-
2000 (8) TMI 1146
... ...
... ... ..... Delay condoned. The appeal is dismissed on merits.
-
2000 (8) TMI 1145
... ... ... ... ..... ecting a re-count by the Court In his submission the grievance raised before the High Court was fully capable of being taken care of at the trial of the election petition to be filed after the declaration of the results and so the bar of Article 329(b) was attracted. In this connection he invited our attention to Chapter XIV-B Counting of Votes of Handbook for Returning Officers (1998) issued by Election Commission of India. This is an aspect of the case on which we would not like to express any opinion as the requisite pl....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1144
... ... ... ... ..... ue of jurisdiction in the context of suit being barred by limitation, is framed and decided in the first instance before proceeding to decide the suit on any other issue. If the said issue is answered against the plaintiff, then it would be wholly unnecessary for the trial Court to undertake the extensive exercise of recording of evidence with regard to the rival stand on the merits of the case. This would enable the Court to decide the proceedings with utmost dispatch and would subserve the purpose with which section 9-A ....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1143
... ... ... ... ..... d many of these officers may be on the verge of superannuation, the High Court would do well in finalising the seniority within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of this judgment. Writ Petition No. 490/87 is accordingly allowed. Writ Petition Nos. 1252/90 and 14114/84 are accordingly dismissed. Writ Petition Nos. 707/88, 856/88 and 764/88 stand disposed of in terms of the directions given herein-above. Application for impleadment filed by Mr. R.C.Chopra in Writ Petition(Civil) No.490/87 is allowed. Application....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1142
... ... ... ... ..... rit petition that he had filed and that that order contemplated that the Arbitrator, acting on the arbitration Clause in the agreement, would have the authority to award restoration. In the first place, we do not find any such observation in the judgment of the learned Single Judge. In any event, such observation, even if it were there, would not vest the Arbitrator with a jurisdiction that he did not otherwise possess in law. 8. Learned Counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant would move the respondent for c....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1141
... ... ... ... ..... l evidence is permitted it would divest the rights of other parties to the written document. We are, therefore, of the view that the subsequent oral arrangement set up by the defendant-appellant cannot be proved by the parol evidence. Such an evidence is not admissible in evidence. 8. The learned Counsel for the appellant then urged that Ex. A/1, in fact is not a settlement deed but is a Will and, therefore, parol evidence is admissible to substantiate the subsequent oral arrangement. This controversy also arose before the....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1140
... ... ... ... ..... re and assumption. It may be just possible that the property may be found to be not partible by metes and bounds. In that case, it cannot be said that there is division of tenancy and apportionment of the rent. This plea thus is not going to improve the case of the defendant in any way. 29. The defense raised by the defendant thus needs no investigation. As already noticed, lease deed, rate of rent, termination of tenancy by efflux of time stand admitted or are not disputed and need no investigation. A decree for possessio....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1139
... ... ... ... ..... scheme whereby, it can grant respective sites at such prices as it may determine and settle the dispute. This is only a suggestion to reduce unnecessary litigation and not a direction to BDA. Nor is it intended to create or recognise any right in any of the petitioners. 90. For the reasons stated above, we find that petitioners are not entitled to any relief, and these petitions are dismissed, subject to the observations above, reserving liberty as follows (i) to petitioners to approach Civil Court for appropriate relief w....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1138
... ... ... ... ..... xtent of para No. 18 and 19 so far Annex. F is concerned. (16). In para 22 of the written statement, it has been submitted that petitioner has purposely suppressed the identity of the counting agents who had prepared the documents contained in Annex. G and the documents therein are false and fabricated documents. In para 17 of rejoinder, the same has been denied. Further, as reference has been made in para 22 also with respect to the proceedings that documents were not supplied as per the requirement of the provisions of S....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1137
... ... ... ... ..... stray suggestions are put, it cannot be said that instances suggested are in breach of Rule 4. 16. Under the circumstances, this court finds that this Criminal Revision Application is devoid of merits and same is required to be dismissed and accordingly it is dismissed. Rule is discharged. Ad-interim stay granted on 15th June, 1989 by this Court stands vacated. The accused is directed to surrender himself before the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Jamnagar to serve out the sentence imposed vide judgment dt. 12th ....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1136
... ... ... ... ..... g the disputed period. No presumption that whatever income was shown by them in the sales tax return for the year 1992-93 was the result of sale of furniture by the appellants, could be legally drawn by the Commissioner. He was duty bound to hold an independent enquiry regarding the actual manufacture and clearances of the furniture, made by the appellants during the period in question. For having not so done his impugned order cannot be legally sustained. 12. In the light of the discussion made above, both the grounds put....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1135
... ... ... ... ..... e respondent vide letter dated 4-5-2000 to consider revoking the indefinite suspension in the trading of this scrip - effected from 16-5-1996. In this context it is made clear that a company and its promoters are separate legal entities. A company cannot be substituted for promoters for the purpose of imposing penalties. It is also seen that the respondent had asked ASE to consider revoking the 4 year old ban on trading in the appellant s scrips, but at the same time by the impugned order the appellant has been debarred fr....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1134
... ...
