|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 1 to 20 of 733 Records
-
2009 (9) TMI 1079 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ments of receipts and expenditures on various heads. After going through the same I am satisfied that it is not a case of wilful disobedience, but financial difficulties is the main reason for non compliance of the orders of the court. 24. Learned Counsel for Respondents drew my attention to Rule 21 of Chapter 17 of the Bombay High Court, Appellate Side, Service Rule 1960 and stated that every order passed under Article 226 of the Constitution is to be drawn up as if it were a decree and shall be executable as a decree in the manner provided in the Code of Civil Procedure. In the circumstances, the petitioners are at liberty to proceed to execute the decree. 25. In the circumstances, present contempt petition will have to be dismissed and the same is accordingly dismissed. Notices issued to Respondents are discharged. At the request of Advocate Smt. Mutatkar for the Petitioners, liberty granted to the petitioners to follow any other appropriate remedy available under the law.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1078 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... r dated 17/11/2009 confiscated the goods. The Tribunal had imposed a fine in lieu of confiscation. Fine however was in respect of both jewelry and currency. The amount was not apportioned between the two. Though the petition before us was only in respect of jewelry and we have remanded the matter back, we direct the original authority while passing the order to consider the imposition of fine in lieu of confiscation independently in respect of currency and jewelry. Order clarified accordingly.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1077 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... is also not in dispute nor it is denied that no suit has been instituted for the cancellation of the said Deed of Assignment, which still holds the field. Since the entire action instituted by the plaintiff-trust is on the basis that the defendants have started manufacturing and marketing various types of fans using the impugned trademark 'CINNI' that already stood assigned to the 1st plaintiff-Trust, the interim orders passed by this Court on May, 2009, restraining the defendant No. 2 from interfering with the business of the plaintiff in terms of the assignment deed dated 05.11.2000 and further restraining the said defendant from transferring the impugned trademark 'CINNI' that stood assigned to the plaintiff-trust by the aforesaid assignment deed in favour of any third party except the plaintiff-trust, appear to be wholly justified, and are made absolute. IA No. 5726/2009 stands allowed to the aforesaid extent. IA Nos. 6870/2009 and 6871/2009 are dismissed.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1076 - KERALA HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... e matter to the Full Bench, as we agree with the legal position adumbrated in Abdul Samad (supra) and Moosakoya (supra). In view of the above discussion, we prefer to adopt the view taken by the learned Single Judge in Shoukath Ali v. Tahsildar (supra). The Writ Petitions are to be dealt with in the light of the directions in that case, which are in accordance with Abdul Samad (supra) and Moosakoya (supra). The reference is answered accordingly. 8. In many of the cases, factual disputes are there concerning violation of natural justice etc. So, the individual cases have to be dealt with separately on merits and in appropriate cases, after filing the counter affidavit. Therefore, we are not dealing with the merits of each individual case. The Registry shall place the Writ Petitions before the appropriate Bench as per the roster. Ordered accordingly. It is clarified that the petitioners will be free to move the learned Single Judge for appropriate interim relief, if so-advised.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1075 - SC ORDER
... ...
... ... ..... gree that an important question of law arises on interpretation of Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act but confined to one assessment year only, namely, A.Y.2001-2002. To be listed on 25th November, 2009 for final hearing. Liberty is given to the parties to complete their pleadings before 25th November, 2009. Liberty to file additional documents. S.L.P.(C) No.....CC 10935/2009 Delay condoned. Dismissed.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1074 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ating complete details of treatment and expenditure incurred thereon and such other information/material as considered necessary. x) Records of the hospital and the information sent in the prescribed format to the concerned authority from time to time shall be subjected to half-yearly audit by the Principal Secretary (Health)/DGHS with the help of a Chartered Accountant/officers from the office of Comptroller General of Accounts and report thereof shall be submitted to the special committee comprising Chief Secretary and others , set up by the GNCTD for the purpose of this matter. 62. In our opinion, this is a fit case for imposing exemplary cost on IMCL which has contested the matter and raised several frivolous objections to avoid its responsibility to give free treatment to the citizens as envisaged under the agreement. IMCL shall pay Rs.2 lacs as costs, to be paid in equal shares to the petitioner and the GNCTD. 63. The writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1073 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... urisdiction and passed a decree which thus becomes a nullity. 16. Similar principles have been laid down by this Court in the case of Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation v. K. Satyanarayana Co. (1995) 2 SCC 385. In paragraph 3 of the report, the Court held On the admitted facts, viz., that the respondent had not preferred any objection to the award in question under Section 30 of the Act and, in fact, had applied for a decree in terms of the award, the trial court could not have granted pendente lite interest which was not a part of the award. To that extent, the trial court had exceeded its jurisdiction. 17. The same facts are present here. Here also the appellant herein has not filed any objection under Section 30 of the Act to the award. Rather the appellant had applied for a decree in terms of the award under Section 17 of the Act. 18. In view of such clear factual position, we find no merit in this appeal and which is accordingly dismissed. There is no order as to costs.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1072 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... is categorical mention of English Calendar months from April to March that would necessarily mean the wage to be beginning from 1st of each English Calendar month and to end up with the last day of the English Calendar month. The said forms are merely, in fact, the guiding factors; particularly as to how such contribution are to be reflected so as to keep the correct records. I, therefore, allow the present petition and set aside the impugned order imposing penalty upon the petitioner under Section 14-B of the EPF Misc. Provisions Act, 1952. However, it is made clear that wherever the default was committed by the petitioner in not making the timely payments even after taking the wage month of the petitioner from 16th day of each English Calendar Month to 15th day of the following month the respondent will have every right to impose and recover the penalty amount from the petitioner. 30. In view of the foregoing discussion, both the petitions are allowed with above directions.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1071 - ANDHRA PRADESH HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ity to the petitioner as to the contents of the report of the Enforcement department, an allegation whose factual basis is conceded by the respondent in the oral submission of the learned Special Government Pleader. 4. As the petitioner was denied reasonable opportunity to respond to and file objections after communication of the report of the Enforcement officials, which is the basis for the rejection of the petitioner's claim for input tax credit, the order of assessment dated 26-05-2009 cannot be sustained and is accordingly set aside. The matter is remanded to the respondent for enabling passing of a fresh order of assessment after the petitioner is furnished a copy of the report of the Enforcement officials. The petitioner shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to submit its objections within the time to be stipulated in a notice to be issued. The fresh order of assessment shall be passed thereafter The writ petition is disposed of as above. No order as to costs.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1070 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... eption Locked false Priority 31 SemiHidden false UnhideWhenUsed false QFormat true Name Subtle Reference /> <w LsdException Locked false Priority 32 SemiHidden false UnhideWhenUsed false QFormat true Name Intense Reference /> <w LsdException Locked false Priority 33 SemiHidden false UnhideWhenUsed false QFormat true Name Book Title /> / Style Definitions / table.MsoNormalTable mso-style-name Table Normal ; mso-tstyle-rowband-size 0; mso-tstyle-colband-size 0; mso-style-noshow yes; mso-style-priority 99; mso-style-parent ; mso-padding-alt 0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top 0in; mso-para-margin-right 0in; mso-para-margin-bottom 10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left 0in; line-height 115%; mso-pagination widow-orphan; font-size 11.0pt; font-family Calibri , sans-serif ; mso-ascii-font-family Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family Times New Roman ; mso-bidi-theme-font minor-bidi;
-
2009 (9) TMI 1069 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge." 16. If we take these principles into consideration, we find that the complaints disclose a prima facie case, and these petitions deserve to be dismissed, and are accordingly dismissed. The Rule is discharged.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1068 - ITAT DELHI
... ...
... ... ..... AA entered into with Canada. In this regard, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of J.Dalmia Vs. CIT - 53 ITR 83 and Benares State Bank Limited Vs. CIT - 75 ITR 167 held “……….The expression “paid” in section 16(2) it is true does not contemplate actual receipt of the dividend by the member. In general, dividend may be said to be paid within the meaning of section 16(2) when the company discharges its liability and makes the amount of dividend unconditionally available to the member entitled thereto…………” 6. In view of the above, we do not find any merit in the action of the lower authorities for bringing the amount of loan received by the assessee who is resident of Canada, during the relevant year, by treating the same as deemed dividend, within the meaning of Article 10 of DTAA. 7. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Decision pronounced in the open Court on 25th September, 2009.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1067 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... . 1 who, according to him, are being either approached or contacted by the Defendants. He permitted to do so within two weeks by way of an affidavit. 24. List this application for further consideration on 27th October 2009. IA No. 12060/2009(under Order XXVII Rule 1 CPC) 25. Learned Counsel for the plaintiffs/applicants states that he wishes to withdraw this application. 26. Dismissed as withdrawn. IA No. 12061/2009(under Order XXXIX Rule 2A CPC) 27. In view of the orders passed today, this application has become infructuous and it is dismissed as such. IA No. 12066/2009 (under Section 151 CPC by Defendant No. 8) 28. In view of the orders passed today vacating the ad interim injunction granted on 22nd July 2009, this application seeking extension of that order does not survive. The Defendant No. 8 may file an appropriate application seeking directions in accordance with law. 29. This application is dismissed. IA Nos. 12062, 12064 and 12065/2009 30. List on 27th October, 2009.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1066 - COMPANY LAW BOARD, CHENNAI
... ...
... ... ..... n Kumar for transferring their shares in favour of SM and his associates, as reiterated by Shri Sashikumar, learned Counsel, being inter-twined with the disputed agreement and having flown therefrom, cannot be granted until the finality is reached in O.S. No. 235 of 2008. 14. The substantial issues raised in C.A. No. 35 of 2008 in C.P. No. 243 of 2008 are found to have been agitated in C.A. Nos. 36 to 44 in C.P. Nos. 244 to 252 of 2008 and, therefore, the conclusions reached in C.A. No. 35 of 2008 in C.P. No. 243 of 2008 will squarely apply to these company applications. Accordingly, in exercise of the power vested in regulation 44 read with Section 10 of the CPC, the proceedings in C.P. Nos. 244 to 252 of 2008 shall also stand stayed pending final adjudication of the civil suit in O.S. No. 235 of 2008 on the file of the Court of Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore. The parties are at liberty to apply on final disposal of the civil suit in O.S. No. 235 of 2008. Ordered accordingly.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1065 - DELHI HIGH COURT
... ...
... ... ..... ed by the police. 37. There was also no issue relating to the time gap between the recording of the two completely contradictory statements. These aspects cannot be certainly overlooked. Other than these two contradictory statements, there is not even whisper of an allegation involving the petitioner in the commission of the offence in any of the other relevant documents including the initial MLC and the postmortem report. 38. Following the principles laid down in Dilawar Balu Khurana Vs. State of Maharashtra (Supra), the first version of the prosecution has to be accepted. It, therefore, has to be held that the prosecution has failed to make out a case raising strong suspicion of the involvement of the petitioner in the commission of the offence. In view of the above, the order dated 18th April, 2009 passed by the learned Additional Judge, Rohini, directing and framing charge against the petitioner is hereby set aside and quashed. This petition is allowed in the above terms.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1064 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... tant case, the whole time member has worked out the amount from the prices that were available and we find no ground to interfere with the order in this regard. 4. Before concluding, we may mention that this appeal had come up for hearing on August 31, 2009 alongwith Appeals No. 154 of 2008 and 2 of 2009 and when the arguments in Appeal No. 154 of 2008 had almost concluded on September 2, 2009, the learned Counsel in all these appeals made a request that they be allowed to withdraw the same including the present one. On an objection raised by the learned Counsel appearing for the respondent Board, the request was declined and we proceeded to decide the appeals on merits. 5. In the result, the appeal fails and the same stands dismissed. Since the appellant in connivance with the finance company had indulged in a fraud which is bigger than the one committed by the appellant in Appeal No. 154 of 2008, the respondent Board shall have its costs which are assessed at ₹ 1 lac.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1063 - SECURITIES APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI
... ...
... ... ..... 2005 as has been done by the whole time member. This has resulted in a lower penalty being imposed on the appellant. In the present appeal filed by the appellant, we cannot enhance the penalty amount but certainly there is no scope for reducing the same. There is, thus, no ground for us to interfere with the order of the adjudicating officer. Before concluding, we may mention that after the arguments had concluded from both sides, the learned counsel for the appellant on instructions from his client’s representative who was present in Court, sought permission to withdraw the appeals which was declined on an objection being raised by the learned counsel for the respondent. In the result, both the appeals fail and they stand dismissed. The appeals have been argued admirably by both sides. However, we are of the view that in these cases, the costs must follow the event. Accordingly, the Board shall have its costs in both the appeals which are assessed at ₹ 50,000/-.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1062 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... his election agent there was some malpractice at the polling stations during the polling. It needs little reiteration that for purpose of Section 100(1)(d)(iv), it was necessary for the election petitioner to aver specifically in what manner the result of the election insofar as it concerned the first respondent, was materially affected due to the said omission on the part of the Returning Officer. Unfortunately, such averment is missing in the election petition. In our judgment, therefore, the Election Tribunal/High Court was justified in coming to the conclusion that statement of material facts in the election petition was completely lacking and the petition was liable to be rejected at the threshold on that ground. We have, therefore, no hesitation in upholding the view taken by the High Court. 22. Consequently, this appeal, being devoid of any merit, fails and is dismissed accordingly. Since the first respondent remained unrepresented, there will be no order as to costs.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1061 - SUPREME COURT
... ...
... ... ..... On the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the opinion that this aspect of the matter needs to be gone into by the Trial Court. Accordingly, we allow this appeal and set aside the impugned judgment and order of the Division Bench and that of the learned Single Judge and remand the matter to the Trial Court. Before the Trial Court, the respondent will have liberty to produce any documentary evidence to show that the Trust had authorized it in writing to receive rent and file suit for eviction on behalf of the Trust. The respondent-plaintiff shall also implead the Trust as proforma-defendant before the Trial Court. 13. The Trial Court shall decide the suit uninfluenced by any observations made by us in our order or the observations made by the Division Bench and learned Single Judge of the High Court or the earlier decree of the Trial Court. All contentions are left open to the parties to be urged before the Trial Court. 14. Appeal allowed. No order as to the costs.
-
2009 (9) TMI 1060 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
... ...
... ... ..... o as to enable the Assessing Officer to carry out independent investigation. Initially, documents for establishing identity of the creditors, their creditworthiness and genuineness of the transactions will be submitted by the assessee for further verification by the Assessing Officer. 25. As a result, the appeal of the Revenue is treated as partly allowed but for statistical purposes. Assessee’s Cross Objection No.149/Ahd/2005 (out of ITA No.1114/Ahd/2005) for Assessment Year 1997-98. 26. The Cross Objection filed by the assessee relates to confirming the addition of ₹ 27,472/-. In Revenue’s appeal(supra), we have confirmed the order of the Learned CIT(Appeals). Following the same reasoning, we dismiss the ground of the Cross Objection. 27. As a result, the appeal of the Revenue is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes, whereas the Cross Objection filed by the assessee is dismissed. Order signed, dated and pronounced in the Court on 11/09/ 2009.
........
|
