|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 698 Records
-
2009 (10) TMI 999 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... oncerning jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 227, which the High Court failed to keep in mind, it must be held that in the facts and circumstances of the case and the findings recorded by the Additional Rent Controller as well as the Administrative Tribunal, High Court was not justified in interfering with the concurrent orders of eviction based on the ground of sub- letting in exercise of its power under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. 36. The submission of the learned senior counsel for the respondents that the powers of the Rent Controller under the Act, 1968 are exercisable like that of courts of Mamlatdars under the Goa, Daman and Diu the Mamlatdar's Court Act, 1966 and that onus never shifted to the tenant is devoid of any substance and is noted to be rejected. 37. For the foregoing reasons, the appeal must be allowed and is allowed. The judgment dated November 29, 2006 passed by the High Court is set aside. The parties will bear their own costs.
-
2009 (10) TMI 998 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... be said to be retrospective merely because a part of the requisites for its action is drawn from a time antecedent to its passing, thus, cannot be ignored. We have gone into this aspect in detail even though we find in the factual matrix of the present case there are two FIRs of the year 2003 and one of 2006 which are both after the said Act come into force. 37. The observations of the Full Bench of the Gujarat High Court in Sarjubhaiya Mathur bhaiya Kahar v. Deputy Commissioner of Police and Anr. case (supra) are material to the effect that once a matter has been considered by the Supreme Court on earlier occasions as a result of which consideration of sections have been held to be valid a new ground of challenge even on the basis of approach made in later decisions of the Supreme Court may not be available before the Court to the petitioner. 38. In view of all the aforesaid reasons we find no merit in the petition, which is dismissed with costs quantified at Rs. 25,000.00.
-
2009 (10) TMI 997 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
delete
... ... ... ... ..... artner of M/s. Ohm Developers could not produce any evidence that the amount written in the seized document was in fact received from the assessee. In the instant case as the assessee has categorically denied to have made any payment in excess of Rs. 101,687/- upto 31-3-99 in respect of purchase of flat in our considered view the said denial cannot be brushed aside without bringing any positive material on record. Merely recording made by a third party or statement of a third party cannot be treated as so sacrosanct so as to read as a positive material against the assessee. In view of the above in our considered view the CIT(A) was not justified in confirming addition to the extent of Rs. 3,81,414/- in the hands of the assessee. We therefore delete the addition of Rs. 3,81,414/- and allow the ground of appeal of the assessee. 12. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced at the close of hearing in the presence of parties in the Court on 9/10/2009.
-
2009 (10) TMI 996 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... n any manner. We, accordingly, allow the appeals, set aside the judgment of the Division Bench and order the acquittal of the appellant. CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 1619/2007 We have heard the learned Counsel for the parties as well. The appellant herein was the Investigating Officer from 23.12.1995 to 23.3.1996 in the rape and murder of Chitra. The allegation against the appellant was that he had deliberately shielded the real offenders in the murder case and was accordingly liable for the offence under Section 201 of the IPC. The Sessions Court acquitted the appellant, which judgment has been reversed by the High Court, leading to this appeal. In the light of what has been held above in the connected Criminal Appeal Nos. 905-906 of 2007, we find that the present appeal needs to be allowed as it is not possible on the evidence to ascertain as to whether the appellant was, in fact, guilty of the offence alleged against him. We make an order in the above terms and order his acquittal.
-
2009 (10) TMI 995 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... rguments, learned AR contended that matter may be referred to the Special Bench for considering the issue in correct perspective. 16. As per our considered view, learned AR’s submission for referring the matter to the Special bench, when in assessee’s own case the Tribunal has taken one view, cannot be accepted, more particularly in view of the fact that against the order of the Tribunal the assessee has already approached to the High Court and the Hon’ble High Court vide its order dated 5.10.2009 had accepted the substantial question of law. As the matter is already before the High Court, there does not appear to be any judicial propriety to refer the matter to the Special Bench. 17. Respectfully following the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for immediately preceding assessment year, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Decision pronounced in the open Court on 30th October, 2009.