... ... ..... atra, JJ. ORDER Appeal dismissed.
-
2000 (8) TMI 1133
... ... ... ... ..... nce. Any such easy release would tempt the forest offenders to repeat commission of such offences. Its casualty will be the forests as the same cannot be replenished for years to come. The approach adopted both by the Authorised Officer and the High Court completely ignores the importance of the forests and the purpose of the object for which the Act was made. As the appellant-State has not prayed for quashing the order of the Authorised Officer we refrain to deal with that even though we do not approve it. We are, however....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1132
... ... ... ... ..... e is clear denial of the execution of such document by the plaintiff, hence the High Court fell into error in applying the said proviso which on the facts of this case would not apply. In view of this the very execution of the Gift Deed Exhibit B-1 is not proved. Admittedly in this case none of the two attesting witnesses has been produced. Once the gift deed cannot be tendered in evidence in view of the non-compliance of Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, we uphold that the plaintiff has successfully challenged its ex....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1131
... ... ... ... ..... r the scheme on one hand and the bulk shares/controlling block of shares required to be disposed of in accordance with the machinery formulated hereinabove. These norms are evolved only to draw the distinction between shares which could be sold in a routine manner through the Disposal Committee and shares which are required to be sold through the mechanism mentioned hereinabove, so that the Court keeps its control in the matter of implementation of the Scheme qua the bulk shares/controlling block of shares. This categorisa....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1130
... ... ... ... ..... n all other respects I fully agree with the high-wrought observations, views and conclusions of the learned Chief Justice. 82. I have also a passing observation. Unlike other statutory rules, the Rules of the High Court of Kerala are framed by the High Court in exercise of its power under Article 225 of the Constitution of India. Section 120 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and all other enabling powers to regulate its procedure . Since it is not possible to discern such a procedure either in the Act or the Rules as to....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1129
... ... ... ... ..... tter for remitting back to the authorities below for exercising such discretion, as the matter relates to an assessment year 1979-80, we deem it appropriate to consider the case on merits, instead of remitting the matter to the authorities. Considering the claim of the petitioner that it was under a bona fide impression that the turnover relating to the matches is not liable to tax at multi-point, the levy of maximum penalty at five times the tax due may not be appropriate. Further, taking into account all attendant facts ....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1128
... ... ... ... ..... clared that the petitioner is entitled to normal increment from 1st June, 1985 till the date of his retirement. The respondents are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Deputy Collector by ignoring his adverse entries as aforesaid as expeditiously as possible, preferably within two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The respondents are further directed to release normal and regular increments of the petitioner from 1st June, 1985 and to pay all the diffe....... + More
-
2000 (8) TMI 1127
... ... ... ... ..... the case, as an integral part thereof, to animadvert on that conduct. It has also been recognised that judicial pronouncements must be judicial in nature, and should not normally depart from sobriety, moderation and reserve. 15. During the 36 years which elapsed thereafter this Court has reiterated those words on different occasions. R.K. Lakshmanan v. A.K. Srinivasan and Anr. 1976 1SCR 204 , Niranjan Patnaik v. Sashibhushan Kar and Anr. 1986CriLJ911 , S.K. Viswambaran v. E. Koyakunju and Ors. 1987CriLJ1175 16. It would ha....... + More
