|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 577 Records
-
2001 (3) TMI 1070 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... al, JJ. ORDER Delay condoned. The civil appeal is dismissed.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1069 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... . In the meanwhile, the court has to forward a copy of the document to the Collector for the purpose of adjudicating on the question of deficiency of the stamp duty as provided in Section 40(1)(b) of the Act. Only if the appellant is unwilling to remit the amount the court is to forward the original of the document itself to the Collector for the purpose of adjudicating on the question of deficiency of the stamp duty. The penalty of ten times indicated therein is the upper limit and the collector shall take into account all factors concerned in deciding as to what should be the proper amount of penalty to be imposed. 14. Inasmuch as none of the above proceedings had been adopted by any of the authorities including High Court we set aside the impugned orders. We direct the Munsif to consider first whether the document is insufficiently stamped and if he finds that question in the affirmative he has to adopt the next step indicated above. 15. This appeal is accordingly allowed.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1068 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t and gave the absolute interest to the settlee. 16. In this case, the settlor retained the life Interest and settled the life interest to the first beneficiary to be enjoyed by him after the settlor's life time and thereafter to the first beneficiary's natural children, failing which it has to go to the appellant's son. When the right of the first beneficiary itself had not taken effect there can be no vesting of any right in favour of the appellant's son and therefore, the appellant cannot claim any title to the suit property, as is heir. 17. The questions whether the document is a settlement or a Will and whether the document was acted upon on the date of Ex-A1 have both been answered against the appellant by both the Courts. For the reasons given by me above, I am of the opinion that they have decided correctly. There are no merits in the second appeal. Both the second appeals are dismissed. But in the view of the relationship between the parties no costs.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1067 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e of filing of the award and the procedure to be followed by any party, if the records are not filed by the Arbitrator/Umpire. This rule does not speak of issuance of notice by the court under sub-section (2) of Section 14 and, therefore, would not be relevant for the present purpose. 17. Relying on Rule 6 of the Arbitration Rules, Mr. Dwivedi has contended that the order passed by the court on 04.01.1999 could not be construed as a notice. This point needs no consideration as no submission was made on behalf of the appellant that the order passed on that date would be a notice under sub-section (2) of Section 14 of the Act. 18. For what has been stated above we find merit in the present appeals and accordingly they are allowed by setting aside the impugned judgment. The order of the Additional Civil Judge, Agra dated 25.02.1999 making the award a rule of the court is affirmed. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we direct the parties to bear their own cost.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1066 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... R Delay condoned. Appeal admitted. No stay.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1065 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ing officer. 6. Unlike usual cases under the Criminal Procedure Code, in cases under the NDPS Act, by the time of arrest, main part of investigation will be completed and duty of the investigating officer is mainly in sending the samples for chemical analysis and other routine work and there is no likelihood of any prejudice in usual circumstances. Therefore, we are of the opinion that merely because a detecting officer himself is investigating officer or the officer of the same ranks as that of the detecting officer is investigating the case and files report before the Court will not vitiate the proceedings under N.D.P.S. act in the absence of proof of specific prejudice to the accused. Therefore, legal position stated in Naushad v. State of Kerala 2000 (1) KLT 785 to the contrary is overruled. Since the term of imprisonment as imposed by the lower court is already over, no further orders are necessary in this Criminal Appeal. The Criminal Appeal is disposed of accordingly.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1064 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tival or procedural law and not of substantive law. It is a well established proposition that such a change of law operates retrospectively and the person has to go to the new forum even if his cause of action or right of action accrued prior to the change of forum. He will have a vested right of action but not a vested right of forum. If by express words the new forum is made available only to causes of action arising after the creation of the forum, then the retrospective operation of the law is taken away. Otherwise the general rule is to make it retrospective". (underlining is ours for emphasis). 14. Change of forum being a procedural law, thereby no substantive right has been taken away far less any right of life and liberty as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 15. For the reasons aforementioned, there is no merit in these applications which are accordingly dismissed. But in the facts and circumstances of this case there is no order as to costs.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1063 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... eps to ensure that there is no misuse or abuse of the relaxations given by us above. 10. We, reiterate that except for the relaxation given above, no other commercial vehicles shall ply in Delhi unless converted to single fuel mode of CNG with effect from 1st April, 2001. 13. During the course of arguments, it was contended before us that low sulphur diesel should be regarded as a clean fuel and buses be permitted to run on that. It was submitted that in some other countries ultra low sulphur diesel which has sulphur content of not more than 0.001 per cent is now available. We direct the Bhure Lal Committee to examine this question and permit the parties to submit their written representations to the Committee in that behalf. The Committee may submit a report to this Court in that behalf as also indicate as to which fuel can be regarded as "clean fuel", which does not cause pollution or is otherwise injurious to health. Let the report be submitted within one month.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1062 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ingle Judge that there are basic features of similarities between the two marks which make misleading of the public a reasonable inference, we are of the view that this finding can not stand in view of the findings arrived at by us to the effect that taking into account the differences between the plaintiff/respondent's and defendant/appellant's marks and trade dresses there can be no legally relevant confusion in the marketplace. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed. The Order dated 23rd June, 1997 is set aside to the extent indicated above. The appellant /defendant's application, IA.7896/96 under Order 39 Rule 4 CPC is allowed and IA.6973/96 under 39 Rules 1& 2 CPC, filed by the plaintiff/respondent dismissed. Appeal stands disposed of accordingly. 24. Needless to add that the findings and conclusion arrived at by us are meant only for the purpose deciding the appeal and will not affect the case on me which of course will have to be decided in accordance law.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1061 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... jeopardise the liberty of summoned persons and put them to extreme hardship and inconvenience. 7. The contention of learned counsel for the respondent that the liability of the petitioner may be presumed by virtue of sub clause (2) of Section 142 of the Act is without any merit. In a criminal case, it is for the complainant to allege and make out all the ingredients of the offence before calling upon the Court in proceed against an accused. Only those presumptions which are permissible under the law are permitted to be raised to be established by the complainant/prosecution. The accused can always rely upon the presumption of innocence in his favor. 8. In the result, I am of the considered view that the impugned order summoning the petitioner as an (SIC) the complaint No.118/97 titled DB Merchant Banking Services Ltd. Vs. Ganga Automobiles Limited and Others cannot be sustained. The petition is, Therefore, allowed and the summoning order against the petitioner is set aside.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1060 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... asure of the party in charge of the litigation. On the top of this it was submitted on behalf of the Union that the petitioners should be compelled to continue in the litigation before the Industrial Court and that their fate would be finally decided in the complaint and that they should subject themselves and submit to the proceedings pending before the Industrial Court, I am unable to agree with the submissions of the learned Advocate. In these circumstances I allow the Petition and make the rule absolute in terms of prayer (a) of the Petition with costs which is quantified as ₹ 10,000/- to be paid by the Respondent No. 1 Union to the Petitioners. Interim order dated 20th July, 1996 stands vacated. It is needless to mention that the complaint pending before the Industrial Court can continue against the Respondent No. 2 in the Petition I.e. M/s. Salvi Super only. 7. All parties to act on an ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by the Associate of this Court.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1059 - COMPANY LAW BOARD PRINCIAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... Companies Act, Accordingly, we order the Central Government to order an inspection under section 209A of respondent company No. 1 on priority basis and thereafter take appropriate action, if any thereafter. We further direct that till such time the Central Government take such view on the findings of the inspection report, the order dated 2-5-2000 regarding maintaining status quo on the fixed assets as well as the deposits of the company will continue. 19. In regard to the final relief to be granted, in cases of closely held companies, this Board has always been directing one of the parties to sell their shares to the other party. In the present case, the respondents have expressed their willingness either to sell their shares to the petitioners or purchase their shares. However, the petitioners were not willing to either of the options till such time the investigation sought for by them is completed. 20. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of without any order as to cost.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1058 - COMPANY LAW BOARD, NEW DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... ta High Court has already protected the interests of SKS in SPL by directing that no decision shall be taken to deprive the SKS group from having joint management of SPL without the leave of the court. As far as Soma is concerned, the learned counsel for the respondents, Shri Sen has made a statement that the control of Soma now with SKS shall not be disturbed. Thus, we find that the interests of SKS in both Soma and SPL are now protected. Therefore, we are of the view that, in view of the pending proceedings before the Calcutta High Court and view of the complicated shareholdings in the respondent companies, we should decline considering the prayer of the petitioners for division of assets and accordingly, we do so. However, we grant liberty to the petitioners to approach us in case the declaration sought by them in the Calcutta High Court is granted by the court. 17. With the above observations, we dispose of all these nine petitions, however, without any order as to cost.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1057 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rred on the workmen and the said benefit is available on the date when the case is finally adjudicated, the said benefit should be extended to the workmen." 35. A three-Judge Bench of this Court in Kerala State Electricity Board and anr. vs. Valsala K. and anr. (1999)IILLJ1112SC has referred to the aforesaid decision and held that it was wrongly decided in view of the four-Judge Bench decision of this Court in Pratap Narain Singh Deo (supra). Nonetheless, in appropriate cases the principle of taking advantage of the beneficial legislation, subsequently enacted, is not dissented from by the larger Bench. 36. In the result, we allow these appeals and set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court. We direct the Railway Administration to pay the amount awarded by the Claims Tribunal to the appellant (if not already paid) within three months from today together with interest at the rate of 12 per annum from 27.6.1997 (the date of the order passed by the Claims Tribunal).
-
2001 (3) TMI 1056 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... under the relevant Town Planning Laws) for housing persons in the low-income group and letting or selling the same to such persons in low income group on no profit no loss basis the total cost of such a project will be got certified by a reputed Chartered Accountant." 64. The appellant would be bound by the aforesaid undertaking which we accept. 65. Before parting, we wish to express, to put it mildly, our deep anguish on the manner in which the specified authority, competent authority and the State of Gujarat has been conducting itself before the trial Court, High Court and this Court. Different stands at different points of time have been taken sometimes supporting the plaintiff and sometimes the defendants. 66. For the aforesaid reasons, we allow the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and dismiss the suit of the plaintiff, Transfer Case (8) No.64 of 1998 and SLP (C) No.1692 of 1999 are also disposed of in terms of this judgment. Parties to bear their own costs.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1055 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ner dealing in any goods or services under any domain names containing the word TATA or any other mark/name identical with or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's trade mark TATA and (ii) An order of permanent injunction is passed in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants, restraining the defendants, their principal officers, servants, representatives and agents or any of them, from using the trademark and name TATA in any manner whatsoever or operating any business, and making, selling, offering for sale, advertising and in any manner dealing in any goods or services, under any other domain names containing the word TATA or any other mark/name which is identical with or deceptively similar to the plaintiff's trademark TATA or containing the word TATA on the Internet or otherwise and from doing any other causing dilution of the trademark TATA. There shall be no orders as to costs. Decree sheet be drawn up accordingly. The suit is accordingly disposed of.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1054 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tachment before judgment of all or any of such assets. In case, the defendants neither furnish securities within the aforesaid period nor disclose their assets as directed above within the aforesaid period, then the right, title and interest of the defendants in the residential flat situated at flat No. 151/B, Maker Towers, G.D. Somani Marg, Cuffe Parade, Mumbai-5 shall stand attached, as also the right, title and interest of the defendants in the office premises at Edena Building, 9 Queens Road, Mumbai-400020 shall also stand attached, as also the right, title and interest of Rajesh Vora in the office premises at 4, Bibijan Street, Fida Mansion, Mumbai-400003 and the right, title and interest of Rajesh Vora in the office premises at 51, Cutch Castle, Opera House, Mumbai-400004, shall also stand attached. Notices of motion are disposed of. Parties to act on simple copy of the order duly authenticated by the Associate/Personal Secretary of the Court. Certified copy expedited.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1053 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tion to adjudicate the pleas of law raised before it and dismissed the petition of the appellant by a one sentence order. The orders of the Magistrate as also of the High Court being contrary to law are liable to be set aside. While allowing this appeal and setting aside the orders impugned we permit the respondent-accused to apply for regular bail in the trial court. If any such application is filed, the same shall be disposed of on its merits keeping in view the position of law and the observations made hereinabove. We would reiterate that in cases where the offence is punishable with death or imprisonment for life which is triable exclusively by a court of Sessions, the Magistrate may, in his wisdom, refrain to exercise the powers of granting the bail and refer the accused to approach the higher courts unless he is fully satisfied that there is no reasonable ground for believing that the accused has been guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1052 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... erred from the aforesaid vague statement in the complaint. I have also perused the sworn statements of the complainants recorded by the learned Magistrate while taking cognizance of the offences. In those statements also there is absolutely nothing about the petitioner A-3 being in-charge of the affairs of the company at the lime when the offence was committed. 14. So far as the alleged offence under Section 420, IPC is concerned, there is not even a whisper, either in the complaint or in the sworn statement, about the facts that constituted the said offence. 15. For the aforementioned reasons, all the Criminal Petitions have to succeed and they are accordingly allowed. Consequently, the criminal proceedings in all the five Calendar Cases, i.e. Calendar Case Nos. 290, 291, 316, 282 and 283 of 1999, pending on the file of the 1 Additional Judicial Magistrate of 1 Class, Proddatur. Cuddapah District are quashed insofar as they relate to the petitioner A-3 accused is concerned.
-
2001 (3) TMI 1050 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... mained on killa No. 15 of Rect. No. 45 in the capacity of a tenant at the time of the acquisition, then he is entitled to the compensation in the same ratio as has been awarded to Shri Ram Kumar and the judgment of Mangat Ram's case (Supra), which has been relied upon by the trial Court as well as by me, entitles the tenant to claim compensation to the extent of 3/4th share. ( 20. ) Thus , the finding of the learned trial Court on issues No. 2 and 4 are affirmed. ( 21. ) I have already held above that Gram Panchayat Kanehi is the owner of the land in question, therefore, it has rightly been awarded compensation to the extent of 1/4th share. ( 22. ) The net result is that the appeal as well as the application under Order 41 Rule 27 C.P.C. are totally devoid of any merit and the same are hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. The order dated 21.1.1997 passed by the trial Court viz-a vis Ram Kumar and Khem Ram is hereby affirmed. No order as to costs. Appeal dismissed.
........
|
