|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 320 Records
-
1996 (12) TMI 403 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t power vested in the Court. Same view was taken in State of Haryana & Ors. v. Bhajan lal & Ors. (1992) Supp. 1 SCC 355 and G.L. Didwania & Anr. v. Income Tax Officer & Anr. (1995) Supp. SCC 25 etc. Considered from this perspective, we hold that the High Court was wholly wrong in quashing the complaint/proceedings, under Section 432 of the Code. The appeal is accordingly allowed. The judgment of the High Court is set aside. We make it clear that all the observations in the judgment on merits are only to find out prima facie case whether the High Court would be justified in the exercise of its power under Section 482. The trial Court will have to decide the case on its own merits in the light of the evidence that may be led at the trial without being influenced in any manner by our observations made hereinabove. The trial Court is directed to proceed from the stage the complaint was pending at the time of quashing, to take further steps in accordance with law.
-
1996 (12) TMI 402 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... poultry feed cannot be said to be a balanced poultry feed. 8. The view so taken by us, is fully fortified by the decisions of Gujarat High Court in Glaxo Laboratories (India) Ltd. v. The State of Gujarat, (1979) 43 STC 386 and State of Gujarat v. Pfizer Ltd., (1991) 82 STC 374. 9. For the reasons we held that the turnover of the concentrates amounting to ₹ 17,46,561.40 P. which is brought to tax by the assessing authority under the heading "balanced poultry feed supplements" will be exempted in view of the entry No. 5 relating to balanced poultry feeds vide notification dated 31-1-1985. 10. In the result, the petition succeeds and is allowed directing the assessing authority to treat the turnover of balanced poultry need supplement exempt in view of the entry No. 5 of the notification dated 31-1-1985. The recovery proceedings initiated in regard to the tax on the turnover of the balanced poultry feed supplements for the years under considerations are quashed.
-
1996 (12) TMI 401 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... viction came to be filed on the ground of subletting of the premises. Considering the constitution of the companies, its operation and the nature of the incidence that flowed therefrom, this Court had held that the limited company and the partnership firm were two only on paper but were one for practical purposes There was substantial identity between the limited company and the partnership firm. On the basis of those findings, it was held that there was no sub-letting. The ratio has no application to the facts in this case. In view of the findings recorded above, viz., there was a clear assignment between the Foreign Company and the Indian Company of the demised premises without any written consent of the respondent-landlord, it is a case of "sub-letting" within the meaning of Section 14(1)(b) of the Act. The courts below, therefore, have not committed any illegality in reaching those findings warranting interference. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.
-
1996 (12) TMI 400 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... vel shall consist of Chief Secretary, Law Secretary and another member, other than the Home Secretary, appointed by the State Government. (a) The Committee shall on its own, within two months of the passing of the order by the authority concerned, investigate whether there is or has been a relevant order under Section 5(2) of the Act. Where there is or has been an order whether there has been any contravention of the provisions of Section 5(2) of the Act. (b) If on an investigation the Committee concludes that there has been a contravention of the provisions of Section 5(2) of the Act, it shall set aside the order under scrutiny of the Committee. It shall further direct the destruction of the copies of the intercepted material. (c) If on investigation, the Committee comes to the conclusion that there has been no contravention of the provision of Section 5(2) of the Act, it shall record the finding to that effect. The writ petition is disposed of. No costs. Order accordingly.
-
1996 (12) TMI 399 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... her in a coordinated project like this, if one component is not worked out the entire project gets delayed and the enormous cost on that score if re-bidding is done. The High Court has totally lost sight of this fact which directing the rebidding. In our considered opinion direction of re-bidding in the facts and circumstances of the present case instead of being in the public interest would be grossly detrimental to the public interest. In the premises, as aforesaid, we set aside the impugned judgment of the Orissa High Court and direction that the contract awarded in favour of the appellant Paradip Port Trust be affirmed and the appellant may execute the work expeditiously. We further make it clear that the appellant will not be entitled to claim any escalation of the bid amount on the ground of any delay in issuing the work order on account of the pendency of the present litigation. This appeal is, therefore, allowed. But in the circumstance without any order as to costs.
-
1996 (12) TMI 398 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... king of entertainment tax and penalty for the period prior to that date could never have been made. It appears that there is some substance in the submission revolving round this ground. The Revisional Authority is required to consider the petitioners' case in that respect. Hence, the following order is passed - The impugned order passed by the Revisional Authority (the Entertainment Tax Commissioner) on 1/10/1996 is hereby quashed and set aside and the matter is remanded to the Revisional Authority (the Entertainment Tax Commissioner) for considering the revision strictly on merits. The Revisional Authority shall decide the Revision Application in accordance with law as expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of two months from the date of receipt of writ of this direction. The petitioners shall be heard before deciding the Revision Application on all the ground including grounds stated in this judgment. Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs.
