|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 568 Records
-
2001 (2) TMI 1060 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... any merit in the said submission also. 21. Accordingly. I hold that the impugned orders of suspension are valid and cannot be set aside on the ground of selective suspension as alleged by the Petitioners and there is no inconsistency in the impugned orders of suspension when the orders refer to both Regulation 7(1)(b) and 7(1)(c) of the regulations and the impugned orders passed by the 1st Respondent at the directions of the 2nd Respondent cannot be also held to be bad on the ground that the 1st Respondent had acted on the directions of the 2nd Respondent. 22. For the foregoing findings, I am unable to accept all the contentions raised on behalf of the Petitioners and accordingly 1 reject the same. In view of my above findings, I do not find any grounds to interfere with the orders of suspension as there are no merits in the writ petitions. Accordingly all the writ petitions are dismissed. No costs. Consequently, W.M.P. Nos. 26775, 26779 and 26780 of 2000 are also dismissed.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1059 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the exercise of his discretion, if he so thinks fit, give such notice to the injured person or to any particular relative or relatives of the deceased, but not giving of such notice will not have any invalidating effect on the order which may be made by the Magistrate on a consideration of the report." 15. In the above view of the matter learned single judge has done wrong to the appellant when he closed the door of the High Court before him by saying that the High Court is going to consider whether the criminal proceedings initiated at his behest should be quashed completely and that the complainant would not be heard at all even if he wants to be heard. 16. We, therefore, allow this appeal and set aside the impugned order. The petition filed by the respondents for quashing the criminal proceedings can now be disposed of by the High Court after affording a reasonable opportunity to this appellant also to be heard in the matter. 17. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1058 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... fall of the democratic system and the rule of law we have adopted. 17. It is submitted that the Government has to face many odds and difficulties. If the Government is facing difficulties owing to natural calamities like earthquake and the like and priority on war-footing is required to be given to relief-work and rehabilitation, it must be given breathing time. 18. For the aforesaid reasons, the application deserves to be allowed and appropriate directions are required to be issued. The application is, accordingly, allowed. The opponent is directed to decide the petitioner's application within the period of three months from today keeping Section 3 read with Section 4 of the Act in mind, and shall not abstain from deciding on the ground that the Rules are not framed. The opponent is further directed to frame the Rules under Section 5 of the Act within the period of 10 months from today undergoing required formalities. Rule accordingly made absolute. 19. Petition allowed.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1057 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ce of the application for substitution which having not been done, the application filed by him was entitled to be granted. 14. We are of the opinion that the interest of justice requires that the application of the appellant for setting aside the decree be allowed and the suit be disposed of after hearing the appellant on merits. We, however, make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion in regard to the other contentions of the appellant as to the discharge of original 8th defendant as a guarantor by the Bank or the effect of not deciding issue Nos.9 and 12 in the original suit by the trial court. 15. For the reasons stated above, the appeal is allowed, the impugned judgments of the High Court and the trial court are set aside. The application under Order 9 Rule 13 read with Section 151 of the C.P.C. filed by the appellant on 25.3.1996 shall stand allowed. The appellant shall be afforded opportunity of contesting the suit in accordance with law. No order as to costs.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1056 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n 51A of the Act certified copies of the sale-deed could not be considered without examining persons connected with the transactions mentioned therein. 18. The High Court cannot therefore be faulted for relying on the transactions recorded in Ex.A2 and A4 though no one was examined for proving such transactions. No evidence had been adduced by the state for creating any doubt regarding the bona fides or genuineness of the transactions mentioned therein. It is true that the area of lands involved in those sale-deeds were relatively very small. Nonetheless, learned judges persuaded themselves to consider the sale price indicated therein along with the prices shown in other transactions mentioned in Ex.A1 and A3 also, for reaching the conclusion that the market value of the acquired land should have been Rs.75,000/- per acre. The increase made by the High Court is not so substantial as to warrant interference from this court. 19. For the aforesaid reasons we dismiss this appeal.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1055 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... is Court in Rajdeo Sharma's case (supra) we reasonably foresee that the prosecution would be able to complete the evidence only within the farthest time permitted in Rajdeo Sharma as we can have a glimpse of the volume of documents and of the evidence to be adduced by the prosecution. We feel that it would be unfair and unreasonable to compel the two ladies, who by the advancement of old age would possibly have already crossed into geriatric stage, to stand the long trial having no reasonable prospect of ultimate conviction against them. We are, therefore, inclined to decline them from the array of accused and quash the criminal prosecution so far as those two ladies are concerned. We do so. 23. Thus, the appeals filed by the two lady appellants - Seeta Hemchandra Shashittal and Shanta Subarao Shirali - would stand allowed but the appeals filed by the appellant- public servant Niranjan Hemchandra Shashittal and his wife Anuradha Niranjan Shashittal, would stand dismissed.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1054 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Trial Court and require no interference. Once it is admitted that land was on old grant terms it is irrelevant to argue that it is not shown that Ambala was under the Bengal Army. The same would be the position when on evidence Court has held that land is on old grant terms. It may only be mentioned that even in the three Appeals which were withdrawn, it had been an admitted position that the land was on old grant terms. As that position could not be controverted and as those parties were fully covered by Surendra Kumar Vakil's case (supra), those Appeals were withdrawn. In these Appeals, the principles laid down in Purushotam Dass Tandon's case and P. T. Anklesaria's case (supra) would not apply. In our view, these Appeals are fully covered by the ratio laid down in Surendra Kumar Vakil's case. In our view there is no infirmity in the impugned Judgments of the High Courts. Accordingly, these Appeals are dismissed. There will, however, be no Order as to costs.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1053 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... e do not find any valid ground to admit the appeal. It is accordingly dismissed.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1052 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... has the present intention of carrying it out but if, having accepted the pecuniary advantage involved in the transaction, he fails to pay his debt, he does not necessarily evade the debt by deception. 11. Moreover, the appellant has no case that the respondents obtained the article by any fraudulent inducement or by willful misrepresentation. We are told that respondents, though committed default in paying some installments, have paid substantial amount towards the consideration. 12. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, it is difficult to discern an element of deception in the whole transaction, whereas it is palpably evident that the appellant had an oblique motive of causing harassment to the respondents by seizing the entire articles through magisterial proceedings. We are of the view that the learned judge was perfectly justified in quashing the proceedings and we are disinclined to interfere in such matters. 13. The appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1051 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ations not comparable, but even the work is not comparable. The work which the Deposit Collectors do is completely different from the work which the regular employees do. There was thus no question of absorption and there was also no question of the Deposit Collectors being paid the same pay scales, allowances and other service conditions of the regular employees of the banks. 30. We also see no substance in the contention that these Schemes are un-remunerative. The Banks have introduced these Schemes because they want to encourage the common man to make small and regular deposits. As a result of such Schemes, the number of depositors have become much larger. We have no doubt that such Schemes are continued because the Banks find them remunerative. The Banks have large collections through such Schemes. 31. For the reasons set out hereinabove, we see no substance in any of these Appeals. All the Appeals accordingly stand dismissed. There will, however, be no order as to costs.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1050 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ashini Bose, 1962 Supp. (3) SC4 294 (AIR 1962 SC 1471), Mary Sonia Zachariah v. Union of India, (1995) 1 KLT 644, Ahmedabad Women Action Group (AWAG) v. Union of India (1997) 3 SCC 573 (1997 AIR SCW 1620 AIR 1997 SC 3614) and Preman v. Union of India, 1998 (2) KLT 1004 AIR 1999 Ker. 93). However, in the light of the above conclusion, it is unnecessary to refer to those decisions though some of them may have bearing in analysing and understanding the scope of the provisions which are made applicable exclusively to Christians as it happened in the case of Section 118 of the Act or in the case of the Indian Divorce Act. Therefore, we have not adverted to any one of these provisions. If Christians alone had been discriminated against by treating them as a separate class, we think the argument could have been understood and merited consideration. 9. In that view of the matter, we do not think there is any merit in these petitions and the same stand dismissed accordingly. No costs.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1049 - SETTLEMENT COMMISSION, NEW DELHI BENCH
... ...
... ... ..... und for demanding any interest as the applicants themselves have deposited substantial amount of their correct liability even before the issue of Show Cause Notice to them. 28. In view of the facts and circumstances of this case and in view of our findings as stated in this order, we order that the case covered by the Show Cause Notice dated 7.8.1998 issued to the applicants shall be settled by accepting the payment of an amount of ₹ 2,03,46,462 as additional amount of duty payable by the applicants in this case and all the applicants would be entitled to immunity from prosecution and penal liability under the Central Excise Act 1944. The settlement so arrived shall be void, if it is subsequently found by the Commission that it has been obtained by fraud or mis-representation of facts. In this connection attention of the applicants is drawn to provisions of sub-section (9) of section 32F and sub-section(3) of section 32K. The applications, are accordingly, disposed of.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1048 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ave been placed before the arbitrators to indicate that the heavy power tariffs received from the U.P. State Electricity Board should exercise 33.1/3 per cent cut in the highest maximum demand recorded in any month during the 12 months from August 1978 to July 1979 and the manner in which the same should be regulated. Whether that amount of electricity was supplied to the respondent or not is also not clear from the records. In the absence of such material placed before the arbitrators, we cannot embark upon an investigation on the basis of this order of the U.P. Government. Therefore, we think, the High Court is justified in having dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant, and we do not think that there is any justification for us to interfere with the award which was made the decree of the civil court and in appeal affirmed by the High Court. The appeal, therefore, stands dismissed. However, in the circumstances of the case, the parties shall bear their respective costs.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1047 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... been given an opportunity of being heard in the matter in respect of the proposed remarks or strictures. Such an opportunity is the basic requirement, for, otherwise the offending remarks would be in violation of the principles of natural justice.” Keeping in mind the aforesaid principles of law, so far as present case is concerned, it is apparent that the petitioner-Advocate was not given show-cause notice and he had not got any opportunity of being heard. The case involved a short question whether the adjournment was to be granted or not and under the facts and circumstances, in the opinion of this Court, the remarks are unjustified, uncalled for and are liable to be expunged. Having thus examined the matter, and in view of what has been stated above, the petition deserves to be and is hereby allowed. It is directed that the aforesaid remarks do stand expunged from the order of the learned Magistrate dated 29-5-2000. No order as to costs. Misc. Criminal Case allowed.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1046 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rt may deliver shall be acceptable to (SIC) the High Court neither opposes nor supports the appellant's prayer; its stand is neutral. 20. For the foregoing reasons the petition is allowed. The following portions occurring in the judgment of the High Court are directed to be expunged - The manner in which the cognizance of the said offences came to be taken clearly suggest that the Magistrate wanted to rope in the petitioners in a criminal case in order to pressurise them to have the dais in court room no.8 and other civil work as noted in the petition carried out as desired by her defying all judicial norms being gross abuse of process of court 21. The petition stands disposed of accordingly. Needless to say the abovesaid observations having been directed to be expunged if the said observations have percolated into the annual confidential rolls of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate the same shall also stand expunged for the foundation thereof has itself ceased to exist.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1045 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rement of the respondent. The respondent had only less than two years to retire from service. If the impugned order is viewed in the light of these facts, it could be said that the order of compulsory retirement was passed for extraneous reasons. As the authorities did not wait for the conclusion of the enquiry and decided to dispense with the services of the respondent merely on the basis of the allegations which had not been proved and in the absence of any adverse entries in his service record to support the order of compulsory retirement, we are of the view that the Division Bench was right in holding that the impugned order was liable to be set aside. We find no merit in the appeal, which is dismissed accordingly. However, three months' time is given to the appellant-State to comply with the directions of the Division Bench, failing which the respondent would be entitled to get interest at the rate of 18% for the delayed payment of the pecuniary benefits due to him.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1044 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... the present case, we decline to interfere, leaving the question of law open. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1043 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... s based on the said document. The decree is for execution of an agreement which is held by us not admissible in evidence. 8. The question whether the sale deed was in fact a sale deed or a mortgage deed needs no answer in view of the fact that there is no reconveyance deed. Admittedly the so called reconveyance deed was allegedly executed after a long time after the sale deed was executed. The judgments relied upon by the learned Counsel for the respondent and which were relied upon by the learned single Judge arc not at all applicable to the facts of the present case. In those cases reconveyance deeds were not in dispute and as a matter of fact reconveyance deeds were executed on the date of sale deed itself. Therefore, we hold that the sale deed was in fact a sale deed as there was no reconveyance deed. This deed of sale could not be termed as a mortgage deed. 9. For the reasons, we allow the appeal. Set aside the judgment of the learned single Judge. No order as to costs.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1042 - COMPANY LAW BOARD DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... #8377; 60 lakhs (which did not materialize). The second is CA 128 of 1999 complaining about issue of an advertisement by the company for sale of the plant and machinery at Bangalore Unit in violation of the order of this Bench dated 16-1-1997 which had restricted the power of the company to sell unusable assets beyond a book value of ₹ 50 lakhs and that the plant and machinery at Bangalore was more than ₹ 50 lakhs and, thus, the respondents had committed contempt. Since no sale had taken place pursuant to the advertisement we do not consider that the respondents had committed any act of contempt. As a matter of fact, after the said application was filed, we had directed the company by an order dated 3-6-1999 not to dispose of any assets of the company except in the normal course of business, without our approval. Therefore, this application also does not survive. 31. With the above directions, observations we dispose of this petition without any order as to cost.
-
2001 (2) TMI 1041 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... main name which is identical without deceptively similar to the plaintiffs trade mark 'DR. REDDY'S' and from doing any other thing as is likely to lead to passing off of the business and goods of the defendants as the business and goods of the plaintiff. The defendants are also restrained by permanent injunction from using the trade mark/domain 'drreddyslab.com' or any other mark/domain name which is identical with or deceptively similar to the plaintiffs trade mark 'DR. REDDY'S' for internet related services or any business which may lead to dilution of distinctiveness of the plaintiffs trademark 'DR. REDDY'S'. Defendants are also directed to transfer the domain name 'drreddyslab.com' to the plaintiff and shall deliver all impugned material including brochures, stationary and other printed matters bearing the impugned name 'drreddyslab.com'. Defendants shall pay cost of the suit to the plaintiff and bear their own.
........
|
