Reported in : (2008)3PLR192
.....to a criminal contempt within the meaning of section 2(c) of the act?2. the aforementioned questions are required to be examined in the light of the facts which are evident from the reference order dated 29.8.2007. smt. jasbir kaur has filed the instant petition under sections 11 and 12 of the contempt of courts act, 1971 (for brevity, 'the act'), alleging disobedience of order dated 19.9.2003 (p-1) passed by this court in f.a.o. no. 211-m of 2003. the petitioner-smt. jasbir kaur has filed the appeal (f.a.o. no. 211-m of 2003) assailing the order and decree of divorce, dated 5.8.2003, passed by the learned additional district judge, patiala. on 30.4.1990, marriage between smt. jasbir kaur and shri kuljit singh was solemnised. on 30.9.1996, the husband-respondent filed a petition under section 13 of the hindu marriage act, 1955 (for brevity, 'the 1955 act'). on 5.8.2003, learned additional district judge, patiala, allowed his petition by granting him a decree for dissolution of marriage. feeling aggrieved, the wife-petitioner approached this court by filing first appeal on 9.9.2003 (fao no. 211-m of 2003) and this court on 19.9.2003 passed the following order:issue notice to show.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2008)152PLR769
m.m. kumar, j.1. this order shall dispose of civil writ petition nos. 12708 to 12717 of 1999 as common question of law and fact are involved in these petitions. for the purposes of this order, facts are being taken from c.w.p. no. 12708 of 1999. this petition is directed against order dated 11.9.1997 (annexure p.1) passed by the improvement trust tribunal, jalandhar declining the re-determination of compensation under section 28-a(3) of land acquisition act, 1894. an application for re-determination of the award has been made by the petitioner trust.2. the matter had earlier come up before a division bench of this court and the same was dismissed vide order dated 1.4.2002 which reads thus:no one has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no. 2 (claimants) despite publication. learned counsel for the petitioner argues that as the award has been signed only by the president, it was non-est in the eyes of law and, therefore, not enforceable. we put to the learned counsel for the petitioner as to whether the claimants were, infact, entitled to the benefits of enhanced compensation. it is not denied by the learned counsel that the claimants were entitled to the enhanced.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 149(2008)DLT515(SC); JT2008(5)SC325; 2008(2)KLT473(SC); (2008)5MLJ106(SC); 2008(6)SCALE207; 2008AIRSCW3231:AIR2008SC2226:2008(4)CivilL2008(3)Supreme170; JT2008(5)SC325; 2008(4)LH(SC)2448; 2008(3)KCCRSN186
.....was economically dependent on the petitioner. hence, the aforesaid decision can be of no help in deciding the present dispute, since necessary factual details are lacking.14. learned counsel for the appellant then invited our attention to the decision of a learned single judge of the andhra pradesh high court in y. pridhvi kumar v. the general manager, telecom district, hyderabad : air1993ap131 . we have carefully perused the said decision and find that that decision is also distinguishable. in the said decision it appears that there was a telephone line in the name of the mother and another telephone line in the name of the son, and both were living together. there were dues in the name of the mother and it was held by the andhra pradesh high court that in that situation the liability could not be fastened on the son and his telephone line could not be disconnected. it is not clear from the aforesaid decision of the andhra pradesh high court whether the mother was economically dependent on her son. it is quite possible that the mother was economically dependent on her husband who was paying her bills. it is also possible that the mother was a working woman with an.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : JT2008(6)SC290; 2008(7)SCALE158; (2008)5SCC502; 2008AIRSCW3595; 2008(5)SCC502; 2008(3)Supreme207; 2008(4)LH(SC)2575
.....and a new section 54a was proposed to be inserted.the amended section 54 reads as follows:54. penalty for unlawful import, export, transport, manufacture, possession etc.- ,whoever in contravention of this act or of any rule or order made or of any licence, permit or pass granted, thereunder(a) imports, exports, transports, manufactures, collects, sells or possesses any excisable article, or,(b) cultivates any hemp plant (cannabis sativa); or(c) constructs or works any distillery, pot still or brewery; or(d) uses, keeps or has in his possession any materials stills, utensil, implements or apparatus whatsoever for the purpose of manufacturing any excisable article other than tari; or removes any excisable articles for any distillery potstill,(brewery) or warehouse established or licensed under this act or(e) bottles any liquor for the purposes of sale; or(f) taps or draws tari from any tari producing tree;shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years and with fine which may extend to two thousand rupees.sections 54a and 69 read as follows:54(a). owner of animal, cart, vessel, raft, motor vehicle or any other means of conveyance deemed to be.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2008(1)CTLJ371(SC); JT2008(5)SC623; (2008)6MLJ852(SC); 2008(7)SCALE302; 2008AIRSCW4176; 2008(3)Supreme247; 2008(4)LH(SC)2411
.....of section 100 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 ( in short the 'code') was allowed by the high court by the impugned judgment. 2. the background facts in a nutshell are as follows:os no. 953 of 1984 on the file of the second additional judge, city civil court, hyderabad was filed by one b. venkatachalam, the husband of the respondent no. 1 and father of respondents 2&3. during pendency of the suit, the said venkatachalam died and his legal representatives were brought on record.the suit was filed by the plaintiffs for the specific performance of agreements of sale (ex.a-1 and a-4) by passing a decree in favour of the plaintiffs, to convey the plaint schedule property in favour of the plaintiffs by executing a proper sale deed, and if the specific performance of the suit contract is not possible, to repay an amount of rs. 22,475.30 received by the defendant towards the sale consideration with interest thereon at 12% per annum from the date of suit till the date of realization, and to deliver vacant possession of the plaint schedule property to the plaintiffs.according to plaintiff, the 2nd defendant allotted the plaint schedule house bearing no. srt 374 situated in the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2008(1)CTLJ366(SC); JT2008(5)SC566; 2008(5)KarLJ106; 2008(7)SCALE206; (2008)5SCC361
.....the trial court but was dismissed on the ground of limitation by the first appellate court and therefore the second appeal was filed. 2. background facts in a nutshell are as follows:the plaintiff no. 1's husband entered into an agreement of sale of house property no. cts 2565, ward no. 5, of mudhol corresponding municipal no. 536, on 15-11-1974 for consi- deration of rs. 6,000/-. a sum of rs. 1000/- was paid and subsequently two sums of rs. 300/- and rs. 600/- were paid on 21-12-1974 and 13-8-1975. but in the mean time, a suit was filed by the defendant's wife and children in 0. s. no. 72/76, wherein the plaintiff's husband was made a party. questioning the agreement of sale, and the suit came to be dismissed on 4-8-1977. the first appeal preferred in r. a.84/77 subsequently numbered as r, a, 83/79 came to be dismissed on 18-8-1979 and the second appeal preferred in rsa no. 385/80 also came to be dismissed on 5-6-1980. therefore the present suit is filed on 15.9.1981 for specific performance of agreement of sale.the defendant contended that the suit house belonged to his deceased father and his deceased father made an oral gift of the suit, property in favour of himself and his.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR2008SC3247; JT2008(5)SC449; 2008(6)SCALE482; 2008AIRSCW5484
.....by the appellants or for that matter any other points raised on their behalf and disposed of the revision in a somewhat curious manner. it noted the facts of the case and the points urged on behalf of the two sides and then abruptly gave the operative direction under the heading 'order'. there is no indication in the order why the revisional authority deemed fit to uphold the appellate order or why he accepted the case of kedar and badri in preference to the pleas raised by the side of baij nath. on a plain reading the revisional order appears to us to be quite unsustainable. the appellants then took the matter to the high court. but before the high court too the writ petition was dismissed without any proper consideration of the pleas raised on their behalf. the high court simply referred to some of the observations made by the settlement officer and dismissed the writ petition. in review, the point with regard to the earlier suit, being title suit no. 658 of 1955 was specifically pressed but the high court brushed it aside by observing that since the suit was dismissed for default there was no decision on merits deciding the rights of the parties. 5. we are afraid, that can.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2008(I)OLR(SC)838
order1. petitioner-wife has filed this transfer petition under section 25 of the code of civil procedure, 1908 seeking transfer of hmp case no.88 of 2007 pending before the family court, indore , madhya pradesh to the family court, raipur, chhattisgarh.2. notice was issued to the husband-respondent and he is represented before us.3. counsel appearing for the respondent-husband states that there is a danger to the respondent's life if he goes to raipur and prays that this case be transferred to any other place than raipur. per contra, counsel appearing for the wife assures that no harm shall be caused to the husband on his coming to raipur to attend the proceedings.4. on the assurance given by the counsel appearing for the wife, we transfer the aforesaid case no. 88 of 2007 from the family court, indore, madhya pradesh to the family court, raipur, chhattisgarh. we make it clear that if any untoward incident happens, the respondent is put at liberty to approach this court for transferring this case to a place other than raipur.5. the transferor court is directed to transmit the entire record related to the aforesaid case to the transferee court forthwith.6. the transfer petition is.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR2008SC3241; 2008(3)AWC2906(SC); 2008(1)CTLJ384(SC); 2008(6)SCALE694; (2008)5SCC325; 2008AIRSCW5477; 2008(3)Supreme143
.....in this appeal is to the order of a division bench of the patna high court dismissing the letters patent appeal filed by the appellant.2. background facts in a nutshell are as follows:on 1.9.2000, the indian oil corporation ltd. (in short the 'ioc') issued advertisement inviting applications for appointment of a dealer in respect of certain retail outlets (petrol pumps) in various places including one in brahampur in state of bihar. the appellant was one of the applicants. the applications were verified by ioc and the applications of all the eligible candidates were forwarded to the dealer selection board (in short the 'dsb') for making selection. the dsb issued interview letters to all those candidates who were found eligible. it considered the materials placed before it by the applicants and produced during interviews, and on the basis of the interview allegedly prepared a select list on merits in the following order:1. smt. poonam kumar-appellant, 2. shri dinesh kumar singh; and3. shri anil kumar. on being placed at no. 1 in the select list, a letter of intent was issued on 8.11.2001 and the necessary order was handed over to the appellant. she claims to have made substantial.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [2008(117)FLR963]; JT2008(6)SC349; 2008(7)SCALE104; (2008)5SCC741
.....engineer in proportion of 2/3rd from the assistant executive engineers and 1/3rd from assistant engineers in accordance with the relevant rules.2. facts relevant and necessary leading to the filing of this appeal may be stated.3. there are two feeder channels for promotion to the post of executive engineers (ees): (i) from direct recruit known as assistant executive engineers (aees) and (ii) from the grade of assistant engineers (aes) (promotees). 4. the rules governing the service of the cadres framed under article 309 of the constitution of india are called 'the indian defence service of engineers (recruitment and conditions of service) rules, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as 'the rules'). the appellants in the present case are the aes, whereas private respondent nos. 4 to 10 are aees. the aees are appointed by direct recruitment on the basis of selection made by union public service commission (for short 'the upsc'). 5. a circular dated 29.07.1997 was issued by respondent no.2 in which it was stated that as on 1.4.1997 out of the then sanctioned strength of 445 posts of ees, 354 posts (as against 297 posts) were occupied by those employees who have been promoted from the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT