.....the respondents no.2 to 8 are the joint owners of the suit property is also a matter of evidence and requires trial for its adjudication.” the factual background of this case stands already noted in the opening paragraph of the impugned judgment and needs no reiteration. at the hearing, it was contended by learned counsel for appellantsdefendants that the respondent-plaintiff cannot proceed with their suit for possession on the basis of general power of attorney, as general power of attorney sales have been held to be not valid by the apex court in suraj lamp & industries vs. state of haryana & anr. (2012) 1 scc656 it was vehemently urged by learned counsel for appellants that without the consent of co-sharers, the suit property cannot be sold and due to this infirmity, the suit of the respondent-plaintiff is not maintainable and the impugned judgment deserves to be set aside and the trial court judgment ought to be restored. upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned judgment and trial rsa no.330/2014 page 2 court judgment, i find that the question whether the subject property could be sold without the consent of co-sharers is an aspect which is required to be decided at.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....where the wrong is basically to the victim and the offender and the victim have settled all disputes between them amicably, irrespective of the fact that such offences have not been made compoundable, the high court may within the framework of its inherent power, quash the criminal proceeding or criminal complaint or fir if it is satisfied that on the face of such settlement, there is hardly any likelihood of the offender being convicted and by not quashing the criminal proceedings, justice shall be casualty and ends of justice shall be defeated.” and also in narinder singh and ors. v. state of punjab and anr. 2014(2) crimes 67 (sc) where the supreme court held as follows:“29. in view of the aforesaid discussion, we sum up and lay down the following principles by which the high court would be guided in giving adequate treatment to the settlement between the parties and exercising its power under section 482 of the code while accepting the settlement and quashing the proceedings or refusing to accept the settlement with direction to continue with the criminal proceedings:29. 1 power conferred under section 482 of the code is to be distinguished from the power which lies.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....section 4 of the land acquisition act, 1894. learned counsel for appellant fairly concedes that costs imposed vide order of 17th february, 2014 have not yet been paid and undertakes on behalf of appellant that cost of `500/- would be deposited with the advocates welfare fund within six weeks. let it be so done. upon hearing and on perusal of the impugned judgment which relies upon a decision of a coordinate bench of this court in la.app no.la.app no.74/2014 page 1 266/2008, ‘jai singh vs. uoi & anr.’, rendered on 23rd august, 2011, this court finds no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. as a result thereof, this appeal is dismissed, with no order as to costs. (sunil gaur) judge november12 2014 r la.app no.74/2014 page 2
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....out that one day prior there were heated arguments between the deceased and attar singh and his two sons gave death threats to his father. the factual matrix of the case as set out in the fir are that on 30.03.2014 complainant jay singh, who is son of the deceased, lodged a report that at about 1:30 a.m. in the intervening night of 29/30.03.2014 when he was sleeping at his house he heard some voices from outside his house. after hearing them he went outside and saw that attar singh (applicant) and his sons rakesh and vinod @ meenu were beating his father on the street near the drain. when he reached there to protect his father they pushed him and ran away, he fell down on the street and started shouting in anxiousness, hearing which his sons naveen and amit also came at the place of incident and took their grandfather inside the house. he also stated that at night due to anxiousness he did not inform the police. in the morning at about 7:30 a.m. when he went to his father‟s room he saw blood on the face of his father, his upper clothes were torn, his clothes had blood stains on them and he was lying dead. thereafter, the matter was reported to the police. he has also.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....chose not to furnish/declare the information regarding previous service, when it was asked for. you have thereby willfully suppressed the material fact, regarding vrs in the 'employment questionnaire', at the time of interview, on 09.07.2007. (c) you did not return the voluntary retirement benefits received from sail, despite having been advised by the mro division vide letter no. h/a/sm(hr)- mro/95349/451/09 dt 23.01.2009. further, in reply to another letter from sm(hr)-mro dt 14.11.2009, reminding you to return the amount, it was informed by you that you are expecting certain clarification from it department. it is understood that the amount has not yet been returned by you to sail, even after a lapse of more than two years." a copy of the enquiry report was furnished to respondent no.1 and he was asked to give reply to the enquiry report. respondent no.1 gave reply by letter dated 7.2.2013 (annexure-t2), which was communicated on 4.3.2013 (annexure-t3). the disciplinary authority, namely the managing director of helicopter division, considering the reply as also the submission made by respondent no.1, passed an order of dismissal dated 18.3.3013 (annexure-v). respondent no.1.