|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 21 to 40 of 468 Records
-
2003 (8) TMI 572
... ...
... ... ..... indicated hereinabove. (xiv) If a person is aggrieved with regard to assessment of a property situate inside the Corporation can assail it before the District Judge under Section 149 of the Corporation Act and if a person whose property is situated in the Municipality and is grieved by an order of assessment can file an appeal before the Civil Judge as provided under Section 139 of the Municipalities Act. It is hereby made clear that the challenge can be made on every ground except on the ground pertaining to rate as fixation of rent is intrinsically collective and can only be assailed when resolution is challenged before the competent authority. (xv) It is imperative to State here that 'it is requisite on the Municipal Corporation as well as the Municipality to fix the rent on category basis taking into consideration the classifications made under the principal enactment and the 1987 Rules. 55. The writ petitions are accordingly disposed of without any order as to costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 571
... ...
... ... ..... ne the delay. Application for condonation of delay is dismissed. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Civil Appeal No. 5122 of 2003 Delay condoned. We see no reason to interfere. The appeal is dismissed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 570
... ...
... ... ..... far are quashed. In view of the failing health and old age of the petitioner, he is allowed to appear and reply to the notice of offence before the learned MM through his counsel on 1st September, 2003, the date already fixed as it is a summons case and the maximum sentence is fine up to ₹ 500/- as the process of appearance is issued in the form of Schedule I under Section 61 of Cr.P.C which empowers the accused not only to appear through pleader but plead guilty also. Proforma of summons is as under - "To.......................(name of accused) of .......................(address) WHEREAS your attendance is necessary to answer to a charge..............(state shortly the offence charged), you are hereby required to appear in person (or by pleader, as the case may be) before the (Magistrate) of..............on the.......................day of ..........................Herein fail not. Dated, this..........day of ................20... (Seal of Court) (Signature)"
-
2003 (8) TMI 569
... ...
... ... ..... appellant calls in question the constitutional validity of the Statute on the ground it runs counter to the provisions of the Constitution, the burden is on it to establish the same. The appellant has failed to discharge the said burden. In our view, the sharing of the proceeds collected by virtue of the impugned Act is a matter between the Union and the State and the non-sharing of proceeds collected by the Union and the State, in our view, cannot be a ground to nullify the provisions of the Act. It could be a ground for the State to make claim for its share and enforce its rights. It will not be a ground, as noticed by us earlier, to nullify the impugned Act. Therefore, the fourth and the last contention advanced by the learned Counsel for the Appellant is also liable to be rejected as one devoid of any substance. 23. Therefore, in the light of the discussion made above, this appeal is liable to be rejected. Accordingly it is rejected. However, no order is made as to costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 568
... ...
... ... ..... 995 read with the order dated 11.11.1994. No other reason or ground is given in the order of the Magistrate to condone the delay under Section 473 of the Code. If the discretion is exercised on relevant considerations, possibly no fault could be found with such discretion. The High Court although noticed in the impugned order as to the effect of order dated 6.2.1995 and found that there was error committed by the Magistrate but took the view that it was not a serious one. Added to this, the proceedings are of the year 1994. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, the CJM as well as the High Court committed serious error in upholding taking cognizance when it is clearly barred by Section 468(2) of the Code. 13. Under these circumstances, the impugned order affirming the order of the CJM cannot be sustained. Hence, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order is set aside and the criminal proceedings in P.S. Case No. 16/94 in the court of CJM, Patna, are quashed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 567
... ...
... ... ..... nce, the High Court ought not to have interfered with the same. From the material on record, the defence has been able to establish that the prosecution case in regard to the time and place of incident is highly doubtful even the evidence of the eye witnesses apart from being interested was full of contradictions and improbabilities based on which no conviction could have been recorded against the appellants. For the reasons stated above, this appeal succeeds and the judgment and conviction awarded to the appellants by the High Court is set aside. The appellants, if in custody, shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. Crl. Appeal No……/2003 @ SLP (Crl.) No.6744 of 2001 Leave granted. Following the judgment delivered by us in Criminal Appeal No.1141/2001, we allow this appeal, set aside the judgment and the conviction awarded by the High Court. If the appellant is in custody, he shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.
-
2003 (8) TMI 566
... ...
... ... ..... sary forms as prescribed under law in the office of the Registrar of Companies to place on record these changes. As to the third objections in view of the fact that the demerged company continues to subsist, the pending proceedings would obviously continue in accordance with law. 11. In view of this, I am satisfied that proposed arrangement would be in the interest of the companies and their members and creditors. Prayers in terms of paragraph 26(A) of Co. Pet. No. 148 of 2003 and in terms of paragraph 28(A) of Co. Pet. No. 149 of 2003 are hereby granted. 12. The petitions are disposed of accordingly. So far as the costs to be paid to the Central Government standing counsel is concerned, I quantify the same at ₹ 3,500 per petition. The same may be paid to the learned advocate Smt. P. J. Davawala for the demerged/transferor company and Shri. D.N. Pate for the resulting/transferee company. 13. The registry is directed to keep copy of the judgment in the companion matter.
-
2003 (8) TMI 565
... ...
... ... ..... s. 14.3.1 i The Appellants are directed to make public announcement to acquire the shares of the Target company as per the regulations within 3 months from the date of this order. ii The referral date for the purpose of calculation of offer price shall be 27.10.1994. iii The Appellants are directed to pay interest @ 15% per annum from 24.2.1995 till the date of actual payment of consideration for shares to be tendered in the offer directed to be made as per this order. iv The interest is directed to be paid only to those persons who were holding shares of the Target company as on 25.1.1995 and continue to be shareholders and eligible to participate in the public offer to be made in terms of above direction, for the shares held in their name on 25.1.1995, tendered and accepted in the public offer directed to be made. 228. The order dated 19.2.2002 stands modified to the extent stated above. 229. The order as modified, is upheld. 230. The appeal disposed of in the above lines.
-
2003 (8) TMI 564
... ...
... ... ..... ut the blood group. In fact, the High Court noted this position and observed that presence of PW-4 at the time of recovery is doubtful as he has been found to be an unreliable witness. It was observed that even if it is accepted that there was existence of blood, this circumstance is not such from which it can be found that the accused was perpetrator of the crime. In the aforesaid report (Ex.61) it was clearly stated that the blood group of blood found on the clothes could not be determined. Neither the blood group of the deceased nor that of the accused was determined. In that background, the High Court held that the possibility of the blood being that of the accused cannot be ruled out. In view of the findings recorded by the High Court about the non- acceptability by evidence relating to alleged extra judicial confession, the conclusions of the High Court cannot be said to be one which are unsupportable. We decline to interfere in the appeals, and the same are dismissed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 563
... ...
... ... ..... e field and some in the Union field and sentenced to separate terms of imprisonment to run concurrently, State Governments sometime remit the whole sentence without a reference to the Central Government, although legally the Central Government has to order remission in relation of offences in the Union field. A provision is being added requiring specifically that the person cannot be released unless the Central Government also remits the part of the sentence relating to an offence in the Union field". It is brought to our notice that the amount directed to be deposited has been so done by the respondent-accused before the Trial Court. We set aside the order of the High Court. We do not propose to restrict the right of the accused to move the appropriate Government for such relief as is available in law. It would be at sole discretion of the appropriate Government to exercise the power conferred on it in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated.
-
2003 (8) TMI 562
... ...
... ... ..... maintained by the company to the UTI on funding of interest as was done in the case of other lenders. The facts of the case disclose that on such parity the additional amount of principal payable to the UTI would have been higher by ₹ 11.73 crores (after a sum of ₹ 10.74 crores is adjusted which is already paid by the company against principal). 43. Accordingly, sanction under sections 391(2) and 394 of the Companies Act is granted to the aforesaid scheme subject to the modification that the Unit Trust of India shall be paid an additional amount of ₹ 3 crores in view of the aforesaid facts as stated in the preceding paragraph and as proposed and agreed to by the counsel for the petitioner company during the course of arguments. The amount shall be paid at any time according to the convenience of the petitioner but during the currency of the period of the scheme. 44. With the aforesaid modification, the scheme is sanctioned. The petitions stand disposed of.
-
2003 (8) TMI 561
... ...
... ... ..... tation that nomination paper of return candidate (Respondent) was improperly accepted by the Returning Officer. It ought to have been rejected by the returning officer in the background of the above facts and circumstances. Thus, examining the matter from any angle, we do not find the judgment of the High Court sustainable. In the result, the appeal is allowed with costs and the judgment and order passed by the High Court is set aside, as well as the election of the Respondent to 204 Fatua Assembly Constituency of State of Bihar. The Election Commission of India is called upon to hold election for filling up the vacancy caused by the setting aside of the election of the Respondent. As per requirement of Section 103 of the Representation of People Act, the substance of the decision shall be intimated to the Election Commission and the Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of the State of Bihar. An authenticated copy shall also be sent to the Election Commission at the earliest.
-
2003 (8) TMI 560
... ...
... ... ..... ent must be with him cannot hold good in view of termination of the MOU. The second respondent if he chooses to remain to be a member of the Company he can do so, but cannot demand participation in the management of the company as a matter of right. However, in case the second respondent desires to go out of the Company he may exercise his option within 21 days from the receipt of this order, upon which, the petitioners will return the amount of investment made by the second respondent with 15 per cent per annum interest from the date of investment, within 15 days thereafter. In view of our findings, the reliefs claimed by the petitioners are of no significance, especially when the declaration that the second respondent ceased to be Managing Director and that seventh respondent is not a director of the Company etc. do not fall within the realm of Section 398. The interim orders of this Bench stand vacated. The petition stands disposed of in these terms. No order as to costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 559
... ...
