|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 546 Records
-
2006 (12) TMI 582 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... td., M.G. Road, Mumbai is directed to pay over to the Applicant the total amount lying credit to the savings bank account No. 002- 1523346-006. 49. Mr. M.L. Palan, did not argue this Appeal specifically and submitted that the fate of this Appeal is also dependent on the construction put by us to the various clauses of the Will. The directions given by the learned single Judge are in conformity with the construction of the various clauses of the Will put by us and, therefore, call for no interference. 50. In the result, we dispose of this group of five Appeals by the following order i. Appeal Nos. 163 of 2005 and 164 of 2005 are disposed of as indicated above. ii. Appeal Nos. 80 and 81 of 2000 are dismissed. iii. Appeal No. 508 of 2005 is also dismissed. iv. The interim orders passed in these Appeals shall stand discharged. 51. Oral prayer for stay of our judgment made by the counsel for the Appellant as well as by Mr. R.L. Tolat, counsel for the Respondent No. 9, is rejected.
-
2006 (12) TMI 581 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ipso facto vitiate the cheque or lead to the conclusion that there is material alteration in the cheque. The said decision according to me does not at all lay down a proposition that a defence that a blank signed cheque was misused by the complainant is not available to the accused in a prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. That decision cannot also help the complainant in the facts and circumstances of this case. 10. In the result- (a) This Crl.M.C. is allowed in part to the extent indicated above. (b) The learned Magistrate is directed to forward the cheque to the expert for comparison as indicated earlier if the condition stipulated is complied with by the petitioner . 11. It is made clear that I have not intended to express any opinion on the disputed facts involved. The learned Magistrate must consider the materials placed before him in accordance with law unfettered by any observations when he is finally called upon to appreciate the evidence.
-
2006 (12) TMI 580 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... f acquittal has been recorded. The views of the learned Trial Judge cannot be said to be wholly unsustainable. It is now well known that if two views are possible, the Appellate Court shall not ordinarily interfere with the judgment of acquittal. We do not, however, mean to lay down the law that the High Court, in a case where a judgment of acquittal is in question, would not go into the evidence brought on records by the prosecution or by the State but we would like to point out that even if the High Court reversed the judgment of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court, it is incumbent on the High Court to arrive at the conclusion that no two views are possible. See also Samghaji Hariba Patil v. State of Karnataka 2007CriLJ36 ; and Umrao v. State of Haryana and Ors. 2006CriLJ2798 . 16. For the reasons aforementioned, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained, which is set aside accordingly. The appeal is allowed. The appellant is on bail. He is discharged from the bail bonds.
-
2006 (12) TMI 579 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ration while deciding the question of grant of bail. 16. Having regard to the afore-mentioned circumstances, particularly the role attributed to the appellant in the charge-sheet, we are of the view that it is a fit case for grant of bail to the appellant. Consequently, the appeal is allowed and the order passed by the High Court is set aside. It is directed that the appellant shall be enlarged on bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 5 lakhs with two sureties, each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Special Court, Pune. He shall also remain bound by all the conditions as stipulated in Section 438(2) of the Code. The appellant shall also surrender his passport, if any, before the Special Court, Pune. 17. It goes without saying that aforenoted observations on the merits of the material collected by the prosecution are tentative, only for the purpose of this appeal, and shall not be taken as an expression of final opinion on the merits of the case.
-
2006 (12) TMI 578 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... un concurrently and not consecutively. 9. However, in this case the provision of Section 427 of the Code was not invoked in the original cases or in the appeals. A separate application was filed before the High Court after the special leave petitions were dismissed. Such an application, in our opinion, was not maintainable. The High Court could not have exercised its inherent jurisdiction in a case of this nature as it had not exercised such jurisdiction while passing the judgments in appeal. Section 482 of the Code was, therefore, not an appropriate remedy having regard to the fact that neither the Trial Judge, nor the High Court while passing the judgments of conviction and sentence indicated that the sentences passed against the appellant in both the cases shall run concurrently or Section 427 would be attracted. The said provision, therefore, could not be applied in a separate and independent proceeding by the High Court. The appeal being devoid of any merit is dismissed.
-
2006 (12) TMI 577 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... dustries Ltd. v. Collector of Central Excise, Bombay, B.D. Gupta v. State of Haryana and Tarlochan Dev Sharma v. State of Punjab and Ors. in support of his contention that the charge levied was vague. Since we have held that the charge was not vague, the case law relied upon does not advance the case of the appellants. 5. No other point was raised. 6. In the result, the appeals are partly allowed and impugned order in so far as it holds the appellants guilty of violating Regulation 10 of the takeover code is set aside. The other findings recorded by the adjudicating officer in regard to the second show cause notice are upheld. Let the appellants now pay the penalty amount within 45 days from the date of receipt of this order. 7. Before parting we may clarify that since Triumph International Finance India Ltd. has not filed an appeal against the findings recorded against it in the second show cause notice, those findings against the said company have become final. 8. No costs.
-
2006 (12) TMI 576 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e date of his arrest. Mr. Boparai after verifying the detention period of the applicant-appellant from the concerned quarters, makes a statement at the Bar that, he by now, has undergone more than seven years of his substantive sentence. We are also of the opinion that keeping in view the present situation, the possibility of the present appeal being heard in near future is very remote. We, therefore, allow the instant criminal miscellaneous and direct that the applicant-appellant shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sangrur on his furnishing adequate surety bonds. We further direct that copies of this judgment be supplied free of costs to Inspector General of Prisons for the State of Punjab, Haryana as also of the Union Territory of Chandigarh for onward transmission to the jail/sub-jail under their control, for onward information of all prisoners. Another copy of the judgment be supplied to Mr. D.D. Sharma, representing Union of India.
-
2006 (12) TMI 575 - CESTAT CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... rent transactions. 17. It was decided in Orion Systems v. CC, Cochin 2005 (192) ELT 1117 (Tri. Bang.), and upheld by the Apex Court that the requirement that when Bill of Entry relied upon by the department to enhance value was not available on record, it could not be concluded that the goods imported on such Bill of Entry were identical to the goods imported by the assessee. In view of the above ratio it is essential that the importer is given an opportunity to contest the proposal to enhance the value of the impugned goods by furnishing him copies of the Bills of Entry relied upon. As the duty, penalty, fine, interest etc. depend on the assessable value to be determined, the impugned order is set aside and the matter remanded to the Commissioner for adjudicating the allegations afresh in the light of our various observations above. Of course, the appellants will be given adequate opportunity of being heard before such adjudication. (Pronounced in the Open Court on 11.12.06)
-
2006 (12) TMI 574 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... n the assessee’s case for the earlier assessment year in Tax Case No. 1428/2005 and a decision of the Calcutta High Court reported in 179 ITR pg. 8. Learned Additional Solicitor General very fairly concedes that the against aforesaid decisions, Department has not filed any appeal. The special leave petition is dismissed.
-
2006 (12) TMI 573 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... State, it goes without saying that the appellant- Corporation in future may act in terms thereof, unless otherwise provided for by the Statute. 18. Although the matter is not before us, however, keeping in view the fact that now it is widely felt that a modern abattoir should be constructed, as was noticed by this Court in Buffalo Traders Welfare Association (supra), which ensures hygiene and sanitation, we would request the High Court to consider the desirability of disposing of Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 11069/2006 (Asaf Ali v. State of U.P. and Ors.) as expeditiously as possible. Save and except the aforementioned directions, we are of the opinion that the Corporation may work out the other modalities as it deems fit and in accordance with law. If respondent No. 1 has deposited any amount for the modernization of the plant, which has not been carried out, the Corporation may refund the amount subject to any outstanding dues. The appeal is allowed accordingly. No costs.
-
2006 (12) TMI 572 - COMPANY LAW BOARD
... ...
... ... ..... such maxims are that he who seeks equity must do equity and he who comes into equity must come with clean hands...." There have been allegations and counter allegations. The Company Law Board is a court of equity and considering the equities between the parties, I find that the equity is in favour of the respondents as it is they who have been nurturing the company even while facing the brunt of various cases against them. Rather it is the conduct of the petitioners as detailed above which has been prejudicial to the interest of the functioning of the company. Therefore, it would be highly unjust to grant the prayers sought by the petitioners . Such a relief, if granted could be highly oppressive to the respondents. Thus, the petitioners have not established any act of oppression or mismanagement in the affairs of the company and as such the petition deserves to be dismissed. 10. The petition is hereby dismissed with no order as to cost. All interim orders stand vacated.
-
2006 (12) TMI 571 - CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND GOLD TRIBUNAL, AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... ter filing appeal himself exercising the powers of sub-ordinate to whom he had authorized to file Appeal. Under any circumstances, this kind of action on the part of the Commissioner can not be compliance to Sub-section 2 of Section 35B of Central Excise Act, 1944. 13. Thus, in the light of aforesaid discussions and in my considered opinion the present appeal is not maintainable on the ground of these objections raised and as recorded by the Ld. Member (Judicial). Therefore, I am in full agreement with the said order. The issue of Commissioner's filing the appeal himself any appeal is squarely decided against the Revenue by the aforesaid majority decision. Respectfully following the same we find that all these appeals are liable to be dismissed on the preliminary objections raised by the respondents without going into merits. All the appeals are dismissed and the cross objections filed by the respondents are also disposed of. (Dictated & pronounced in the Open Court.)
-
2006 (12) TMI 570 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n 3(2) is applicable to amusement parks, the provision has not expressly been excluded nor indicated exclusion of amusement parks defined in Section 2(a-1) of the Act. It is imperative to consider the ratio in paragraph No. 11 of Sale Tax Commissioner v. Modi Sugar Mills (Supra), where the Supreme Court has held that taxing statutes cannot be interpreted on the basis of as answered as mentioned hereinabove. 30. The answer to the third question raised, we hold that the burden of proof in justifying that the benefit has not been passed on to the Consumer and in fact that there is no case of unjust enrichments, rests on the Petitioners. It is upon the petitioners produce sufficient material against unjust enrichment.The petitioners are at liberty to approach the said purpose, with all the relevant material and the appropriate authority to decide the same expeditiously. 31. Rule is made absolute in both the above Petitions in terms of the above, however with no order as to costs.
-
2006 (12) TMI 569 - CHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... al objectives but in the long term they debilitate and destroy the constitutional system, by enervating the rule of law. 66. In the result, all the above petitions succeed. The impugned amendment to Section 49 of the Chhattisgarh Co-operative Societies Act, 1960 is struck down as uliravires, arbitrary and subversive of the democratic structure of the co-operatives as contemplated under the Act. As a necessary consequence, provisions in Section 49 of the Act, as it stood immediately before the impunged amendment, would continue to hold the field. 67. In view of the opinion of the majority, we uphold the constitutional validity of the impugned Amendment Act No. 22 of 2004 and dismiss all the writ petitions, however, with no order as to costs. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies, State of Chhattisgarh, Raipur, is directed to hold election to the concerned Co-operative Societies within a period of fix months from today, as directed by Vijay Kumar Shrivastava, J. in his order.
-
2006 (12) TMI 568 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... rs Patent power of the High Court in the matter of appeal against an order of learned single Judge to the Division Bench.... 13. Keeping in view the principles of law as enunciated in the aforementioned decisions of this Court, it is evident that a letters patent appeal, which was filed prior to coming into force of the 2002 Act would be maintainable. Our attention has, furthermore, been drawn to the two decisions of this Court in Bento De Souza Egipsy (Dead) by LRs. v. Yvette Alvares Colaco and Ors. (2004) 13 SCC 438 and Sanjay Z. Rane and Ors. v. Saibai S. Dubaxi (Dead) Through LRs. (2004) 13 SCC 439, wherein this Court opined that Section 100A of the Code has no retrospective effect. 14. We, therefore, are unable to accept the contentions of the learned Counsel for the appellant that Section 100A of the Code will have retrospective effect so as to bring within its fold even the appeals preferred prior to coming into force of the said Act. The appeal is dismissed. No costs.
-
2006 (12) TMI 567 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... sufficiently wide to relate also to orders or decisions made in the course of proceedings which may result in a conviction of and sentence for contempt. But we have come to the conclusion that the broad interpretation is the correct one. The statutory language permits it. It provides a remedy in a case of unjustifiably prolonged custody, and it does so without impinging on cases where the allegation is of an offence other than contempt of court. Moreover, there are exceptional features which surround summary proceedings for contempt which, as the authorities make clear, demand an enlarged process of judicial scrutiny.... See also Modi Telefibres Ltd. and Ors. v. Sujit Kumar Choudhary and Ors. 2005 (7) SCC 40 and see also Vivek Sarin v. Multi Metal Udyog (2005) 11 SCC 495. 18. We, therefore, for the reasons aforementioned, are unable to uphold the impugned order which is accordingly set aside. The appeal is allowed with the aforementioned observations and directions. No costs.
-
2006 (12) TMI 566 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ioner/non-applicant that the respondent-applicant had filed a SLP against the judgment dated 7th October, 2005 and the same was dismissed. Admittedly, the SLP was dismissed in January, 2006 and the fact that the petitioner/non-applicant had taken employment in RITES came to the knowledge of the respondent-applicant only in May, 2006. 15. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we allow the application and recall our order/judgment dated 7th October, 2005. Writ Petition filed by the petitioner/non-applicant will be treated as dismissed. The cheques given by the petitioner/non-applicant will be returned by the respondent-applicant and will not be encashed. In view of the Order passed above, we are not passing a specific order imposing costs on the petitioner/non-applicant though the facts require imposition of exemplary costs. CM No. 7456 OF 2006 IN WP(C) No. 4458 OF 1993 In view of the order passed above, the application has become infructuous and is accordingly dismissed.
-
2006 (12) TMI 565 - COMPANY LAW BOARD
... ...
... ... ..... aimed by the petitioner are on account of the purported breach of the agreements by the respondents. In this connection, beneficial reference is invited to a decision of the apex court in Sangramsinh P. Gaekwad and Ors. v. Shantadevi P. Gaekwad and Ors. (2005) Vol.123 CC 566, wherein it has been held, inter-alia, that when a complaint is made as regards violation of statutory or contractual right, the shareholder may initiate a proceeding in a civil court but a proceeding under Section 397 of the Act would be maintainable only when an extraordinary situation is brought to the notice of the court keeping in view of the wide and far-reaching power of the court in relation to the affairs of the company. Against this background, the decisions cited by learned Counsel appearing for the respondent herein will be of little assistance to them. For these reasons, the parties are hereby directed to resolve the disputes raised in the company petition by arbitration. Ordered accordingly.
-
2006 (12) TMI 564 - COMPANY LAW BOARD
... ...
... ... ..... imed by the petitioner are on account of the purported breach of the agreements by the respondents. In this connection, beneficial reference is invited to a decision of the apex court in Sangramsinh P. Gaekwad and Ors. v. Shantadevi P. Gaekwad and Ors. (2005) Vol.123 CC 566, wherein it has been held, inter-alia, that when a complaint is made as regards violation of statutory or contractual right, the shareholder may initiate a proceeding in a civil court but a proceeding under Section 397 of the Act would be maintainable only when an extraordinary situation is brought to the notice of the court keeping in view of the wide and far-reaching power of the court in relation to the affairs of the company. Against this background, the decisions cited by learned Counsel appearing for the respondent herein will be of little assistance to them. For these reasons, the parties are hereby directed to resolve the disputes raised in the company petition by arbitration. Ordered accordingly.
-
2006 (12) TMI 563 - CESTAT MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... ers) in the manufacture of sugar plant at the factory site of the assessees and hence credit of duty was available to the manufacturers of the goods in question, and not to the appellants. 3. On hearing both sides, we find that the issue stands settled in favour of the assessees in a series of decisions of the Tribunal starting with the decision in the cases of Kranti SSK Ltd. v. CCE, Pune-I - Final Order No. A/1173/WZB/06/C-III, dated 12-6-2006 and Padamshree Dr. D.Y. Patil SSK Ltd. v. CCE, Pune - Final Order Nos. A/1905-1906/WZB/06/C-III, dated 19-6-2006; which decisions have been subsequently followed in the case of Rajarambapu Patil SSK Ltd. v. CCE, Pune-II - Order No. A/2103/WZB/06/C-I, dated 30-10-2006 2007 (208) E.L.T. 372 (Tribunal) 2008 (11) S.T.R. 437 (Tribunal) . Following the ratio of the above decisions, we hold that the appellants are entitled to credit of the amounts in question, set aside the impugned orders and allow these appeals. (Pronounced in Court)
........
|
