.....opposite party no. 1-writ petitioner and undertakes to file vakalatnama within a week. let the matter appear under the appropriate heading.”2. the factum that the present petitioner had filed an intervention application during pendency of the writ petition being wpc no. 7567/2011, is not in dispute. the factum that on 26.04.2013 when the matter was taken up on mentioning by the counsel for the respondent no. 4 – deoghar municipal corporation, learned counsel for the intervener was not informed. it therefore leads to the impression that though, interventionist had stake in the matter, but writ petition was decided in his absence. the order dated 26.04.2013 passed in wpc no. 7567/2011, of which review is being sought, reads as under: “heard counsel for the parties. the writ petition has been posted today on mentioning by the respondent no. 4-deoghar municipal corporation.2. the simple grievance of the petitioner herein is that he has made an application before the respondent corporation on 5th of june 2006 for passing necessary orders under section 194 of the bihar municipal act, 1922 for granting permission to the petitioner to demolish the building as it is in dilapidated.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....opposite party no. 1-writ petitioner and undertakes to file vakalatnama within a week. let the matter appear under the appropriate heading.”2. the factum that the present petitioner had filed an intervention application during pendency of the writ petition being wpc no. 7567/2011, is not in dispute. the factum that on 26.04.2013 when the matter was taken up on mentioning by the counsel for the respondent no. 4 – deoghar municipal corporation, learned counsel for the intervener was not informed. it therefore leads to the impression that though, interventionist had stake in the matter, but writ petition was decided in his absence. the order dated 26.04.2013 passed in wpc no. 7567/2011, of which review is being sought, reads as under: “heard counsel for the parties. the writ petition has been posted today on mentioning by the respondent no. 4-deoghar municipal corporation.2. the simple grievance of the petitioner herein is that he has made an application before the respondent corporation on 5th of june 2006 for passing necessary orders under section 194 of the bihar municipal act, 1922 for granting permission to the petitioner to demolish the building as it is in dilapidated.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....it has been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that sisai (bharno) p.s. case no. 139 of 2014 is barred in law in view of the fact that with respect to the allegation made in the f.i.r. another case i.e. sisai (bharno) p.s. case no. 06 of 2013 had already been instituted and the statement of the informant of that case could not be a ground for instituting another f.i.r. learned counsel further submits that both the f.i.rs. relate to the same incident and the petitioner has been implicated on the basis of the investigation carried out in the first f.i.r. and such being improper in law, the entire criminal proceeding deserves to be quashed and set aside. learned counsel in support of his contention has referred the judgments of the hon’ble supreme court in the cases of t.t. antony v. state of kerala, (2001) 6 scc181reported in (2001) 6 scc181 babu bhai v. state of gujarat & others reported in (2010) 12 scc254and amitbhai anilchandra shah v. cbi reported in (2013) 6 scc348 5. mr. kaushik sarkhel, learned a.p.p. appearing for the state has submitted that initially the informant while instituting the first complaint had based her claim on certain information.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....had not sanctioned the 5th floor -2- with respect to the said flat and the sanctioned plan was only till fourth floor. on being aware of the factual position, the complainant had sent a pleader notice to the petitioner to return the amount of rs.8,32,750/- but in spite of returning the amount, on 19.05.2014, a notice was given to the complainant that since rest amount has not been deposited, the said amount shall be forfeited by them. based on the aforesaid allegation, p.c. case no. 136 of 2014 was instituted, in which after enquiry, cognizance was taken for the offence punishable under sections 420/34 of the indian penal code. mr. a. allam, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, has submitted that the petitioner at the relevant point of time was the branch manager of bank of india, telco town branch, p.o. p.s. telco, district-singhbhum east. it has been submitted that the auction was held and after depositing of certain amount by the complainant, documents were submitted to him. it has further been submitted that even bank was not aware of non sanctioning of plan of fifth floor of flat, for which the auction was held. learned senior counsel submits that although.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....to claim the medical benefits. the learned single judge dismissed the writ petition accepting the contention raised by the respondents. 6. the fact that the appellant was diagnosed with right orbital nerve sheath tumor with lesion in the year 1995 and he had undergone treatments at the sree chitra institute is not in dispute. he had undergone two major surgeries in 1995 and 1996 and a minor surgery in 1998. thereafter also he had undergone treatment at the sree chitra institute. the disease of the appellant has been named or described differently in different documents such as right orbital nerve sheath tumor with lesion, intra-orbital tumor, right orbital neurofibroma and neurofibroma orbital. a medical certificate dated 18-11-2015 issued by prof. s. nair, head of the department, sree chitra institute, shows that intra-orbital tumor, neurofibroma orbital and right orbital neurofibroma convey the same meaning. there is no dispute also with regard to the fact that the different names or descriptions of the disease used in the different documents convey the same meaning. 7. m/s thrissur cotton mills, where the appellant was employed, was closed down in the year 2004. however,.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....act 14 of 2013 ). 2. in view of the legal question that is involved in this writ petition, this court is only addressing the legal issue bereft of facts involved. 3. the petitioner is working as an officer apron in the ground services department (gsd) of air india limited, thiruvananthapuram. the icc of air india limited, southern region received a complaint forwarded by the airport director. this complaint alleged to have been raised by 17 lady employees of air india-sats (ai-sats), a joint venture company of air india and singapore air transport services limited. the committee conducted an enquiry against the petitioner based on the complaint. the report of the committee is produced as ext.p23. the issue in this writ petition is revolved around the validity of the enquiry report, on the ground of non compliance of principles of natural justice. 4. the case of the petitioner is that he was not given any opportunity in the matter and complaint as referred in the icc is a forged one by some officials of the joint venture company and some of the officers of the air india to wreck vengeance against the petitioner for having filed a complaint before the central bureau of.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....a particular system of medicine but practices in that system is a quack and a mere pretender. c. the drugs act was enacted to regulate import, manufacture, distribution, sale of drugs to curb the evil of adulteration and production of substandard drugs posing a serious threat to the health of the community; at the time of its enactment in 1940 it was not intended to apply to ayurvedic, siddha or unani drugs which were brought into its purview only by act 13 of 1964. section 33 which falls in chapter-iv of drugs act empowers central government to make rules for the purpose of giving effect to the provisions of chapter-iv which deals with manufacture, sale and distribution of drugs. section 33a says that chapter-iv shall not, except as provided in the act, apply to ayurvedic, siddha or unani drugs. d. that rule 2(ee) of the drugs rules defines a registered medical practitioner as a person (i) holding a qualification granted by an authority specified or notified under section 3 of the indian medical degrees act, 1916 or specified in the schedules to the mci act; or (ii) registered or eligible for registration in a medical register of a state meant for the registration of persons.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....115a or section 44bb of the act. 3. the present appeal was admitted on 08.01.2013 and the following questions of law were framed: 1. whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal erred in law in holding that the activity of 2d/3d seismic survey carried on by the appellant in connection with exploration of oil, was in the nature of "fees for technical services" in terms of explanation 2 to section 9(1)(vii) of the act? 2. whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal erred in law in holding that income of the appellant, in the nature of "fees for technical service" was liable to tax in india under section 44bb of the act only if the appellant had permanent establishment ("pe") in india in the relevant assessment year? 4. briefly stated, the relevant facts necessary to consider the disputes involved are as under:- 4.1 the assessee is a company incorporated under the laws of norway and is principally engaged in the business of providing geophysical services worldwide. these services include the services of acquiring and processing two dimensional and three dimensional seismic data (both on land and offshore). the acquisition of seismic data is.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....with its then secretary, n.k. arora, also issued no objection certificate to him to facilitate a sanction of loan from his employer bpcl despite the fact that the entire property of the society was mortgaged to dchfc which had given a loan for construction of the housing project. no objection certificate from the dchfc was never secured. the rules were further blatantly violated and a mandatory declaration-to the effect that neither he nor any of his dependents owned any property in delhi, (which was a condition sine qua non before the induction of any member in the society) was not taken from the petitioner. it is also submitted that the society did not have any right or authority to allot any plot or land to anyone since it was allotted to it on lease hold basis and it had no right to sell any part of it to anyone. despite such restriction, in violation of the terms of lease deed, the society fraudulently allotted a plot admeasuring about 300-400 square feet to the petitioner. it is further contended that any proceeding initiated after the passing of the new dcs act of 2003 is to be dealt with in terms of the provisions as per the provisions of the said act. it is not disputed.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....duties, levies, cess and any other charges leviable, including tax to be deducted at source, except that : (a) customs duties on 15 offshore manufactured trains and mock-up shall not be included in price. (b) excise duties (after availing modvat) as well as sales tax on finished 45 trains indigenously manufactured shall not be included in the price. (it should, however, be noted that the customs duties on the imported components and equipment as also the excise duties as well as sales tax on the indigenous components and equipment installed in the indigenously manufactured trains shall be included in the price). (c) customs duties on the imported spares, jigs, fixtures, special tools and diagnostic equipment etc. and excise duties, sales tax and other levies if any on the indigenous finished spares, jigs, fixtures, special tools and diagnostic equipments etc. sourced in india and supplied to the employer shall not be included in the price (it should, however, be noted that the customs duties on the imported components and equipments as also the excise duties as well as sales tax on the indigenous components and equipments installed in the indigenously manufactured spares,.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT