Reported in : 2009CriLJ1070
.....as per the impugned judgment delivered on 16-3-1998 by learned sessions judge, mayurbhanj at baripada in s.t. case no 113 of 1995.3. the following facts emerging from the trial court's record are mostly not in dispute.(i) a full-body truck bearing registration no. br 16-a-0795 was belonging to satwant singh (p.w. 14). under hire purchase agreement sudam singh (hereinafter referred to as deceased no. 1) had taken possession of that truck and was driving the same.(ii) deceased no. 1 (sudam singh), dharmadeo singh yadav (deceased no. 2) and bhikari pandit (deceased no. 3) had gone from bihar to ichhapur border (border between orissa and andhra pradesh) and returned with a consignment of 130 numbers of 'vikrant' tyres. amongst them deceased no. 2 was a co-driver with deceased no. 1 and deceased no. 3 was the helper of the truck.(iii) in the night between 7/8-1-1995 the truck went via jamsola check gate (border between orissa and bihar (presently in jharsuguda)). during the morning hours of 8-1-1995 the dead bodies of the aforesaid three deceased persons were found lying by the side of the national highway no. 5 at ward no. 24 of baripada town. khirod kumar das (p.w.i) lodged.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2009)3PLR625
.....is an offshoot of the agreement dated 1.9.2004, which was entered into between the petitioner-defendant and the respondent-plaintiff.briefly, the facts leading to the filing of the suit are that the petitioner-defendant has advanced a loan of rs. 6,70,000/- for the purchase of a truck to the respondent-plaintiff and, accordingly, entered into an agreement on 1.9.2004.the respondent-plaintiff agreed to pay the amount in 47 monthly instalments each. one instalment was taken in advance by the petitioner-defendant and the remaining 46 instalments were to be paid by the respondent-plaintiff in equal monthly instalments. the respondent-plaintiff handed over 46 post dated cheques of rs. 16,023/- drawn on indian overseas bank, branch nangal township, tehsil nandpur sahib, district ropar, punjab to the petitioner-defendant. it is the contention of the petitioner that some of the cheques, which were handed over by the respondent-plaintiff, were misplaced during transit and, therefore, the cheques could not be encashed. the petitioner informed the respondent-plaintiff about the said loss and claimed the amount along with interest, penalty and service charges. the respondent-plaintiff,.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2009(244)ELT36(P& H); (2009)154PLR416
.....making process of the petitioner is fair and reasonable and satisfies the requirement of fairness in terms of articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of india.5. the fact that the petitioner supplied information in respect of interview marks itself is indicative of the law that the information can be supplied to respondent no. 2, respondent no. 2 has sought information in respect of his grading by the competent authority. such information is not personal information as the information sought is in respect of right of the petitioner to be considered for promotion in accordance with rules. the personal information can be said to be information relating to a person and not in respect of grading of a candidate. therefore, we do not find any merit in the arguments raised by the petitioner that under section 8(1)(j) of the act, such information cannot be supplied. the argument that information sought is part of vindictiveness of respondent no. 2 is not tenable. the information sought is in respect of marks obtained which cannot be said to wanting in bonafides in any manner.6. in view of above we do not find any merit in the present petition and the same is dismissed.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2009)22VST210(P& H)
.....against the order of bifr dated july 5, 2001 and order dated december 5, 2006, annexure p15, made a prayer for setting aside the said orders also.3. facts set out in the petition are that respondent no. 3-company was declared sick under the provisions of the sick industrial companies (special provisions) act, 1985 (sica) vide order dated june 28, 1999, which was followed by draft rehabilitation scheme dated april 11, 2001. the scheme was circulated to all concerned including the petitioner. the petitioner by letter dated june 21 2001 annexure p2 raised objections to grant of concessions. it was submitted that concessions/reliefs could be considered only if the same were consistent with the policy of the state subject to approval of the steering committee. the policy was annexed to the said objections. however, the bifr vide impugned order dated july 5, 2001, annexure p3 sanctioned the scheme under section 18(4) of the sica. with regard to the concessions to be granted by the petitioner-state, following provision was incorporated:4.5. state government/other agencies(i) to declare the company as a relief undertaking and grant all reliefs and concessions applicable to a sick.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR2009SC613; 2009(1)KarLJ529; 2008AIRSCW7768; 2009(1)AIRKarR202
.....to death sentence. the last appeal i.e. 748 of 1996 was filed by the state challenging acquittal of present appellant- a. yadav , a2.2. background facts in a nutshell are as follows:sunanda varadhan, aged 73 years, (hereinafter referred to as the `deceased' nos. 1 and 2) and her mother rukamma, aged 90 years, came from well to do family and their children were settled outside bangalore. they were staying at flat no. 201, first floor, richmond place, convent road, bangalore. they were often engaging the services of accused-1 as part-time driver to take them in and around bangalore. they had also engaged selvi (p.w.3) as maid servant. they were often calling personally or on phone their relatives including suvarna prasad (p.w.6) daughter of deceased sunanda, lakshmi (p.w.8) deceased rukamma's cousin sister, nagamani (p.w.19) - niece of deceased rukamma and dr. xavier (p.w.22) a retired medical practitioner, who was staying in the same apartments and was said to be looking after the health of both deceased. similarly, keshava iyengar (p.w.1) whose daughter was married to the son of deceased sunanda, used to visit both sunanda and rukamma at their apartment and look after their.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR2009SC731; 2008AIRSCW7947; 2008(6)LHSC4276
.....34 of the indian penal code, 1860 (in short the `ipc'). they were found guilty and convicted by learned sessions judge kasaragod.2. background facts in a nutshell are as follows:babu (pw 1) on 3.9.1996 at about 9.30 pm closed his bakery shop and proceeded towards his house in his scooter. when he reached near b.ed centre, nellikkunnu, he saw a person lying on the road and three persons were standing near him and among the three persons, two persons, namely ashraf (a1) & afras (a2), stabbed the person lying on the road with knife. he saw the incident with the help of the head light of his scooter. he was able to identify that the persons were ashraf (al) & afras (a2). when they saw pw 1, they ran away from the place of occurrence. immediately he went to the shop of ganghadharan, pw3, a local councillor and informed this to him. both of them came to the scene of occurrence. pw3 was able to identify the person lying and told pw1 that he was one jayachandran known to him. since the police picket was posted near the place of occurrence, as there were frequent communal clashes, pw3 went to the police picket post and informed them of the incident and then pw4 the police officer.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2009)1SCC618
.....chajju ram and hari krishan khosla did not prohibit award of interest on equitable grounds when there was inordinate delay. he drew attention to the fact that ultimately in the said two decisions, the amount already paid as interest was directed not to be recovered. he also placed reliance on two other decisions of this court namely prabhu dayal v. union of india : air1994sc1451 and girdhari v. union of india : air2005sc3038 relating to acquisitions under the requisitioning and acquisition of immovable property act, 1952 (`raip act' for short, provisions of which, relating to acquisition and compensation are in pari materia with the provisions of the act), to show that interest can be awarded from the date of acquisition till the date of payment.4. on the contentions urged, the only question that arises for consideration is whether award of interest by the high court on the compensation for acquisition of requisitioned property under defence of india act, 1962 is impermissible.5. section 36 of the act provides for the manner of acquisition of requisitioned property. section 37 of the act deals with determination of compensation for acquisition of requisitioned property......
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR2009SC1531; 2008(15)SCALE516:2009AIRSCW1035
.....from an arbitration award, directing the parties to maintain status quo. the division bench was apparently fully conversant with the relevant facts and hence, it allowed the appeal by a brief order without stating the basic facts of the case. it was thus left open to the appellant to take us through the facts of the case and in turn it falls upon us to uphold the decision of the high court by stating the relevant facts.4. this appeal arises from an arbitration award that was intended to settle a family dispute but which apparently failed to satisfy all the contending parties. objections against the award were filed in the high court and a protracted litigation commenced. in course of the long drawn proceedings, it seems the appellant tried to resolve his disputes with the two objectors not at the same time but by dealing with them separately and one by one. in that process some slips were made here and there and as a result the whole thing comes unstuck for the appellant.5. the relevant facts of the case may, in brief, be stated as follows:6. an arbitration award dated october 6, 1996 confirmed, subject to some modifications, a family settlement under the memorandum of.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [2009]152CompCas335(SC); 2008(15)SCALE578
.....in order to cheat him and the last allegation is 'on complainant's enquiry, the accused 1 to 3 are threatening to kill him.9. after noticing the factual aspects the high court referred to some judgments and came to an abrupt conclusion in the following words:here in this case, there is no forgery of documents referred to in the complaint. the first respondent invents certain documents to show that those documents were not in the handwriting of the complainant. further, there is no allegation that by using such forged document, the accused has acquired gains. therefore the above authority will not apply to the facts and circumstances of this case.10. accordingly, the prosecution was quashed holding that the grievance, if any, of the complainant will have to be redressed through the civil forum or the company law board. he cannot prosecute the respondents on the basis of bald allegation without any basis. accordingly, prosecution has quashed.11. learned counsel for the appellant submitted that while exercising powers conferred under section 482 cr.p.c. the parameters have not been kept in view by the high court and matters which are essentially to be resolved during trial, have.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR2009SC925
.....inquest report does not show the presence of pw 3, so, in any event pw1 whose name has been stated becomes the solitary witness. the foundational facts are in doubt and the view taken by the high court is a possible view and so there is no scope for interference as the high court has considered the totality of the circumstances and there was manipulation of times.6. to begin with, we find the high court's judgment is full of abrupt conclusions and some times contrary to the evidence on record. the high court has considered certain factors to be material whereas in fact they are not so. for example the non-mention of the name of the deceased in the company of pw 5 in ex.p5 has been considered to be a vital omission. no basis for such a conclusion has been indicated. there was nothing to discard the evidence of the eye witnesses on the ground that material should have been shown to show that pw 5 was actually not in town and had gone to madras or any other place. it is surprising that the high court rests its view on a totally unfounded conclusion that the question put by a2 and the answer by pw5 appear to be artificial. so far as the delay in sending ex.p1 and p2 is concerned,.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT