the settlement deed Ex. A.4 and in directing the recovery of possession of the suit properties from the appellant and respondents 2 and 3. Consequently the second appeal fails and is dismissed with costs.
-
1988 (3) TMI 462 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... was held and the balance sheet and profit and loss account, were not placed. Failure to hold a meeting is a offence under S. 166 of the Act. S. 210 of the Act will apply only when a meeting is held and the documents are not placed at the meeting. That a meeting should have been held and the documents should have been placed, cannot form the basis of a prosecution under S. 210 of the Act. The opening words of S. 210(1) of the Act makes this position clear. In the absence of any averment in the complaint that the annual general meeting of the company was held in which the documents had not been placed, the prosecution under S. 210 of the Act cannot stand. The averments in the complaint do not disclose an offence under S. 210 of the Act. The proceedings in C.C. No. 1070 of 1982, therefore, have to be quashed. 14. In the result, Crl. M.P. Nos. 6032, 6034 and 6036 of 1985 are dismissed. Crl. M.P. No. 6038 of 1985 is allowed and the proceedings in C.C. No. 1070 of 1982 are quashed.
-
1988 (3) TMI 461 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... struction. It may be in a proper case where the tenant had proper opportunity of meeting the case tried to be made out during enquiry by cross-examining the landlord and his witnesses, the want of pleading by itself may not be made a ground for rejecting the application for eviction, if it could be said that the tenant knew what was the requirement of the landlord, but where there was no such opportunity, prejudice being writ large, it may not be proper for the Court to make an order of eviction taking into consideration the evidence adduced during the enquiry; because such evidence adduced during enquiry without pleading is valueless and has to be eschewed. Therefore, the Court below was not right in making the order of eviction on the basis of the evidence not pleaded in the application. In the result and for the reasons stated above I hold the order made on all the four grounds is unsustainable. The revision is allowed and the order of eviction under revision is set aside.
-
1988 (3) TMI 460 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tatement may be confirmed after ten years. In that event the public exchequer will have spent lakhs of rupees without taking any work from the employee. With the pendency of an appeal on this point hundreds of allied matters may have to be admitted and tagged on to the present matter. The point therefore deserves to be settled at this stage itself by a larger Bench. 9. learned Counsel for the respondents-caveator prays that if the Court is inclined to consider this question after granting special leave, the petitioner should be directed to pay the past arrears and continue to pay the salary to the respondent who has succeeded before the Central Administrative Tribunal. This question also, in our opinion, should better be dealt with by the larger Bench before which this matter is placed as per the directions of the Hon'ble Chief Justice. We accordingly refer this matter to a larger Bench. The office shall seek directions of the Hon'ble the Chief Justice in this behalf.
-
1988 (3) TMI 459 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... le issue because the plaintiff had disclosed the details about the registration of the firm in the original plaint itself. 14. On the facts of the present case, therefore, it appears to me that the order of the learned III Assistant Judge wholly rejecting the application for leave to defend needs to be set aside. Instead, I order that the defendants will be entitled to leave to defend the suit on their depositing a sum of ₹ 10,000 within a period of one month from today. On their deposit of ₹ 10,000 in the trial Court, the order of the trial Court refusing the application for leave to defend shall stand set aside and the suit will be restored to file and be tried on merits. 15. The revision petition is thus allowed to the extent indicated above. Since there is no appearance on behalf of the plaintiff, there will be no order as to costs. 16. I must express my appreciation of the assistance given by Mr. Padmanabhan and Mr. Sundaravaradan at my instance in this case.
-
1988 (3) TMI 458 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ed Counsel for the eceased-respondent Madanlal did not intimate the Court about the death of his client as required under Order 22, Rule 10-A, C.P.C. If he would have moved an application giving intimation of his death, the learned Counsel for the appellant would have taken steps in time for bringing his legal representatives on record. It is also not the case of the respondents that the appellant Kishan acted with some ulterior motives or with malafides in moving the said applications with great delay. 13. In view of all these facts, circumstances and authoritative observations, the applications of the appellant Kishan dated 17-4 1986 for condoning the delay, for setting aside the abatement and for bringing the legal representatives of the deceased respondent Madanlal on record deserve to be allowed. Accordingly, the applications are allowed. The legal representatives of the deceased-respondent Madanlal are brought on record. Amended cause title will be filed within a month.
-
1988 (3) TMI 457 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nd the period from 6 years to 8 years so as to make the direct recruits more experienced and suitable for the higher post. That is a matter for the Rule making Authority; the Tribunal cannot sit in judgment over the opinion of the Rule making Authority. No Court or Tribunal can substitute its own view in a matter such as this. Such a Rule framed by a competent Authority cannot be struck down unless it is shown to be violative of any Fundamental Right guaranteed to a citizen under the Constitution." We do not find any infirmity in the above findings arrived at by the Tribunal. In the premises aforesaid we hold that the third proviso to sub rule 2 of Rule 12 of Central Secretariat Service Rules, 1962 as amended by Notification No. 5/8/80-CS. I. dated 29th December, 1984 is not ultra vires of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution. The judgment and order of the Central Administrative Tribunal is hereby affirmed and the appeals are dismissed without costs. Appeals dismissed.
-
1988 (3) TMI 456 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... xpression 'purchased' would undoubtedly connote the domain and control of the property given into the assessee's hands. From the facts on record, it 1s clear that, apart from the payment of substantial purchase consideration, the assessee secured possession of the property on 10-8 1976 which is within the period of one year specified under section 54(1). There might have been some procedural delay in obtaining formal registration of the sale deed. But, that, in our opinion, is immaterial. In the facts and circumstances, the Tribunal was right in coming to the conclusion that the assessee purchased another residential house within the period of one year as stipulated by section 54(1). The house property purchased by the assessee had come into the full domain and control of the assessee within the period of one year. 3. In the circumstances, our answer to the question referred is in the affirmative, i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. No costs.
-
1988 (3) TMI 455 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... o examine the wider submission canvassed by the learned advocate for the assessee placing reliance on the decisions of the High Court in C1T v. Eternal Science of Man's Society 1981 128 ITR 456 and the Madras High Court in CIT v. Nachimuthu Industrial Association 1982 138 ITR 585 which have taken the view even independently of the said circular that in such circumstances and on such facts, section 13(2)(h) would not apply. We, therefore, need not dilate on these decisions. Consequently, even the second contention canvassed by the learned advocate for the revenue is found to be devoid of any substance and is rejected. 13. As a result of the aforesaid discussion, it has to be held that the revenue has failed to make out any of the contentions canvassed before us in this reference. All the four referred questions, therefore, are answered in the affirmative, against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. Reference stands accordingly disposed of with no order as to costs.
-
1988 (3) TMI 454 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ntractor became irrelevant due to subsequent price escalation, it was held in that case that contractor's claim for compensation for the excess expenditure incurred due to the price rise could not be turned down on ground of absence of price escalation clause in that regard in the contract. Agreement as a whole has to be read. Reliance was placed very heavily on this decision on behalf of the appellant before us. It has to be borne in mind that in the instant case there are specific clauses referred to hereinbefore which barred consideration of extra claims in the event of price escalation. That was not so in Tarapore and Company's case. That made all the difference. The basis of bargain between the parties in both these two cases were entirely different. 10. In the aforesaid view of the matter we are of the opinion that the High Court was right in the view it took and there is no ground to interfere. The petition for special leave fails and is accordingly dismissed.
-
1988 (3) TMI 453 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... thus hold that the duty as levied on package tea is valid and legal and the said item/product is a separate and specific excisable item. 84. Thus the two appeals under consideration should be dismissed. 85. We order accordingly. There will however be no order as to costs in the appeals. 86. Consequent to our findings as above, we also dismiss the appeals in F.M. A.T. Nos. 95 and 96 of 1986 where, in fact no separate arguments were advanced by the learned advocates, as the points as involved, would be covered by the judgment as proposed by us in F.M.A.T. No. 4198 of 1985 and F.M.A.T. No. 2338. There will be no order as to costs in these appeals also. Since the point involved in this case are not only matters of great public importance and also requires the determination by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, as prayed for by the learned Advocates appearing for the appellants, we grant necessary certificate for him to appeal to the Supreme Court. Samir Kumar Mookherjee, J. I agree.
-
1988 (3) TMI 452 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... vitiate the legislative process in the exercise of which the impugned Act and ordinances were respectively passed and promulgated. The respondents also have failed to prove the alleged mismanagement of the Institute by the Society or by Dr. Jha. Indeed, they have not pressed the allegation of mismanagement. For the reasons aforesaid, the impugned order of termination dated April 21, 1986 of the petitioner Dr. Jagadanand Jha is quashed. Writ Petitions (Civil) Nos. 87 of 1987 and 439 of 1987 and Civil Appeal No. 4141 of 1986 in so far as they relate to the said order of termination of services of the petitioner Dr. Jagadanand Jha are allowed. The State Government will be at liberty to consider the question of termination of service of the petitioner after giving him a reasonable opportunity to make representation. The Writ Petitions (Civil) Nos. 55 of 1987 and 431 of 1987 and Civil Appeal No. 4142 of 1986 are dismissed There will be no order for costs in any of these matters.