... ... ..... ssed overlooking and being oblivion of the factors, which were to be considered and weighed with for the purpose of finding out a prima facie case. Such an order cannot be sustained and, is, therefore, liable to be set aside. 25. However, all observations made above are tentative for the purpose of deciding this appeal. The observations and finding will in no way influence the learned Judge in deciding the suit or interlocutory matters pending before it, particularly the applications under Order 39 Rule 2A, Order 7 Rule 10 and Order 7 Rule 11 of CPC respectively. The learned Judge shall be free to decide the question according to his own wisdom and discretion and in accordance with law. 26. In the result, the appeal succeeds and is allowed. The order No. 6 dated 27th September, 2002 passed in Title Suit No, 1430 of 2002 by the learned Judge, 10th Bench, City Civil Court at Calcutta is hereby set aside. There will, however, be no order as to costs. R.N. Sinha, J. 27. I agree.
-
2003 (8) TMI 558
... ...
... ... ..... that the cars were mainly and substantially used' for letting out on monthly basis. May be in the beginning for some period, they were run on hire for tourists but thereafter it mainly utilized the cars for letting them out on monthly basis. Therefore, in our opinion, it cannot be said that the cars were used in the business of running them on hire for tourists. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the order of the Commissioner (Appeals). The same is sustained." 11. Under these circumstances, the benefit of doubt must go to the assessee and accordingly, we hold that taking into consideration the totality of the facts penalty is not leviable in this case. We accordingly delete the penalty sustained by the learned Commissioner (Appeals). As regards the revenue's appeal in view of our findings in the assessee's appeal (supra) it has become infructuous and is dismissed. 12. In the result, the assessee's appeal is allowed and revenue's appeal is dismissed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 557
... ...
... ... ..... .No.362 of 2001 and however, they have not chosen to file any interim application praying for injunction in respect of possession and alienation, probably for the reason that the plaintiffs already obtained the said interim orders in the present suit in O.S.No.296 of 1998 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Dharapuram. 23. Under those circumstances, it would be appropriate to give suitable direction in order to ensure both the suits, namely O.S.No.296 of 1998 and O.S.No.362 of 2001 can be tried together for the convenience of the parties so that all the issues can be decided comprehensively by the same Court. Accordingly, O.S.No.296 of 1998 on the file of the District Munsif Court, Dharapuram is transferred to the Sub Court, Dharapuram for trying the suit in O.S.No.296 of 1998 along with the suit in O.S.No.362 of 2001 on the file of the Sub Court, Dharapuram. 24. With the above observation, the civil revision petition is disposed of. C.M.P.No.6864 of 2003 is dismissed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 556
... ...
... ... ..... y the lower appellate Court is erroneous and based upon inadmissible evidence or arrived at without evidence." I, therefore, see substance in the contention put forward on behalf of the plaintiff respondents. 17. The appellate Court while reversing the finding of the trial Court and holding Maharaj Mahto as the son of Jattu Mahto, the recorded tenant of Khata No. 14 having his right title and interest in the suit property and possession thereof does not suffer from any infirmity as it has properly weighed the evidence on the record and has also assigned satisfactory reasons for doing so and there is no illegality in the finding of fact arrived at by the learned Appellate Court below. There is thus no substance also in the contention put forward on behalf of the defendants appellant. 18. Viewed thus, there is no merit in these appeals which fail and the impugned judgment of the learned Court below is hereby affirmed and the appeals are hereby dismissed but without costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 555
... ...
... ... ..... herefore, formal service of notice is dispensed with. We see no reason to interfere with the decision of the High Court. The appeals and Special Leave petitions are dismissed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 554
... ...
... ... ..... despite the authorities themselves have granted. permission to the appellant authorizing M/s. Lamina Suspension Products Ltd. to manufacture products on behalf of the appellant as per Act, Rules and Notification? 2. We have heard Sri M.V.Seshachala, learned Counsel appearing for the Appellant and Sri Dinesh Kumar, learned Senior Central Government Standing, Counsel appealing for the respondent. 3. We are of the view the question of law raised in this application arises for consideration in as much as it relates to interpretation of Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 which defines the word “manufacturer”. 4. Therefore, in the fight of the discussion made above, we are of the view, an order is required to be made directing the Tribunal to refer the question of law referred to above. The Tribunal is directed to set out the statement of facts and also the questions of law referred to above. 5. In terms stated above, this petition is allowed and disposed of.
-
2003 (8) TMI 553
... ...
... ... ..... has been set aside by the tribunal. As on today, there. is no order supporting the petitioner in the matter of refund made over to him. Learned counsel is unable to show any provision of law with regard to retention of money particularly in the light of reference application. Annexure-J is fully justified on the facts of this case. Learned counsel for the petitioner says that his client was made to believe that no duty is leviable. Learned counsel also says that question of law has referred to the tribunal and in these circumstances, some instalment facility may be granted to him. In the result, Annexure-J is upheld. Petitioner is directed to submit at appropriate representation before the second respondent within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this order with regard to grant of instalments. If any such representation is filed respondents are directed to consider the same on merits and grant instalments in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. No costs.
........
|