-
1996 (12) TMI 397 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Shri Shiv Sagar Tiwari which set the ball rolling. He deserves commendation for the same. 91. Finally, we hope that coming years would not see any scam or misuse of power in making allotments of government quarters. The trust which is reposed in this context on high public functionaries would be discharged, we are sure, only to advance the object of providing of suitable condition of work to Government employees so that the Government is run on even keel; and shelter, which is a very pressing necessity of any human being, would not come to be denied if the same if otherwise due to the incumbent. A satisfied bureaucracy is as much necessary, as good political leadership, to deliver goods. The Government of free India have many promises to keep after its tryst with destiny on the midnight of 14th August, 1947. We have no doubt that all the public functionaries would so act that the meeting with destiny really sees the dawn of an era of hope for all. 92. We say no more. Adieu.
-
1996 (12) TMI 396 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tion of the Act since Section 3(1) has been made applicable with retrospective effect from December 11, 1993. The direction issued by the Chancellor in that behalf is in contravention of Section 3(1) of the Act. It is settled legal position that the mandamus cannot be issued to violate the law or to act in violation of the law. In this case, the direction issued by the High Court tentamounts to a direction to the appellant to appoint the respondents as per the order issued by the Chancellor, in violation of the Act. The mandamus was, therefore, clearly illegal. The incumbent Vice-Chancellor cannot be found fault with the implementation of the Act as per directions contained in it and the comments and the strictures made against the appellants by the High Court are unwarranted and uncalled for. The appeals are allowed and the High Court's judgment and orders stands set aside but, in the circumstances, without costs. The writ petition is, consequently, dismissed. No costs.
-
1996 (12) TMI 395 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... as brought up by him, he bequeathed his business jointly to him and the appellant specifying further that after the death of the appellant, the business shall be carried on by Arunachala Bakthar, Appellant's husband also, significantly, did not bequeath the residential house absolutely in favour of the appellant but created only a life estate therein for her. The remainder was bequeathed to the children of Arunachala Bakthar. 33. In view of the above facts and circumstances, Arunachala Bakthar was clearly a member of the family of the appellant's husband within the meaning of Section 2(6A) of the Act and consequently, the appellant could well file an application for eviction of the respondent from the premises in question not only for her need but also for the need of her "Foster Son", Arunachala Bakthar, 34. We do not find any infirmity in the judgment passed by the Madras High Court and dismiss the appeal with costs which is quantified at ₹ 15, 000.
-
1996 (12) TMI 394 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... n Wallace Flour Mills Co. Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay in 1989 (44) E.L.T. 598 (S.C.) 1989 Volume 4 SCC 592. The Civil Appeal is dismissed. No order as to costs.
-
1996 (12) TMI 392 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ve been in continuous service (as defined in Section 258 of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947) For not less than one year in the industry concerned before the said date. They shall be paid compensation in terms of Section of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. These workmen shall also be paid, in addition, six year's wages as additional compensation. The compensation shall be paid to the workmen before May 31, 1997. The gratuity amount payable to the women shall be paid in addition. The writ petition is allowed with costs. We quantify the costs as ₹ 1,40,000/-(Rupees one lac forty thousand) to be paid by the States of Gujarat. Maharashtra, Orissa, Kerala, Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and West Bengal in equal shares of ₹ 20,000/- each. The amount of ₹ 1,40,000/- realised from the seven coastal States shall be paid to Mr. MC Mehta, Advocate who has assisted in this case throughout. We place on record our appreciation for the assistance rendered by Mr. Mehta.
-
1996 (12) TMI 391 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ough the charges had yet to be proved by evidence to be adduced in the disciplinary proceedings. The High Court, accepting the explanation offered by the respondent, has proceeded on the basis that there was no merit in the charges levelled against the respondent. We are unable to uphold this approach of the High Court. The allegations are based on documents which would have been produced as evidence to prove the charges in the disciplinary proceedings. Till such evidence was produced it could not be said that the charges contained in the charge-sheet were without any basis whatsoever. 4. The appeal is accordingly allowed and the impugned order of the Division Bench of the High Court as well as the judgment of the learned Single Judge insofar as they relate to quashing of the charge- sheet are set aside. It will be open to the appellants to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the respondent on the basis of the said charge-sheet. No orders as to costs.
-
1996 (12) TMI 390 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... y be made hereafter, by any authority, including the Central or any State Government or any court (including High Court) or Tribunal. We also direct that notwithstanding the closure of any saw mills or other wood-based industry pursuant to this order, the workers employed in such units will continue to be paid their full emoluments due and shall not be retrenched or removed from service for this reason. We are informed that the Railway authorities are still using wooden sleepers for laying tracks. The Ministry of Railways will file an affidavit giving full particulars in this regard including the extent of wood consumed by them, the source of supply of wood, and the steps taken by them to find alternatives to the use of wood. I.A. Nos. 7,9,10,11,12,13 and 14 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 202 of 1995 and I.A. Nos. 1,3,4,5,6,7,8 & 10 in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 171 of 1996 are disposed of, accordingly. List the matter on February 25, 1997 as part-heard for further hearing.
-
1996 (12) TMI 389 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... the form of documents and oral testimony, and overturned the findings of the authorities below. Having heard learned Counsel and perused the aforesaid judgment, which is under appeal, we are of the view that the Tribunal has, on an assessment of the facts, came to a conclusion that is not unreasonable. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed, with no order as to costs.
-
1996 (12) TMI 388 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... laid down whether a fresh lease was intended to be created would depend upon the intention of the parties. 29. In the instant case, the respondent himself says that it was only a licence which was created in his favour and that he had to pay the licence fee. This itself is indicative of the fact that a fresh lease was not created in his favour and consequently the rights under the decree were neither intended to be surrendered nor were they actually surrendered. The decree remained preserved and the creation of a licence had not the effect of destroying it. 30. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed, the judgment and order passed by the executing court as also by the High Court are set aside and the objections filed by the respondent under Section 47 CPC are dismissed with a direction to the executing court to proceed with the execution of the decree and deliver possession to the appellant. 31. The appellant shall be entitled to her costs throughout from the respondent.
-
1996 (12) TMI 387 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... 9-2-1981 and, therefore, duty is payable thereon. However, the Show Cause Notice under Section 28(1) of the Wealth Tax Act was given beyond six months of the last date of clearance. It has been rightly held to be barred by time. The special leave petition is dismissed accordingly.
-
1996 (12) TMI 386 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ings cannot be regarded as profits and gains derived from the conduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity. In this connection it may be pointed out that whenever the Legislature wanted to give a restricted meaning in the manner suggested by the learned Solicitor General it has used the expression "derived from", as for instance in Section 80-J. In our view, since the expression of wider import, namely, "attributable to" has been used, the Legislature intended to cover receipts from sources other than the actual conduct of the business of generation and distribution of electricity." In our opinion the said observations conclude the issue, as has been rightly held in the later decision of the Madras High Court. Accordingly these appeals are allowed, the judgment under appeal is set aside and the question referred to the High Court is answered in the affirmative i.e., in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. No costs.
-
1996 (12) TMI 385 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... holder in due course in terms of Section 142(A) of the Negotiable Instruments Act. However, it does not mean that there cannot be authorisation to file a complaint. He can be authorised to file a complaint. Such power or authorisation to file a complaint could also be conferred by Memorandum of Association or Articles of Association. In the instant case no such authorisation is proved. In similar circumstances, I have held in "M/s. Satish and Co. v. S.R. Traders" vide my judgment and order dated 28-11-1996 in Criminal Appeal No. 180/95 that without such an authorisation a Director or any person similarly situated cannot maintain a complaint under Section 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. In this view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the Court below is correct in negativing the contention of the complainant in this behalf also. 5. For the above reasons, I do not find any merits in this appeal and accordingly this appeal is dismissed. 6. Appeal dismissed.
-
1996 (12) TMI 384 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... di of the case and having been re-affirmed by a Constitution Bench which was bearing a litigation inter partes in the APSRTC case, they constitute good law ii) The definition of 39 State 39 provided in Section 3(58) of the General Clauses Act, which declares that the word 39 State 39 would include 39 Union Territory 39 , is inapplicable to Article 246 (4) iii) The term Union Taxation used in Article 289(1) will ordinarily mean all taxes leviable by the Union and it includes within its ambit taxes on property levied within Union Territories therefore, the States can avail of the exemption provided in Article 289(1) in respect of their properties situated within Union Territories iv) Property taxes levied by municipalities within Union Territories are properly within the ambit of the exemption provided in Article 289(1) and the States can avail of the exemption. In the result, the Civil Appeals and the Special leave Petitions are dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1996 (12) TMI 383 - SUPREME COURT
Scope and intendment of the Amending Act - Held that:- On validity of the Amending Act we are unable to see on what ground can its validity impeached. All that it does is to provide statutory basis and legislative imprimatur to the price fixation done by the Commissioner and its break-up. It also provides for recovery and deduction of the 0.70 paise component on account of maintenance charges of warehouses. It can neither be suggested that the Bihar Legislature did not have the legislative competence to enact the said Amending Act nor can it be suggested that the Act violates any of the fundamental rights enshrined in para III. The general averment of Mr. Y.V. Giri that the Act is arbitrary is too vague to merit any acceptance, apart from the fact that an act of Legislature cannot be struck down merely saying it is arbitrary.
The appeals are allowed, the judgment of the High Court is set aside and it is declared that the Amending Act 9 of 1995 being Bihar Act of 9 of 1995 is neither unconstitutional nor is it ineffective to achieve the objective it set out to achieve - object set out in the Preamble.
........
|