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....referred to as ‘the act’).2. since all these petitions involve similar question of law, they are being disposed of by this common order.3. the factual matrix of the case is that the petitioner is the sole proprietor of m/s. kishan lal building construction, which is an establishment within the meaning of the employees’ provident funds and miscellaneous provisions act, 1952 and is the person in-charge of the said establishment for its day-to-day business. the said establishment has been allotted code no.dl/12261. the case against the petitioner is that the petitioner failed to pay the employees’ pension fund contribution within the stipulated period and violated the provisions of paragraph 4 of employees pension scheme, 1995 and section 6-a(2) of the act and thus committed an offence punishable under section 14(1a) of the act.4. learned counsel for the petitioner urges that during pendency of the case, the petitioner has deposited the entire amount as per demand of the respondent, which fact was confirmed before the trial court on 21.10.2013 by the enforcement officer of the respondent/ complainant. he also submits that the petitioner has already cleared the outstanding.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....case of sk. sattar sk. mohd. choudhari (supra). (ii) in my opinion, the judgments which are relied upon by the petitioner have no application to the facts of the case because no doubt ordinarily a landlord cannot split up the tenancy and eviction cannot be claimed only for a part of the tenanted premises, however, the position in law is different when there are more than one landlords who partition the tenanted premises. after partitioning of the tenanted premises, if part of the tenanted premises fall to the share of one landlord the position is squarely decided in the judgment in the case of kartaram rameshwardas (supra) which follows the earlier judgment in the case of sk. sattar sk. mohd. choudhari (supra) which holds that when on partition one landlord receives part of the tenanted premises, he can file eviction petition with respect to that portion of the tenanted premises which falls to his share. supreme court in the case of sk. sattar sk. mohd. choudhari (supra) has dealt with in detail that this is permissible in view of the different provisions of the transfer of property act, 1882 which recognizes splitting up of the tenanted premises after partitioning of the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....was not served although the same was posted to the correct address. admittedly, the appellant/defendant led no evidence in the trial court. in fact, even leading of evidence in rebuttal by the appellant would not have ordinarily helped the appellant as the notice was sent to the correct address. in my opinion, therefore, the trial court was justified in arriving at a finding that the legal notice dated 15.7.2006 was duly served upon the appellant resulting in termination of the tenancy. (ii) the supreme court in the case of nopany investments (p)ltd. vs.santokh singh (huf) 2008 (2) scc728has held that the tenancy would stand terminated under general law on filing of a suit for eviction. accordingly, in view of the decision in the case of nopany (supra) i hold that even assuming the notice terminating tenancy was not served upon the appellant (though it has been served and as held by me above) the tenancy would stand terminated on filing of the subject suit against the appellant/defendant. (iii) in the suits for rendition of accounts of a dissolved partnership at will and partition of huf property, ordinarily it is required that a notice be given of dissolving the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....the driver of the offending truck, the tribunal noted the evidence of pw2 mr. nitin tyagi who was an eye witness. the tribunal also noted about the fact that a charge sheet has been filed against respondent no.1. further the tribunal relying on the copy of the site plan placed on record noted that the deceased was driving his car just prior to the accident on the wrong side of the road, namely on the right side whereas he should have driven his car on the left side. this conclusion was based on the site plan placed on record. hence, the tribunal concluded and held that the deceased and respondent no.1 were equally rash and negligent due to which the accident took place. on compensation, the tribunal awarded the following compensation:3. 1. loss of dependency 19,32,840/- 2. loss of consortium 10,000/- 3. loss of estate 10,000/- 4. loss of love and affection 25,000/- 5. funeral expenses 5,000/- 6. 19,82,840/- total the tribunal held the deceased also negligent in driving the car, the respondent insurance company was held liable to pay half of the compensation amount i.e. rs.9,91,420/-.4. learned counsel appearing for the appellant challenges the findings of the tribunal holding.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT.....jyoti tyagi, advocate for mr.yeeshu jain, advocate for respondent no.1 coram: hon'ble mr. justice sunil gaur judgment (oral) c.m. no.13496/2014 (u/o9rule 9 r/w sec. 151 cpc) restoration of the accompanying appeal is sought by this application as it was dismissed in default on 17th july, 2014. the reasons stated in paragraphs no.6 to 9 of the instant application provide sufficient cause to allow this application and it is therefore allowed and the accompanying appeal is restored to its original position. application is disposed of. c.m. no.4790/2014 (condonation of delay) & la.app no.159/2014 the delay in filing the accompanying appeal is of about three years. la.app no.159/2014 page 1 a vain effort is made by appellant’s counsel to explain the inordinate delay by asserting that the counsel, who had represented case of appellant before the reference court, had applied for certified copy of impugned judgment of 28th october, 2010 and had obtained it in december, 2010 and due to heavy work load of counsel and his slip of sight, the said certified copies were kept with other files and so, could not be handed over to appellant. it is averred in the application that it is only when.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT