Reported in : RLW2005(1)Raj587; 2005WLC(Raj)UC215
.....the trial court praying therein that he may be permitted to examine himself as a witness in his defence. the learned magistrate vide its impugned order dismissed the petitioner's application on the ground that the matter is already fixed for judgment and that accused himself is not present.3. section 315 cr.p.c. entities an accused to make an application for getting himself examined as a witness in his defence and to give evidence on oath in disproof of the charge made against him. thus an accused has a right to give evidence on oath in disproof of the charge. i fail to see why the trial court declined the prayer of the accused petitioner to give evidence on oath, only on the ground that case was fixed for judgment. section 315 cr.p.c. does not create any bar to make such a request at a particular stage of the case. in my view, if the petitioner is permitted to appear as a witness and give his evidence on oath as a witness in his defence would not cause any prejudice to the complainant, inasmuch as the complainant would get an opportunity to cross examine the accused.4. in the result, this petition is allowed. the impugned order of the trial court is set aside and the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR2006Raj19; IV(2005)BC475; RLW2005(2)Raj1336; 2005(3)WLC341
.....of the chief minister.2. the matter pertains to the attempted recovery towards alleged breach of contract by the writ petitioner-nathulal. brief facts leading to the present appeal are that the appellants issued a notice inviting offers for the contract of collection of tendu leaves in different forest areas. the invitation was issued on 30.1.1973 (annex.r/1) fixing the date of auction as 22.2.1973. it is not in dispute that the petitioner was one of the bidders for the area of erstwhile bijoliya jagir falling in mandalgarh range of forest division, chittorgarh for the season of 1973. the petitioner gave highest bid for the said area for rs. 51,100/-. the bid amount was recoverable in four equal installments of rs. 12,775/- each. it is also not in dispute that on the very day of the auction i.e., 22.2.1973 itself, the petitioner deposited a sum of rs. 29,627/- comprising of rs. 22,550/- towards two installments, rs. 500/- as earnest money and rs. 3577/- towards sales tax. an agreement was also executed by the petitioner (annex.1) on 22.2.1973 confirming the terms and conditions of the contract which provide inter alia that the possession of the area contracted would be.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : II(2005)DMC441; RLW2005(3)Raj1857; 2005(2)WLC496
.....1955 is reproduced as under :-'28. appeals from decrees and orders.-(1) xxxx ... xxxx ...(2) orders made by the court in any proceedings under this act under section 25 or section 26 shall, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3) be appealable if they are not interim orders, and every such appeal shall lie to the court to which appeals ordinarily lie from the decisions of the court given in exercise of its original civil jurisdiction.'7. the above provision makes it clear that order passed under section 25 of the act is appealable under sub-section (2) of section 28 of the act, if the order is not an interim order. a bare perusal of the impugned order will show that it is final in nature. the interim order of maintenance is always passed under section 24 of the act, 1955 during the pendency of the proceedings. so far as application under section 25 of the act is concerned, the same is separate and independent proceeding. the position of law on the point is very clear and objection taken by the learned counsel for the non-petitioner is correct. therefore, i hold that present criminal revision petition under section 397 cr.p.c. against the order passed on an application under.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : III(2005)BC342
.....lal. aggrieved by the order of revisional court, the petitioner-complainant has filed the instant criminal revisional petition.2. briefly stated facts, relevant and necessary for disposal of the instant revisional petition are that a complaint was filed by the petitioner-complainant against respondent no. ?. under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act, 1881 (for short 'the act' hereinafter), inter alia, alleging therein that respondent no. 2 issued a cheque dated 22.12.2003 for a sum of rs. 6,50,000/- in favour of the petitioner-complainant. on the presentation of the cheque of the bank, it was dishonoured and returned unpaid on the ground of insufficiency of fund. a notice as envisaged under section 138 of the act was served on respondent no. 2. the respondent no. 2 despite service of notice, failed to pay the amount within the stipulated period and, therefore, the complaint was filed. the complainant appeared as pw1 before the trial court and made statement. thereafter, accused-respondent no. 2 was examined under section 313, cr.p.c., made statement and produced dw1 vijay tinna as a defence witness.3. an application under section 311, cr.p.c. was filed by respondent.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : II(2005)ACC692; (2005)1MLJ670
.....impugned order of the learned single judge dated 5.11.2004. heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records.2. we are not stating the facts of the case in great detail because they have been stated in the judgment of the learned single judge. however, we may indicate the facts in brief.3. the writ petition was filed praying for the issue of a mandamus restraining the first respondent in the writ petition (w.p.no.22332/2002)(appellant herein) from operating her stage carriage service bearing registration no.tn-27-k-9789 on the route bangalore to baklipura, so far as it relates to the portion lying in tamil nadu. the petitioner also prayed for the issue of a certiorarified mandamus to quash the order of the second respondent/secretary, state transport authority, chepauk, chennai dated 2.5.2002. 4. the writ petitioner in w.p.no.22332 of 2002 is a stage carriage operator in karnataka, and operating a stage carriage service bearing registration no.ka-01-b-4995 on the interstate route bangalore to thirupathur and is a saved operator in the area approved scheme of the dharmapuri district and vellore district, and also claims to be a protected operator under tamil nadu act.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : III(2005)BC210; 2005(1)CTC684; (2005)1MLJ672
.....nagarajamma vs. state bank of india, cuttapah and others, wherein also it was mentioned that on the death of one of the depositors, the resultant factor is trust and the money becomes absolute property of deceased and is payable to his heirs in the absence of contrary intention. it was further mentioned that there is a resulting trust in his favour in the absence of proof of a contrary intention, there being no presumption of intended advancement in favour of the other person. in the instant case, there is no pleading or proof or any document showing that sengoda gounder has gifted in favour of parvathy, one of the heirs, while sengoda gounder had two sons and four daughters.9. the counsel for the appellant/plaintiff again submitted : air2005sc29 anumati v. punjab national bank, wherein in para 12 it was mentioned as follows:'12. .... the fixed deposit receipt is merely a written acknowledgement by the bank that it holds a certain sum to the use of its customers and that the bank is thus a debtor to the account-holders in respect of the amount deposited - a debt which is repayable by the bank to the account-holders with interest on expiry of an agreed period. an 'either or.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2005)2MLJ40
.....the proposed punishment of dismissal. 3. in our opinion, the writ petition itself was premature, since a writ can be filed only when a cause of action has arisen. in this case no dismissal order was served, but the members of the petitioner-association were only directed to submit explanation for the proposed punishment of dismissal. hence, no cause of action had arisen when the writ petition was filed. (subsequently, the dismissal order was passed) in our opinion the writ petition itself should not have been entertained in view of the recent division bench decision of this court in indian additives ltd. v. indian additives employees' union , in which we have followed the rulings of the supreme court in u.p. state bridge corporation ltd. v. u.p. rajya setu nigam s. karamchari sangh 200 (4) scc 268 as well as in rajasthan state road transport corporation v. krishna kant and it has been observed that such writ petition should be dismissed on the ground of alternative remedy under the industrial disputes act. moreover, in special director v. mohd. ghulam ghouse, , and in executive engineer v. r.k. singh, , it has been held that ordinarily writ petitions should not be.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2005(2)CTC84; (2005)2MLJ1
.....of customs and central excise on ad hoc basis from 16.12.2002. aggrieved by the said order, the present writ petition is preferred.4. the brief facts which are required for the disposal of the above writ petition alone are stated hereunder:k. ravindrakumar, first respondent herein joined the service on 10.7.1992 as an appraiser. on 13.4.1998, he was transferred from chennai custom house to custom house, jaipur. during 1998, he allowed the export of consignments of over invoiced, low quality garments in the name of m/s. glowbus office equipments (p) limited involving duty drawback. ten shipping bills from s.no. 000013 to 000022 dated 3.9.1998 were filed by c.m. chauhan in the name of m/s. glowbus office equipments (p) ltd., at icd, udaipur before the first respondent, falsely showing the export of readymade garments with an exorbitant value of rs. 2,71,14,300 being exported to m/s. m. trade middle east trading, dubai, u.a.e., with dishonest and fraudulent intention to claim and receive duty drawback amounting to rs. 46,09,431.00. the above shipping bills were entertained by the first respondent for further processing and he put his signature dated 3.9.1998 on each shipping.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2005(2)CTC277
.....and to pay a fine of rs. 1000, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under section 302, i. p. c.2. the brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:(a) p.w.1 lakshmi is the mother of the deceased chandra and p.w.2 sasikumar is her brother. the deceased was deserted by her husband and living in the house of her mother p.w.1. the house of accused bass alias jayabaskaran is 100 ft. away from the house of p.w.1. there was a vacant sight between these two houses, which was used by the family of p.w.1. this has given rise to frequent quarrels between the family of the deceased and the accused.(b) on 2.11.1999, at about 8.00 p.m., p.w.1 asked the deceased to go to shop and purchase groundnut cakes for the cattle, for which she gave rs. 100 to her. p.w.2 was also present at that time. the deceased wanted to answer the call of nature (urinate) and thereafter to go to purchase groundnut cakes for the cattle. at that time, the accused went towards the site where the deceased was proceeding to answer the call of nature. both p.ws. l and 2 seen this. when chandra was coming near the house of the accused, the accused prevented her from moving.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR2005Cal326,(2005)2CALLT104(HC),2005(2)CHN357
.....regulatory commission with regard to the electricity tariff for the years 2000-01 and 2001-02 to be charged by cesc ltd. from its consumers. in fact, the appeal has been argued on behalf of the appellants by shri suresh agarwal, the appellant no. 2 and the honorary general secretary of the petitioner association.2. appearing in support of the appeal, mr. agarwal submitted that prior to 1948 tariff determination was done by a rating committee under the electricity (supply) act, 1948, wherein the consumers had no role to play. the provisions for such rating committee contained under section 57a of the aforesaid act, 1948, was replaced by the electricity regulatory commission act, 1998, whereunder the commission was empowered to determine the tariff of any utility. according to mr. agarwal, by the said act of 1998 the consumer was for the first time given a right to participate and represent in the proceedings before the commission for the purpose of determining the tariff under section 29(2) of the 1998 act. section 27 of the 1998 act provides for a right of appeal to the high court against determination of tariff by the commission and as indicated hereinabove, the instant.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT