|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 468 Records
-
2003 (8) TMI 592 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... xecution of the sale deed. There is no provision in the agreement that the amount required for the purchase of stamp papers can be adjusted from Rs. 9,50,000/-. The parties have to bear the registration fee, if any, also. The order of the executing court is silent about that aspect also. In the result, the Civil Revision Petition is allowed. The order passed by the court below directing the respondent to deposit Rs. 9,50,000/- within three days and the further direction that upon such deposit he is entitled to get the sale deed executed through court are hereby set aside. The amount deposited will be refunded to the respondent. In case the decree holder has deposited any amount for purchase of stamp paper, he is entitled to get back that amount also. The E.P. is remanded to the executing court for giving an opportunity to the respondent for realisation of Rs. 3,50,000/- as agreed to between the parties in the award of the Lok Adalat. I.A. No. 10 of 2003 shall stand dismissed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 591 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... le of being taken care of and corrected at a later stage and the wrong done, if any, would be set right and rights and equities adjusted an appeal or revision preferred at the conclusion of the proceedings. But there may be cases where 'a stitch in time would save nine'. At the end, we may sum up by saying that the power is there but the exercise is discretionary which will be governed solely by the dictates of judicial conscience enriched by juridical experience and practical wisdom of the Judge. 39. The appeal is allowed. The order of the High Court refusing to entertain the petition filed by the appellant, holding it not maintainable, is set aside. The petition shall stand restored on the file of the High Court, to be dealt with by an appropriate Bench consistently with the rules of the High Court, depending on whether the petitioner before the High court is seeking a writ of certiorari or invoking the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court. 40. Cost made easy.
-
2003 (8) TMI 590 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ansferee is not entitled to recover the arrears as rent for the property on transfer unless the right to recover the arrears is also transferred. If right to recover the arrears is assigned, then the transferee/landlord can recover those arrears as rent and if not paid maintain a petition for eviction under the rent laws for those arrears as well. Since in this case we have found that there was an assignment of right to recover the arrears in favour of the respondent transferee he was entitled to recover the same as arrears of rent. If that period is taken into consideration then the tenant/appellants were certainly in arrears of rent for more than six months and become liable to be evicted from the premises in dispute on the ground of default on their part in payment of rent for more than six months on the date of filing the suit. 20. For the reasons stated above we do not find any merit in these appeals and dismiss the same. Parties shall bear their own costs in this court.
-
2003 (8) TMI 589 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... erred the SLP. It was held that in view of the conclusion that the allegations in the complaint that he allegations in the complaint do not make out any offence against any of the officers of the Company, it would be futile to allow continuance of the criminal proceedings as against the remaining two accused. In the instant case, since I hold that the dispute is of civil nature, I think that the order of process deserves to be quashed as a whole and it would not be proper to allow the complaint to proceed against the remaining accused. 33. In the result, the petition is allowed. The impugned order dated 6.11.2001 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, F.C., Khadki, Pune in C.C. No. 181 of 2001 is hereby quashed and set aside as against the petitioner company (original accused No. 1) and against all the remaining accused Nos. 2 to 7 as well. 34. Rule is made absolute accordingly. C. c. expedited. An ordinary copy of this order duly authenticated by the Sheristedar/P.A. is allowed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 588 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... t he was communal and spreading hatred amongst the communities. It was also stated by him that he had given beating to him and threatened him that if he did not help him in teaching a lesson to the Hindu community then he would not spare his life. 16. A perusal of the aforesaid statements made by the three witnesses spells out that the appellant had threatened the witnesses with dire consequence for not participating in the demonstration organised by him. He threatened them with dire consequence if they did not support him and attend every programme organised by him. He was spreading communal feelings amongst the residents of the locality. He was harassing the public in general and causing disturbance to the public tranquility and security of the locality. We are satisfied that a case was made out for the externment of the appellant under Clause (1) of Section 56(1)(bb) of the Act. 17. For the reasons stated above, we do not find any merit in this appeal and dismiss the same.
-
2003 (8) TMI 587 - CESTAT KOLKATA
... ...
... ... ..... resins have been, in fact, manufactured by the respondents, but have been shown to have been manufactured in the factory of M/s. RGS Industries, is factually incorrect, inasmuch as M/s. RGS Industries were a legal separate entity engaged in the manufacture of resins. He has also observed that the show cause notice for the period from 1.11.86 to 30.4.87 has been issued on 19.9.88. Inasmuch as M/s. RGS Industries have been filing monthly returns and the Revenue was aware of the existence of the same, the notice is barred on limitation. 4. In their memo of appeal, the Revenue, though challenged the findings of the Commissioner (Appeals) on merits, has not submitted anything on the point of limitation. There is a conclusive finding by the Commissioner (Appeals) against the Revenue on the point of limitation, which remains unchallenged by the Department. As such, I am of the opinion that the Revenue's appeal is required to be rejected on this short point. Ordered accordingly.
-
2003 (8) TMI 586 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... no reason to interfere with the majority view expressed. The civil appeals are dismissed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 585 - ORISSA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... g been lodged on 1.12.1994 is beyond the period of limitation of one y.ear and, therefore, the learned Magistrate could not have taken cognizance of the offence even without an application for condonation. 13. Mr. Indrajeet Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioners has raised contentions that the alleged violation is misconceived inasmuch as construed in the light of the provisions of the Companies Act, there was no violation of any of the provisions of law. However, since it has already been held that prosecution was lodged beyond the period of limitation and, therefore, no cognizance could be taken, I need not delve into such question and determine such a question at the stage which would be more or less academic. In the result, the petitions are allowed, the orders of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate-cum-Special Judge, Cuttack dated 1.12.1994 in all the three cases, taking cognizance of the offences and issuing process against the petitioner are quashed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 584 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ty, AIR1992AP333 (FB), wherein it is held by a Full Bench of this Court as follows "to express firm disinclination to go into the factual aspects of the reference order. The fact remains that the order made in Civil Appeal No. 4126 of 1988 has been referred to a Constitution Bench. Until the Constitution Bench goes into the question and authoritatively lays down the law, we are of the view that the decision in Civil Appeal No. 4126 of 1988 holds the field". Unless the Supreme Court goes into the question and lays down the law in accordance with Article 141 of the Constitution, the decision rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in S.P. Sampathy's case (supra) holds good. 10. In view of the said decision, the complaint as such is not maintainable as it is filed through the General Power of Attorney holder, which is not permissible under law. Hence, there are no grounds to interfere with the order of acquittal. The criminal appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 583 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... Respondent's counsel, on instructions, agreed to pay the entire amount by 31st December, 2003. We order accordingly. Till the entire amount is paid to DDA, the possession of the plot shall not be delivered to the respondent. 13. Civil Appeal No. 34 of 1995 is accordingly allowed in the above terms. The parties are asked to bear their own costs. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 5424 OF 1999 14. In this appeal the respondent had already paid the unearned increase. However, as a result of the judgment impugned in CA. No. 34 of 1995 he claimed a refund, which was allowed by the District Forum. On appeal by DDA. State Commission affirmed the order of the District Forum and the Revision preferred by DDA, before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, was also dismissed by the impugned order. As we have set aside the judgment impugned in C.A. No. 34 of 1995, it follows that the respondent is not entitled to a refund. 15. This appeal is accordingly allowed with no order as to costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 582 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... also presides to see that a guilty man does not escape. Both are public duties." (Per Viscount Simon in Stirland v. Director of Public Prosecution 1944 AC (PC) 315 quoted in State of U.P. v. Anil Singh 1989CriLJ88 . Doubts would be called reasonable if they are free from a zest for abstract speculation. Law cannot afford any favourite other than truth. (See Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra 1973CriLJ1783 , State of U.P. v. Krishna Gopal and Anr. 1989CriLJ288 , and Gangadhar Behera and Ors. v. State of Orissa 2003CriLJ41 . Keeping in view the legal principles and the factual scenario in our view the inevitable conclusion is that the High Court was not justified in directing acquittal of the accused persons. Accordingly the judgment of the High Court is set aside and that of the Trial Court restored. Accused Karnail Singh is directed to surrender to custody to serve the balance of the imprisonment as ordered by the Trial Court. The appeal is allowed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 581 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... not functioning, justice should not be denied to the affected persons. In case, if the Administrative Tribunal is not functioning, it would be open to the employees to approach the High Court. 28. Lastly, we make it clear that we have not at all dealt with and considered the constitutional validity of Tamil Nadu Essential Services Maintenance Act, 2002 and the Tamil Nadu Ordinance No. 3 of 2003 or interpretation of any of the provisions thereof as the State Government has gracefully agreed to re-instate most of the employees who had gone on strike. For this, we appreciate the efforts made and the reasonable stand taken by the learned Counsel for the parties. Further, we have not dealt with the grievances of the employees against various orders issued by the State Government affecting their service benefits. We hope that Government would try to consider the same appropriately. 29. The Appeals and Writ Petitions are disposed of accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 580 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... (a) the prosecution has not satisfactorily established the receipt of telephone call on 1.12.1998 from Mousam to deceased Pritam as spoken to by PW-1, (b) the evidence of PWs.2, 3, 13 and 15 are not creditworthy hence not safe to be relied upon; (c) the recoveries of the letter from the house of A-5 and the exercise book from the house of A-1 are not proved as required in law; 32. Therefore, in our opinion the circumstances relied on by the prosecution in this case are neither fully established nor are consistent with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused. These circumstances do not exclude the hypothesis of innocence of the accused, therefore, the appellants are entitled to the benefit of reasonable doubt. Accordingly, we allow these appeals, set aside the judgments of the courts below and acquit the appellants of the charges framed against them. 33. The appeals stand allowed. The appellants, if in custody, shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.
-
2003 (8) TMI 579 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... as to defraud the creditors. It has been held in the decisions in Smt. Shallo Devi v. Mohinder Singh AIR 1971 P&H 325 Ramaswami Chettiar v. Mallappa Reddiar AIR 1920 Mad 748 Badri Dass v. Chunilal AIR 1961 P&H. 398 and K. Najamma v. K. Rangappa AIR 1954 Mad 173 that the transfer of immovable property made with intent to defeat or delay the creditors of the transferor is voidable at the option of any creditor so defeated or delayed and such creditor can avoid the transfer by attaching that transferred property in execution of the decree and thus exercise his option to avoid that transfer. In the instant case Exts. A1 and A2 documents were executed after the issuance of the first cheque with a view to defeat the claim of the creditor. In such circumstances we are of the view the court below has rightly rejected the petition. The appeal would therefore stand dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, parties would bear their respective costs in these appeals.
-
2003 (8) TMI 578 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tion is not bona fide as it is done with the purpose of taking the suit out of the jurisdiction of that court. 4. It is settled law that while considering whether the amendment is to be granted or not, the Court does not go into the merits of the matter and decide whether or not the claim made therein is bona fide or not. That is a question which can only be decided at the trial of the Suit. It is also settled law that merely because an amendment may take the suit out of the jurisdiction of that Court is no ground for refusing that amendment. We, therefore, do not find any justifiable reason on which the High Court has refused this amendment. Accordingly, the impugned order is set aside and that of the trial court is restored. We, however, clarify that as the appellant has now raised the claim from ₹ 1 Lakh to ₹ 10 Lakh, the trial court will determine, whether or not Court Fees are correctly paid. 5. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 577 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... ugust, 2003 in Civil Appeal No. 2416 of 2000 2003 (156) E.LT. 161 (S.C.) etc. this appeal is dismissed.
-
2003 (8) TMI 576 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... Pasayat, JJ. ORDER Appeals admitted.
-
2003 (8) TMI 575 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... xpected to pass a decree which is not capable of enforcement in the courts of law. If the argument of the learned Counsel for the Appellants is to be accepted and if a decree is to be granted for specific performance, without identification of the suit property, it will not be possible to enforce such a decree. 8. This Court, in Nahar Singh v. Harnak Singh and Ors. (1996) 6 SCC 699, in paragraph 5, has also taken a view that if the property itself cannot be identified, the relief of specific performance cannot be granted. 9. In these circumstances, and looking to the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the courts below, we do not find any merit in this appeal. The appeal is dismissed. No costs. 10. Mr. Dhruv Mehta, learned Counsel for the Appellants started his arguments at 10.55 a.m. and concluded at 12.05 p.m. Thereafter, Learned counsel for the Respondents made his submissions in reply for few minutes. 11. The appeal is dismissed in terms of the signed order. No costs.
-
2003 (8) TMI 574 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... tered to Section 3(i)(ii) of TADA Act. Their convictions under Sections 121A, 122 and 124 IPC and sentences imposed are maintained. The conviction under Section 364-A read with Section 120B IPC is maintained, as it is the conviction under Section 3(4) of the TADA Act and Section 14 of the Foreigners Act for the concerned accused appellant along with sentence imposed. 51. However, considering the gravity of the offence and the dastardly nature of the acts and consequences which have flown out and, would have flown in respect, of the life sentence, incarceration for the period of 20 years would be appropriate. The accused appellants would not be entitled to any remission from the, aforesaid period of 20 years. As observed by this Court in Ashok Kumar v. Union of India 1991CriLJ2483 and Satpal v. State of Haryana and Anr. 1993CriLJ314 , "imprisonment for life" means imprisonment for the full span of life. 52. The death reference and appeals are accordingly disposed of.
-
2003 (8) TMI 573 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... te of Maharashtra 1981 Crl. L.J. 1808 and K.C. Iyya v. State of Karnataka 1985 Crl. L.J. 214. However, on consideration of the matter, the view taken by the two Full Benches and the Division Bench commends itself to us. We respectfully follow it. In view of the above, we are of the opinion that the provisions of Sections 438 and 439 do not call for a restricted interpretation. The citizen has the right to choose. His application should be considered. Each case should be examined on its own merits. If it is found that the ground for grant of bail is not made out, the Court has the full jurisdiction to deny relief. Equally, if a case is made out the citizen's liberty should not be allowed to be curtailed. However, we do not find any ground to deny the citizen's right to choose the forum to approach the Court and to make a prayer. This is not warranted by the provision. The reference is accordingly answered. The matter shall now be listed before the learned Single Judge.
........
|
