|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 578 Records
-
1998 (3) TMI 714 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... be directly applicable to this case. S. 12(2) of the Limitation Act does not lay an obligation on the applicant to be prompt in producing the stamp paper. It can not be held that the applicant was guilty of negligence or indifference as he did not produce the stamp papers on the next day after it was notified. 13. Therefore with great respect to the learned Judges who decided 1961 KLT 321 and 1992 (2) KLT 929 we are constrained to hold that we can not agree with their view. We therefore overrule 1961 KLT 321 and 1992 (2) KLT 929. We further hold that the appellant is entitled to exclude the time granted under R. 242 of the Civil Rules of Practice, Kerala for producing the stamp paper as 'time requisite' for obtaining a copy of the decree appealed from for the purpose of S. 12(2) of the Limitation Act, 1963. The office is therefore directed to number the appeal as one filed within the prescribed period and send up the matter for admission before the appropriate Bench.
-
1998 (3) TMI 713 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e held to be without any substance. I also do not find any substance of Mr. Jha that the petitions deserve to be allowed qua petitioners No. 2 to 5 in Writ Petition Nos. 645/98, 646/98, 647/98, 648/98, 651/98 and Petitioners No. 2 to 6 in Writ Petition Nos. 3690/97, 3691/97 and 3692/97, as they were only dormant partners. These vague assertions are not sufficient to quash the complaints at the threshold. These petitioners will undoubtedly get an opportunity to rebut the presumption of dishonest intention, under section 139 of the Act. 10. In view of the above all the petitions are dismissed. Interim orders of stay are vacated. Criminal Application Nos. 624/98 and 694/98 are disposed of accordingly. Rule is discharged in Cr.W.P. Nos. 3690, 3691 and 3692 of 1997. All the aforesaid observations made with regard to the documents and matters of fact shall not be taken into account by the learned Magistrate at any subsequent stage. Certified copy expedited. 11. Petitions dismissed.
-
1998 (3) TMI 712 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... with a direction that it shall direct the plaintiff to obtain opinion of a qualified expert and after examining the expert the trial Court shall give fresh decision on the disputed question relating to handwriting of the defendant on the disputed chit. If, however, the plaintiff shows his inability to obtain expert report then the trial Court shall with the help of magnifying glass compare the handwriting and shall insist upon the plaintiff to prove by direct evidence the handwriting of the defendant on the two post cards relied upon by him and then only fresh conclusion should be arrived at. 20. With the above observations and discussions the appeal is allowed. Judgments and decrees of the two Courts below are hereby set aside. The Civil Suit No. 304 of 1978 is remanded to the Joint Civil Judge (JD), Bharuch for fresh decision in the light of the observations made in the body of the judgment. In the circumstances of the case cost of this appeal shall be borne by the parties.
-
1998 (3) TMI 711 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rt after a period of two and half years. The petitioner is in Government service. There is hardly any apprehension of the petitioner absconding. At this late stage it can hardly be said that the petitioner is likely to tamper with the evidence or interfere with the witnesses. In view of the above I find this to be a fit case in which the petitioner deserves to be granted anticipatory bail. 5. In view of the above, it is ordered that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner on the basis of the non-bailable warrant issued by the Magistrate, 24th Court, Borivli, Mumbai in case No. 170/W/ 98 he shall be released on bail on his furnishings PR Bond in the sum of ₹ 5,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, 24th Court, Borivli. The petitioner is entitled to deposit cash till the surety is furnished to the satisfaction of the Magistrate, 24th Court, Borivli, Bombay. Application is allowed. Certified copy expedited.
-
1998 (3) TMI 710 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... he Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. In our opinion, having regard to the law laid down by this Court no case is made out for interference with the impugned judgment of the Tribunal. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs.
-
1998 (3) TMI 709 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rovisions of the Act and non-application of the settled principles regarding the nature of family arrangement with reference to whether such document requires registration under the Indian Registration Act. Thus, the findings of the respondents are unsustainable in law. Consequently, the circumstances of the instant case justifies the conclusion that the Pre-Act-Partition in the form of family arrangement though not registered under (Section 17(1)(b) of the Indian Registration Act is still valid in law and the authority while determining the excess vacant land under the Act cannot ignore such a partition effected by way of family arrangement. The question for consideration is answered accordingly in the affirmative. 21. For reasons aforestated, the impugned orders passed by the respondents are liable to be quashed and accordingly quashed. The rule is made absolute. Parties to bear their own costs. Consequently, no order is necessary on the W.M.P. and is accordingly dismissed.
-
1998 (3) TMI 708 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... authority - to decide whether the representation should be rejected on the ground that his earlier representation had already been considered and rejected. To put it differently, when the representation was addressed to the Central Governing it was incumbent on the part of the detaining authority to forward the same to the Central Government and not to take a pre-emptive action thereupon of its own. For the foregoing discussion, it must be held that refusal on the part of the detaining authority to send the representation of the detenu to the Central Government resulted in denial of the right conferred on him under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India to pursuade that Government to revoke the order of detention under Section 14 of the Act and on that ground his continued detention has become illegal. We, therefore, allow this petition, quash the impugned order of detention and direct that the detenu be released forthwith unless wanted in connection with any other case.
-
1998 (3) TMI 707 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... when the persons were brought over to the Commission from the Government on deputation whether their option had been asked for or not? Further such a principle if accepted then the inter se seniority would be dependent upon the whim of the Government, and we see no rationale behind the aforesaid principle. The two decisions on which Mr. Ram Kumar, learned counsel placed reliance in support of his contention infact do not lay down the aforesaid proposition. We have, therefore, no hesitation to reject the submission of Mr. Ram Kumar. In the aforesaid premises we dispose of these appeals by reading down the provisions of Regulation 9(2) in the manner as indicated earlier rather than Striking down the same and hold that while determining the inter se seniority of the deputationists in the services of the Commission their entire length of continuous service shall be the basis. These appeals are disposed of accordingly. But in the circumstances there will be no order as to costs.
-
1998 (3) TMI 706 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ay also put on record that earlier by consent of both the parties, Justice A.M. Ahmadi, retired Chief Justice of this Court was suggested to be the arbitrator on the remuneration of ₹ 10,000 per day and on the same remuneration Dr Shah is agreeable to work as mentioned to me. 2. In my view, it will be too much expensive for parties to get their dispute arbitrated at Paris. I, therefore, reject this suggestion of learned counsel for the respondent. Under these circumstances, I allow this application and appoint Dr Nasim Hasan Shah, retired Chief Justice of Pakistan, 58-D/1, Gulberg III, Lahore, Pakistan Phone 755695 (Lahore) to act as arbitrator as per the provisions of Section 11(5) read with Section 11(9) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Office shall intimate about the passing of this order to Dr Nasim Hasan Shah, who may get in touch with the parties for carrying out the arbitration proceedings pursuant to the present order, at his earliest convenience.
-
1998 (3) TMI 705 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e of by the hospital even without charging any money for the services rendered and consequently in such a situation the award of damages for mental agony to the parents is wholly unjustified. We, however, fail to appreciate this argument advanced on behalf of the learned counsel for the appellants inasmuch as the mental agony of the parents will not be dismissed in any manner merely seeing the only child living in a vegetative state on account of negligence of the hospital authorities on a hospital bed. The agony of the parents would remain so long as they remain alive and the so-called humanitarian approach of the hospital authorities in no way can be considered to be a factor in denying the compensation for mental agony suffered by the parents. 15. In the premises as aforesaid, the contentions raised by the learned counsel appearing for the appellants having failed, the appeal fails and is dismissed. 16. Accordingly both the appeals are dismissed with costs of ₹ 5000.
-
1998 (3) TMI 704 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... in the Civil Court under the bona fide belief that the proceedings were governed by the provisions of the old Act. In the facts and circumstances, the period spent from 7-9-96 till the date of this judgment is necessarily to be excluded for the purpose of calculation of the limitation period under section 33(1) and/or section 34(3) of the new Act in case the respondent prefers to take recourse under sections 33 or 34 of the new Act. 13. In the result, therefore, the revision application succeeds and is hereby allowed. The impugned order is hereby set aside. The proceedings in S.C.S. 229/96/ II do not survive and therefore declared as closed. The parties are however free to exercise their option available under sections 33 and 34 of the new Act within the period of limitation prescribed under the said provisions, subject to exemption of period from 7-9-96 till today, as observed above. In the circumstances, there shall be no order as to costs. 14. Revision application allowed.
-
1998 (3) TMI 703 - ITAT AMRITSAR
... ...
... ... ..... as occasion for which alleged gifts were sought by the assessee proved to be baseless and thus all the transactions of gifts were rightly treated as bogus. 7. The other plea was that some of the amounts of gifts were received by the assessee’s wife and that cannot be treated in the hands of the assessee. This argument is again without any force. As all the amounts of gifts stood in the books of assessee and he was supposed to prove the source. The amount of gifts allegedly received by the wife of the assessee which otherwise stood transferred in the account of the assessee were supposed to explain as genuine transaction and they have already concluded that those transactions were bogus and thus the entry in the account books relevant to gifts were rightly treated as unexplained investment as income of the assessee from unexplained sources and rightly treated in the hands of the assessee. 8. The result of the above discussion is that the appeal of the Revenue is allowed.
-
1998 (3) TMI 702 - ITAT CALCUTTA
... ...
... ... ..... he extent of ₹ 17,000 only and the balance amount of ₹ 26,000 was given by payment directly to the supplier of the material required for the construction of the house. Though the expenditure was apparently incurred by the husband being the karta/head of the family, it could not be said that the wife could not have any interest of her own in this house being constructed. The transaction was neither loan nor any gift as no ‘interest’ element was involved and there was no promise to return the amount with or without interest. It was clear that the money given by the wife was a joint venture of the family. Taking into consideration overall facts and circumstances of the case, it could be said that the aforesaid piece of legislation was not applicable in the instant case. By taking the liberal view and applying the golden rule of interpretation, the assessee had a reasonable cause within the meaning of section 273B. Therefore, the penalty should be deleted.
-
1998 (3) TMI 701 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... understand how the provisions of Rule 4 Order XXX CPC, could be extended to such a case. 8. Shri Vikas Singh has also urged that actually the rent was being paid by the Manager and, therefore, the Manager can be treated as a tenant. There is no basis for holding that the Manager was the tenant because admittedly the tenancy was taken in the name of Ashok Transport Agency and rent was also paid in the name of Ashok Transport Agency. It cannot, therefore, be said that the Manager had taken the premises in his own name and there was tenancy of the premises. 9. In the circumstances, we are unable to uphold the impugned judgment of the High Court. In our opinion, the executing court has rightly taken the view that the suit having been filed against the dead person, the decree was a nullity and could not be executed. The appeal is accordingly allowed, the impugned judgment of the High Court is set aside and the order passed by the executing court is restored. No order as to costs.
-
1998 (3) TMI 700 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s has been going on for a number of years, we do not think it will be appropriate to dismiss there appeals on this ground at this late stage. We, however, emphasise that petitioners should not normally short circuit the procedure provided by the taxing statute and seek the redress by filling a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 16. For the aforesaid reasons, these appeals are allowed and the decision of the High Court is set aside. While holding that the respondent is not a local authority whose income is exempted from tax under Section 10(20) of the Act, we, however, direct the assessing authority to consider the claim of the respondent that its income is not liable to be taxed in view of the provisions of Section 11(1)(A) of the Act. This question should be decided by the assessing authority within six months from today and the liability of the respondent to pay tax would be subject to the outcome of that decision. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
1998 (3) TMI 699 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... her Division Bench of this court adverted to the following tests for finding out, as to when a movable property fixed to earth may become an immovable property "(i) the intention of the parties ; (ii) mode of affixation and whether the affixation is intended to be permanent ; and (iii) the onus of proof that even after annexation the article continues to be movable is on the person who alleges it." Applying those tests here, there can be no doubt that the erection of the boiler was intended to be fixed permanently. It has, therefore, to be regarded as immovable property and not as movable property, although, after it is detached and when moved is capable of being regarded as movable property. The assessee, therefore, is not entitled to the benefit of the investment allowance on the machinery used by it for erecting boilers. Our answer to the question referred to us is, therefore, in the negative. In the circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.
-
1998 (3) TMI 698 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e that the cheques may have been issued by the accused at his place of residence or business, the Bank on which it is drawn being often located at a second spot and inevitably the complainant or the payee has his place of residence or business at yet another loca tion. It was for this reason that the Kerala High Court in the case of P.K.Muralendharan v.C.K Pareed, reported in 1992 Cri.L.J. 1965 took the view that any of the three Courts could exercise jurisdiction. In our considered view, where undoubtedly each of the components constitute a stage in the commission of the offence, the final non-payment being the ultimate one, S. 178 Cr.P.C. would clearly apply to an offence of this type." In view of the above I find no merit in these writ petitions. The same are hereby dismissed with no order as to costs. Ad-interim order granted on 22-1-1998 in all the petitions stands vacated. Parties to appear before the trial Court on 18-4-98. C.C. expedited. 12. Petition dismissed.
-
1998 (3) TMI 697 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... his amounts as per his requirements. If at all any inquiry could be held in accordance with law, the respondent-Bank could have initiated such an inquiry, but it could not stop the petitioner from operating his own account. 32.1 In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is ordered that while it will J be open for the respondent-Bank to hold any inquiry against the petitioner, if permissible under law and in accordance with law, if the respondent-Bank so chooses, the petitioner shall be allowed to operate his Staff Savings Account No. 258 provided he furnishes security bond for a sum of ₹ 20,000/- as required under the document dated 15-5-1996, i.e., Annexure R/l enclosed with the affidavit-in-reply dated 28-8-1997 within a period of two weeks from today or from the date the certified copy of this order is made available. Special Civil Application No. 6135 of 1997 is accordingly allowed and the Rule is made absolute in the terms as aforesaid. No order as to costs.
-
1998 (3) TMI 696 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... nts on the decision of Bombay High Court in Gold Seal Engineering Product Pvt. Ltd. and others Vs . Hindustan Manufacturers and others, AIR1992Bom144 is also misplaced as also on the provisions of Order 2 Rule 3 CPC. In view of the decision in Tata Oil Mill's case which squarely covers the point in issue it is not possible to sustain the conclusion of learned single Judge that this court has no territorial jurisdiction to entertain the suit. 13. In our view, prima facie, this court has both territorial as well as pecuniary jurisdiction to entertain the suit and, Therefore, we set aside the judgment under challenge in this appeal. The application (I.A. 4465/89) filed by the appellant-plaintiff would now be considered on merits. The order dated 30th June, 1989 had continued during the pendency of this appeal and it will further continue till the disposal of I.A. 4465/89. 14. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed in the above terms leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
-
1998 (3) TMI 695 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... nd Mr. D.P. Wadhwa ORDER Appeal dismissed.
........
|