-
2009 (10) TMI 994 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... would be attracted. What meaning could be ascribed to the word "pending" found in Section 4 will have to be seen. Prima facie, we are of the view that the impugned order is a final order. In that case, the present matter will not be covered by Section 4 of the Repeal Act. It will have to be then seen whether the State had power under the U.L.C. Act to direct the petitioner to pay the present market value of the said land as determined by the Government Ready Reckoner. However, since in the light of the judgments referred to by us, we have come to the conclusion that exercise of powers under Section 34 of the U.L.C. Act after eight years is improper and illegal, it is not necessary for us to go into this aspect of the matter. We, therefore, keep all those questions open. We make it clear that we have not expressed any final opinion on those questions. 18. In the circumstances, the impugned order dated 15/11/2007 is quashed and set aside. The petition is disposed of.
-
2009 (10) TMI 993 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... he same is unconstitutional. We make it clear that the finding recorded by the Full Bench treating the two provisions are similar and on par is not a good statement in law. Whereas the judgment of the Supreme Court that these provisions are entirely different shall be binding on this Court. The observations that Section 3(2) of Maharashtra Act and Section 6(3A) of Gujarat Act are "similar and on par", made by the Full Bench alone have been disapproved by the Supreme Court. (c) As far as question (c) is concerned, it need not be answered by us as it will be purely an academic question in view of our answer to questions (a) and (b) and would hardly arise for consideration. 44. Having answered the questions of law as formulated by this Bench, now we direct the matter to be placed before the learned Single Judge for disposal in accordance with law. Keeping in view the importance of the questions involved in the present case, we leave the parties to bear their own costs.
-
2009 (10) TMI 992 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... om indulging in such unlawful activities... "This Court has no hesitation in saying that the time has come when the Courts dealing actions for infringement of trademark, copy rights, patents etc. should not only grant compensatory damages but award punitive damages also with a view to discourage and dishearten law breakers who indulge in violations with impunity out of lust for money so that they realize that in case they are caught, they would be liable not only to reimburse the aggrieved party but would be liable to pay punitive damages also, which may spell financial disaster for them." 21. In view of the above, since the plaintiff has proved the actual damages coupled with the fact the goods in the respective business are dis-similar, I am not inclined to grant damages as claimed by the plaintiff, however, it is entitled for Rs.2 lac as punitive damages and cost of the suit. 22. Suit as well as pending applications, if any, are disposed of accordingly. No costs.
-
2009 (10) TMI 991 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... by respondent no. 4 and the bank is proceeding against the petitioner who is the guarantor of the loan. It is not clear from the documents produced by learned counsel for the bank as to what steps have been taken by the bank against the borrower of the loan and merely issuance of notice under section 13(2) of The Securitization and Reconstruction of Financial assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 against the borrower is not sufficient. The bank should have proceeded against the borrower and exhausted all the remedies against him and thereafter the bank could have proceeded against the guarantor. 4. Until further orders of this court, the respondents are restrained from proceeding under section 13(4) of the Act 2002 with regard to petitioner's property who was the guarantor of the loan. However, if any possession has been taken by the bank then the property shall not be sold to anyone else and the petitioner shall be continued in possession of the property.
-
2009 (10) TMI 990 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... be highly improbable that the accused had given the cheques towards the consideration the complainant had paid to the accused towards the sale of the shop, a shop which was not even in possession of the accused and which was being run by one Shroff. 17. This is an appeal against acquittal, and, as already stated, if from the evidence produced two views are equally possible, the Appellate Court will not reverse a Judgment of acquittal and convert an acquittal into conviction. In the case at hand the accused was able to, with the very evidence of the complainant, to show that the two cheques were without any consideration and having discharged the said burden, it was for the complainant to have proved consideration as a matter of fact, which the complainant has failed to prove. 18. Considering the facts of the case, the acquittal of the accused could not be faulted. I find there is no merit in this appeal and consequently the same is hereby dismissed with costs of Rs. 5,000/-.
-
2009 (10) TMI 989 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... used has two options. He can either show that consideration and debt did not exist or that under the particular circumstances of the case the non existence or consideration and debt is so probable that a prudent man ought to suppose that no consideration and debt existed. To rebut the statutory presumption an accused is not expected to prove his defence beyond reasonable doubt as is expected of the complainant in a criminal trial. 13. Considering the facts of the case and in the absence of said Maria Alva for whose non examination, an adverse inference is required to be drawn against the complainant, the accused on the basis of the complainant's own evidence has sufficiently proved that consideration and debt did not exist or in any event had proved that it was improbable. 14. In the light of the above, I am of the view, that the findings of the learned Trial Court could not be faulted. This is not a fit case to grant special leave to appeal. The application is dismissed.
-
2009 (10) TMI 988 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... eld in Ashok B. Pagui (2007) 5 AIR Bom R 560 (supra) that a complaint even by a director of a company was not maintainable without there being a resolution by the Board of Directors. Section 52(i) of the said Act only authorizes a Managing Director to sue or be sued i.e. to initiate or defend a civil action only. The cases at hand were clearly covered by the decisions of this Court in the case of Alka Toraskar (2007) 1 AIR Bom R 399 (supra), Ashok B. Pagui (2007 All MR (Cri.) 2238, Chico Ursula D'Souza (AIR 2004 SC 408) (supra), as well as Om Shakti Schedule Castes (AIR 2008 (NOC) 697) (supra). The view held by the Courts below that both the said witnesses were sufficiently not authorized by the complainant either to lodge complaint/s and/or depose on behalf of the complainant cannot be faulted. 21. In the circumstances, therefore, I find that there is no merits in these appeals, and, consequently the same are hereby dismissed, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
-
2009 (10) TMI 987 - MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... employer due to changed circumstances. (d) As compassionate appointment is granted by carving out a special Scheme contrary to the normal mode of recruitment and when the employer or the government is at liberty to evolve a Scheme for granting such appointment from time to time, then the consideration for appointment has to be made in accordance with the Scheme or Policy that is in existence. (e) The decisions sundered in T. Swamy Dass (supra) and Heeralal Baria (supra) do not lay down the correct law and are hereby overruled. (f) Any right flowing from a settlement between the employer and employees' union or association has to be in a different compartment. (g) It would be the obligation of the employer to deal with the application with immediacy and promptitude so that the grievance of a family in distress gets a fair treatment in accordance with law. The Reference is accordingly answered. Matter be placed before the Division Bench for decision on the appeal on merits.
-
2009 (10) TMI 986 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... , Adv. For the Respondent Mr. Harish N. Salve, Sr. Adv., Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde,Adv., Mr. A. Rohan Singh, Adv., Mr. Ramesh Kr. Mishra, Adv., ORDER The special leave petition is dismissed.
-
2009 (10) TMI 985 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... ituated in village known as Matoda, Taluka Sanand with population of less than ten thousand which also proves that this land is agricultural land and not a capital assets within the meaning of “Section 2(14)(iii) of the Act. That apart, the land purchased and sold by the assessee has been proved to be an agricultural land and accordingly, the addition has rightly been deleted by the C IT(A) and we confirm the same. This issue of the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. Now coming to CO of the assessee in CO.121/Ahd/2009. 5. After hearing the rival contentions, we find that both the sides fairly agreed that the CO of the assessee is supportive of the CIT(A)’s order and we have already dismissed the Revenue’s appeal, this CO of the assessee has become infructuous. Hence, the CO of the assessee is dismissed as infructuous. 6. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue as well as the CO of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 30-10-2009
-
2009 (10) TMI 984 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ery type of assistance for their return and rehabilitation. The process for the rehabilitation in valley has been initiated in June 2008 after Govt. of India announced the package for their return. 8. The aforesaid affidavit makes it clear that the State Authorities have framed the rehabilitation scheme and for implementation of the same, it got the resources also. In such a fact situation no further action/direction is required. 9. In view of the above affidavit/undertaking given by the State and after hearing Mrs. Purnima Bhat Kak, Ld. Counsel for the appellants and Mr. Anis Suhrawardy, Ld. Counsel for the State, we dispose of the appeal with a pious hope that State shall take all endeavours to rehabilitate the persons who have been victim of terrorism and till the State is able to rehabilitate and provide the appropriate accommodation to 31 appellants- retirees/oustees, they shall continue to possess the accommodations which are in their respective possession on this date.
-
2009 (10) TMI 983 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... the Sub-Divisional Officer to hold an enquiry, whether he is Watandar or not. The Scheme of Watan Abolition Act, 1958, does not empower the State Government to issue such direction. What is not provided under the statute ought not to have been exercised by the State Government. Therefore, the State Government had no power to direct the Sub-Divisional Officer to hold an inquiry to decide question of Watandar, notwithstanding the decree passed by a competent civil court which has been affirmed by the High Court in Regular Second Appeal. The abolition of watan is by a legislative decree and not by executive action. Its consequences must be sought under the Statute which effectuates the abolition. It is, therefore, resumption and regrant must be within the statutory framework. 44. We, therefore, set aside the judgment of the High Court in all the appeals. The result is that the appeals are allowed, but in the peculiar circumstances of the case, there will be no order as to costs.
-
2009 (10) TMI 982 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... to vitiate the order. The officials may be inexperienced and ill-equipped to live upto the challenges in the new jurisdiction to order preventive detention available under the KAAPA. Adequate training for and strict insistence of procedural mandates from those wielding such power have to be insisted by the Government if legislative goals are to be fully achieved. The Government must ensure that every representation by the detenu under Article 22(5) of the Constitution and Section 7(2) of the KAAPA is disposed of after real and proper consideration as insisted by the precedents referred above. 54. In the result a) This Writ Petition is allowed; b) The continued detention of the detenu is found to be invalid and unjustified; c) If the detention of the detenu is not necessary in any other case, he shall forthwith be released from custody by the prison authorities; d) The Registry shall forthwith communicate the order to the Superintendent of the Central Prison, Kannur forthwith.
-
2009 (10) TMI 981 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... that once the financier had exercised the option of seizure of the vehicle, the postdated cheques obtained from the purchaser cannot be presented for encashment after the seizure. The owner has to take recourse to other legal remedies for recovery of the balance amount. If and when the vehicle is soled subsequently, the owner can recover the balance amount for adjusting the sale proceeds of the vehicle. Of course, in the post-seizure scenario, it may be open to the parties to agree upon a new schedule of payment or restructuring of the agreement concerned. So, the present case filed on the basis of the postdated cheques issued by the Petitioner is not attracted the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, and hence, the same is liable to be quashed. 15. Accordingly, this criminal original petition is allowed and the case in S.T.C. No. 486 of 2004 on the file of the Judicial Magistrate No. III, Madurai. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed.
-
2009 (10) TMI 980 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... undamental right or civil right cannot he curtailed only if a criminal case is pending against a person. 4. In totality of the facts and circumstances of the case and in view the ratio laid down in Naginder Singh Rana v. State of Punjab, 2004 (3) RCR(Cri) 912, the order declining permission to the petitioner to go abroad does not appear to he correct. Thus, the impugned order dated 12.10.2009 is set aside. The petitioner is permitted to go abroad (Dubai/Abu Dhabi) for 5-6 days on the condition that he shall furnish security to the tune of ₹ 4 lacs with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Court concerned. On the undertaking, as mentioned above, and on furnishing the security, as is ordered to the satisfaction of the Court concerned the petitioner shall be allowed to go abroad. He is directed to return to India on 7.11.2009. 5. The petition is disposed of accordingly. Copy of this order be given Dasti, under the signatures of the Reader of this Court.
........
|
