|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 303 Records
-
1995 (9) TMI 412 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... SWAMI, JJ. ORDER Appeal dismissed.
-
1995 (9) TMI 411 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... it-5 in accordance with the observations made in this judgment. The District Judge, Bhavnagar is directed to assign this particular suit to any other Civil Judge, SD excepting R.S. Timbaliya. Copy of this judgment is also directed to be sent down to all Civil Judges, S.D. at Bhavnagar so that such errors of law even at the stage of deciding Exhibit-5 application are not committed in future. The Judge to whom the work is assigned is directed to decide Exhibit-5 application preferably by 30th November, 1995. Record and Proceedings of the suit if already received by this Court are directed to be sent back to the Court of Civil Judge, S.D., Bhavnagar, immediately. 6. In view of the aforesaid the Appeal stands allowed to the aforesaid extent only. The judgment and order of the trial Court dated 8th of August, 1995 is hereby quashed and set aside. There shall be no order as to costs. 7. In view of the order passed on Appeal From Order, no order on C.A. Notice on C.A. is discharged.
-
1995 (9) TMI 410 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the State before the High Court made the concession without going through the record. We are constrained to observe that the learned Government Advocate should have conducted the case in a more responsible manner considering the nature of the case. The High Court also should have taken care to verify the record before accepting the concession made by the learned Government Advocate. It should have also applied its mind to the aspect that second revision application, after dismissal of the first one by Sessions Court is not maintainable and that inherent power under Section 482 of the Code cannot be utilised for exercising powers which are expressly barred by the Code. As we find that the order passed by the High Court is not legal and just it will have to be set aside. We accordingly allow this appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court and direct the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bilaspur to proceed further with Criminal Case No. 69 of 1993.
-
1995 (9) TMI 409 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... o straight jacket formula could be evolved in adjudging whether the abusive language in the given circumstances would warrant dismissal from service. Each case has to be considered on its own facts. What was the nature of the abusive language used by the appellant was not stated. 12. On the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered view that the imposition of punishment of dismissal from service is harsh and disproportionate to the gravity of charge imputed to the delinquent constable. Accordingly, we set aside the dismissal order. We hold that imposition of stoppage of two increments with cumulative effect would be an appropriate punishment. So, we direct the disciplinary authority to impose that punishment. However, since the appellant himself is responsible for the initiation of the proceedings, we find that he is not entitled to back wages; but, all other consequential benefits would be available to him. 13. The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.
-
1995 (9) TMI 408 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ection 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Be that as it may, this aspect has not at all been considered by the trial Court and the provisions of Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act are altogether ignored and overlooked. Suffice it to observe that the finding recorded by the trial Court on Point No. .2 also cannot be sustained and it would be in the fitness of things if the matter is sent back to the said Court for fresh decision in accordance with law. 10. Consequently, these criminal appeals are allowed and the judgment of the trial Court dated 18.10.1993 passed in all five criminal complaint cases viz. Criminal Complaint cases No. 1125 of 1992, 1499 of 92, 1426 of 1992, 1426 of 1992 and 1498 of 1992 are quashed and set aside and the 20th Jt. Civil Judge, JD & Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Nagpur is directed to decide the aforesaid criminal complaint cases afresh in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Trial Court on 6.11.1995.
-
1995 (9) TMI 407 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... swami, JJ. ORDER Appeal dismissed.
-
1995 (9) TMI 406 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... but then banking business cannot be run without an office and its staff cannot perform its duties efficiently without residential accommodation. The provision for such accommodation would thus be a necessary part of "business activity" of the Bank. And, once this position is accepted, the deposit of rents with regards to such premises would also necessarily form part of "business activity". Since the amount claimed had been allegedly handed over to the defendant for deposit towards such rent, the entire transaction would fall within the ambit of the words "business activity". THE result is that the application moved by the defendant is dismissed. SUIT No. 2661/94 IT is a suit by Vijaya Bank for the recovery of more than rupees ten lakhs. By my separate order of today, I have dismissed the application of the defendant bearing I.A.8662/95. The suit stands transferred to the Tribunal. The file may be placed before the Tribunal on 11th October, 1995.
-
1995 (9) TMI 405 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n 30.10.1992 whereas the counsel for the petitioner got the same on 3.11.1992. From these facts it is abundantly clear that the copies were duly signed and dated by the members of the forum on 30.10.1992. That being so that period of limitation in view of the above discussion will commence from the date on which the copies of the order were ready and made available i.e., 30.10.1992. In the present case the appeals were filed before the State Commission on 30.11.1992 and since 29.11.1992 was Sunday, the appeals were prima facie within time. In these facts and circumstances there was no question of making any application for condonation of delay in filing the appeals as there was no delay at all. 14. For the reasons stated above the appeals succeed and are hereby allowed. The impugned orders of the National Commission and the State Commission are set aside. The appeals are remitted back to the State Commission for disposal on merits in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
-
1995 (9) TMI 404 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... ifferent view of this very question of classification. Accordingly, the appeal is admitted. The stay petition is dismissed as withdrawn. Liberty to mention.
-
1995 (9) TMI 403 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... nterference. 23.3. As regards reappraising the value of the booster pump motor and screw pump motor, when the entire issue of valuation is being reconsidered, the contention raised loses its importance and the contention raised for the purpose of setting aside the said finding virtually does not survive, and the prayer made by the Respondents, therefore, cannot be entertained. 23.4. The cross-objection filed and the reliefs claimed therefore, do not merit consideration and hence, the same stand rejected. Thus, both, the appeal filed by the Customs authority and the Cross-Objections filed by the Respondents, stand rejected except to the extent of the finding of the adjudicating authority in relation to the assessable value for the reconditioned machines and the components, imported vide licence dt. 29.11.1984 and that portion of the order is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the adjudicating authority to reconsider that aspect and arrive at correct assessable value.
-
1995 (9) TMI 402 - PATNA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ssess compensation of ₹ 10,000/- and hold that Sri Srivastava, the then" Officer-incharge of Argora Police Station is personally liable to pay the amount of compensation to the petitioner within three months from today. He is personally liable as because for his illegal and arbitrary action without any authority of law. Public exchequer need not be subjected to suffer. The Secretary cum-Home Commissioner, Government of Bihar as well as the Director General of Police, Bihar shall ensure that the aforesaid amount is paid to the petitioner within three months by Sri Srivastava. In case he does not pay the amount to the petitioner within the period prescribed, the Government shall pay the compensation amount to the petitioner within the said period and shall realise the same from his monthly salary or otherwise. 19. Let a copy of the order be sent to the Secretary cum-Home Commissioner, Government of Bihar and the Director General of Police, Bihar for necessary action.
-
1995 (9) TMI 401 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... ned to interfere. We, however, express no opinion on the question of law raised herein. The appeal is dismissed.
-
1995 (9) TMI 400 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... t in Civil Appeal No. 3195 of 1979 (The Union of India v. Madras Rubber Factory), these appeals are dismissed.
-
1995 (9) TMI 399 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... is is so because these rules, relate to matters for which the Central Civil Services Rules were not applied to employees in Class II, III & IV Posts. The contrary view taken by the Tribunal and the High Court cannot, therefore, be upheld. 8. Consequently, the appeals and the writ petition are allowed in this manner. The impugned orders of the High Court and the Tribunal are set aside. The claim of the concerned employees in these matters would now be considered and decided by the Union Territory administration in accordance with the rules. 9. Leave granted. 10. We have decided the connected matters i.e. Civil Appeal No. 8218 of 1995 (arising out of SLP (C) No. 16536 of 1992), Dhayanand v. Union of India and Ors. with Civil Appeal Nos. 8221 of 1995 (arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 12116-17 of 1991) and Writ Petition (C) No. 181 of 1995 by a separate judgment pronounced today, September 12,1995. Because of the view taken in the connected matters, this civil appeal is dismissed.
-
1995 (9) TMI 398 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t has not established the project and settled the industry the defendant was bound to refund the amount of ₹ 75,000/-. The claim of interest @ 9.5% could also not be said to be an unreasonable claim by the plaintiff. plaintiffs claim to refund of the amount could not be said to be unreasonable when the industry is not established and settled. But in the instant case I find that the plaintiff suit is barred by the law of limitation and it is also bad for failure to prove that the plaint has been signed and verified by a duly authorised person. I answer Issue No. 7 accordingly. 22. Thus, I hold that plaintiffs suit will have to be dismissed as I find that the same is barred by the Law of Limitation and it is also bad for failure on the part of the plaintiff to prove that it is signed and certified by a duly authorised person. 23. The suit is, Therefore, dismissed but in the circumstances of the case I direct the parties to bear their respective costs. 24. Suit dismissed.
-
1995 (9) TMI 397 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n be made out by him, since there was a search and unearthing of materials and documents in respect of which he has been already interrogated and he has chosen to this Court after taking time before the authorities, apparently emboldened by the move of the other appellants. We are also of that the repulsiveness exhibited by the appellants to the summons issued under Section 40 of the Act is wholly unjustified and unwarranted in law and the same appears to be merely a move to gain time, with some ulterior objects. 24. For all the reasons stated above, we do not see any merit whatsoever in the challenge made to the impugned proceedings. The decision of the learned single Judge, dismissing the writ petitions also do not call for any interference in our hands. These writ appeals, therefore, fail and consequently shall stand dismissed. No costs. 25. In view of the dismissal of the writ appeals, no further orders are necessary in the miscellaneous petitions. 26. Appeals dismissed.
-
1995 (9) TMI 396 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... lent intention, knowledge or other conditions of the mind of any person is made it is not necessary to set out the circumstances from which the same is to be inferred and it is enough to allege the same as a fact. Reliance by the learned counsel for the appellant on T.Arivandandam Vs . T.V. Satyapal and another 1978 1SCR742 and Patasibai and others Vs . Ratanlal 1990 1S CR 172 does not further the case of the appellants. All that the Apex Court has held in these two decisions is that a meaningful reading of the plaint should disclose a cause of action. Applying the principles laid down in these two decisions we are of the opinion that meaningful reading of the plaint, as opposed to formal reading thereof, discloses a cause of action in favor of the first respondent and the learned single Judge was right in rejecting the application of the appellant under Order 7 rule 11 CPC. (12) In view of the above discussion we find no merit in the appeal and the same is hereby dismissed.
-
1995 (9) TMI 395 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... schedule was given to the appellant only on 9.7.91 long after the Arbitrator's appointment on 9.3.91. This plea cannot be permitted because, after receiving the fee schedule on 9.7.91, the appellant participated in the case. On 11.2.92 it extended time by consent. Again the time was extended on 4.5.92. The Arbitrator has now stated that he is going to charge only 500 per sitting and for 16/18 sittings in two trips, the further expenses will come only to exceed 18,000 approximately. The claims are on one side for one crore by the contractor and for 2 crores by the Society by way of counter-claim. The fee proposed to be charged for additional sitting of ₹ 500/- per sitting is Therefore not prima facie disproportionate. If the appellants co-operate, the TA expenses will be obviously met from the International Tribunal case. Hence there is no extra burden on the appellant. 26. For all the above reasons, the appeal is liable to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.
-
1995 (9) TMI 394 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... livered on 14th August 1992 in appeal No. 756 of 1991) has no application as contrary to facts of instant case, the general principles of justice and equity were invoked therein by by-passing specific provisions of the agreement between the parties thereto. It was held therein that once the parties had entered into a solemn agreement and the contractor accepted that the escalation was permissible provided the claims fell squarely within the term of the contract, then it was not permissible for the contractor to turn round and seek escalation payment by reference to general principles of justice and equity. 25. Neither of the awards in these petitions is perverse, bad in law, vitiated or otherwise invalid. Each of the petitions being devoid of any merits, is liable to be dismissed. 26. In the result, the Arbitration Petition No. 188 of 1988, the Arbitration Petition No. 200 of 1988 and the Arbitration Petition No. 201 of 1988 are dismissed with costs. 27. Petitions dismissed.
-
1995 (9) TMI 393 - COMPANY LAW BOARD, MADRAS
... ...
... ... ..... uot; " 977040 - 977239 788 100 One hundred " " 1236631 - 1236730 957-969 1,300 One thousand three hundred " " 969866-971165 1397-1399 300 Three hundred " " 1296853- 1297152 1645 50 Fifty " " 1090397 - 1090446 1668 50 Fifty " " 293691 - 293740 1672 50 Fifty " " 762143-762192 2317 20 Twenty " " 51499-51518 2419 200 Two hundred " " 474797 .474996 45738-45787 2,500 Two thousand five hundred " " 5099929-5102428 45789-45798 500 Five hundred " " 5102429-5102928 Total 6,000 Appeal No. 4/111 (SRB) of 1992 O.P. Jalan; Mrs. Sudha Jalan and Vikas Jalan....................Appellants 1358-1375 1,800 One thousand eight hundred Equity Shares 1293253 - 1295052 605-608 400 Four hundred " " 51539-51938 950-953 400 Four hundred " " 969166-969565 2432 400 Four hundred " " 476473 - 476872 45678-45737 3,000 Three thousand " " 5096929 - 5099928 Total 6,000
........
|