-
1988 (3) TMI 451 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... executed guarantee bond in respect of the remaining penalty amount. These weighty subsequent circumstances cannot be ignored while hearing the above Special Civil Applications. Even on this consideration, therefore, the order rejecting the restoration application and the order dismissing the above appeal are required to be set aside in the ends of justice. 9. We, therefore, allow both the aforesaid Special Civil Applications, set aside the order rejecting the restoration application as also the order under which the said appeal has been dismissed. We also direct that the said appeal be restored to file and be heard expeditiously on merits after affording an opportunity to the parties of being heard. The said appeal, after restoration, be disposed of on merits preferably by 31-5-1988. The Special Civil Applications are allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rules are made absolute accordingly. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs. Order accordingly.
-
1988 (3) TMI 450 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... must go back to the Sales Tax Tribunal for fresh consideration. 31. As regards the addition to the purchases of oil seeds, the same cannot also be sustained, as it was made consequent to the additions made in the turnover of oil. This matter must also go back to the Sales Tax Tribunal for fresh consideration. 32. No other point was pressed before me. 33. The result is that the decision of the Sales Tax Tribunal to the limited extend, as indicated earlier, is erroneous. The Tribunal shall consider the question relating to the production of oil and the turnover thereof afresh. The turnover of purchase of oil seeds shall also be decided afresh. 34. In giving effect to this order under Section 11 (8) of the Act, the Tribunal shall restore assessee's appeal to its original number and shall decide it afresh in the light of the observations made above and in accordance with law. 35. This revision succeeds in part and is allowed accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1988 (3) TMI 449 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ing eviction of a tenant from a non-residential premises under section 10(3)(a)(iii) of the Act in order to succeed in his petition should establish that he bona fide requires the premises in addition to proving the other ingredients referred to therein. The judgment of the High Court which has proceeded on a wrong basis has, therefore, to be set aside. Since the High Court while allowing the revision petition has approached the case from a wrong angle, it is necessary to direct the High Court to decide it afresh in the light of what we have stated above. We, therefore, set aside the judgment of the High Court and remand it to the High Court again to decide it afresh. If the High Court finds that the case should be remanded to the Trial Court to enable any of the parties to lead evidence on the question of the bona fide requirement of the landlord it may remit the case to the Trial Court. The appeal is accordingly allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. Appeal allowed.
-
1988 (3) TMI 448 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... sum of ₹ 7000/- to the defendant and will permit the plaintiff to withdraw the remaining amount in order to purchase the stamp papers etc. and to prepare a draft of the sale deed to be executed. The defendant shall execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff on receiving the aforesaid sum of ₹ 7000/- from out of the amount deposited in this Court by the plaintiff, within six months from today. On his failure to do so the trial court will appoint an official of the court to execute the sale deed in favour of the plaintiff. The trial court will be at liberty to grant reasonable time to the plaintiff if and when necessary in order to make further deposit or to comply with the directions of this Court if necessity arises in this behalf. 14. The appeal is allowed. The judgment of the trial court as confirmed by the Lower Appellate Court and the High Court is set aside. The suit is decreed in the aforesaid terms. There will be no order regarding costs throughout.
-
1988 (3) TMI 447 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... impugned orders passed by the various Designated Courts in the State dismissing the applications for bail and direct them to consider each particular case on merits as to whether it falls within the purview of ss. 3 and/or 4 of the Terrorist & Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987; and if so, whether the accused in the facts and circumstances of the case were entitled to bail while keeping in view the limitations on their powers under s. 20(8) of the Act. Where the Designated Courts find that the acts alleged in the police report or complaint of facts A under s. 14(1) do not fall within the purview of ss. 3 and/ or 4 of the Act, they shall in exercise of the powers under s. 10 of the Act transfer the cases for trial to the ordinary criminal courts. The accused persons who have been enlarged on bail by this Court shall continue to remain on bail until their applications for bail are dealt with by the Designated Courts with advertence to the observations made above.
........
|
