Advanced Search Results

Major Uday Nangia, Officer's Mess, Officers Training Academy Vs. the A ...

Court : Chennai

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 109, 125, 135, 153 and 164; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) ; Indian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 285, 306 and 498A; Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 3(1), 34, 34(1), 136, 137 and 137(2)

Reported in : (2007)4MLJ140

taken by the second respondent General Court Martial [for short, 'GCM'] exercising option under Section 125 of the Army Act, 1950, which reads as under:Section 125. Choice between criminal court and court-martialWhen a criminal court and a court-martial have … Army Act and particularly, to Section 135 of the Army Act as well as Rules 34, 136 and 137 of the Army Rules, which read as follows:Section 135. Summoning witnesses(1) The convening officer, the presiding officer of

Subedar Kashmira Singh Vs. Government of India, Rep. by Its Secretary, ...

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 55, 63, 90, 93 and 95; Army Rules, 1954 - Rule 137; Service Law

Reported in : 1997(2)ALD(Cri)42; 1997(2)ALT311

the action tantamounted to double jeopardy, violative of Article 20 of the Constitution and Section 121 of the Army Act, 1950, for short 'the Act', and Rule 53 of the Rules; summary of evidence was recorded contrary to the

Virendra Sharma Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Rajasthan

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 71, 154, 160, 162 and 164(2); Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 34(1), 35(1), 57, 58(2), 58(3), 59, 59-A, 62, 68, 137 and 149; Constitution of India - Articles 21, 32, 33, 226 and 227; Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) , 1973; Evidence Act; Army Regulation, 1987

Reported in : 2002(1)WLN252

orders thereto and the order dated 4.7.1991 (Annex. 10-A) by which his petition under Section 164(2) of the Army Act, 1950 (for short, 'the Act') has been rejected by the Central Government. (2). The facts and circumstances giving rise … cost of the State, therefore, on this ground the petitioner cannot succeed. Further, consideration of requirement of rule 137 of the Rules, which provides for meeting the expenses etc. also becomes irrelevant. (34). The another grievance raised

R. Chatterjee Vs. Sub Area Commander H.Q. Madras

Court : Chennai

Subject : Criminal

Acts : Indian Army Act, 1911 - Sections 2 and 2(2); Constitution of India - Articles 33, 35 and 372

Reported in : AIR1951Mad777; (1951)1MLJ258

Act of 1911. In parenthesis it may be stated that Act No. XLVI [46] of 1950 designated the Army Act, 1950 which came into force on 22-6-1950, though it has no direct appln. to the present case, can also … & not the terms of contract as alleged by the petnr. is evident from a perusal of various sections of the Army Act. It has also to be noted that the so-called contract as contained in annexure … contained inpara. 5 of chap. VIII of Manual of Military Law, p. 137. Chapter VIII deals with the Courts of Law in relation to officers

Union of India (Uoi) and ors. Vs. Ram Sunder Ram

Court : Kolkata

Subject : Civil

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 17, 19, 20 and 72; ;Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 13(3), 177 and 182; ;Air Force Rules - Rule 137; ;Constitution of India - Article 33

Reported in : 2005(4)CHN361

that the writ petitioner/ respondent was discharged from army service under the provisions of section 20 of the Army Act, 1950 read with Army Rules 13(3)(V) read with Clause (v) of the Table and after affording the writ petitioner/respondent … in the case of S. K. Rao. In Cheema's case it was held that the object of Rule 137(g) of Air Force Rules is that the statements recorded in the Court of Inquiry shall not be admissible

Fedders Lloyd Corporation Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Fedders Corporation a ...

Court : Delhi

Subject : Intellectual Property RightsLimitation

Acts : Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958 - Sections 46(l)(6) and 46(3); Limitation Act, 1963 - Schedule - Article 137

Reported in : 1997VIAD(Delhi)53; 1997(2)ARBLR84(Delhi); 69(1997)DLT474; 1997(43)DRJ410

137 of the Limitation Act, 1963. - LABOUR & SERVICES Disability Pension: [Vikramajit Sen, Sanjiv Khanna & S.L.Bhayana,JJ] Army Act (46 of 1950), Section 192 & Pension Regulations for the Army (1961), Regulation. 173 Claimant was on casual

Capt. Kulwant Singh Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Principal Bench New Delhi

Subject : Land Acquisition

3rd July 2001 he was chargesheeted for committing two offences i.e. under Sections 52(b) and 57(a) of the Army Act i.e. dishonestly misappropriating property belonging to the government and in a letter signed by him knowingly making a … Artillery Brigade, an officer holding a permanent commission in the regular Army, is charged with:-Section 52(b) Army Act, 1950Dishonestly misappropriating property belonging to the Government In that he, at Allahabad, on 07 September 1998, having drawn a … seeks to be reinstated in service with all consequential benefits. T.A. No. 137 of 2010 has been filed with a view to seek protection from

N.R. Ajwani Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Delhi

Subject : Service

Acts : Army Act, 1950 - Sections 18, 19, 63, 69, 117(3), 154, 160(4) and 165; Army Rules, 1954 - Rules 17, 23, 23(5), 82(3) and 147A; Indian Official Secrets Act, 1923 - Sections 3, 3(1) and 5; Army Pension Regulations, 1961 - Regulations 3 and 22; Constitution of India - Articles 1, 11, 14, 19(1), 19(5), 21, 31(1), 33, 53, 74, 74(1), 77, 154, 163(1), 226, 309, 310, 310(1), 311, 311(2) and 356; Air Force Act, 1950 - Sections 18 and 19; Air Force Rules, 1969 - Rule 16; Railway Establishment Code - Rules 148, 148(3), 149 and 149(3); Government of India Act, 1919 - Sections 96B; Constitution of India (Fiftieth Amendment) Act, 1984

Reported in : 95(2002)DLT770

neighbourly relations.' 35. The argument before the learned Single Judge was that order under Section 18 of the Army Act, 1950 had been passed without any justifiable reasons and it is an order of dismissal on account of misconduct

Subhash Chandra Sarkar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Madhya Pradesh

Subject : Service

Acts : Constitution of India - Articles 226 and 227; Army Act, 1950 - Sections 41 and 164; Army Rules, 1954 - Rule 25

Reported in : AIR1973MP191; (1972)IILLJ611MP

226 of the Constitution would be able to interfere with the decision of a Court constituted under the Army Act, 1950, subject to the limitations pertaining to interference with decisions of Special Tribunals of course, as provided by Sub-clause … Lordships of the Supreme Court, in Satyanarayan v. Mallikariun, AIR 1960 SC 137 observed that--'Is the conclusion wrong and if so, is such error apparent … such he could not have been tried by the General Court-Martial. On that contention the petitioner's conviction under Section 304 read with Section 149, Indian Penal Code and the sentence of six years' rigorous imprisonment was sought

Extra Judl.Exec.Victim Families Assnandanr Vs. Union of India and Anr

Court : Supreme Court of India

Subject : Land Acquisition

that “a militant or terrorist or insurgent, is an ‘Enemy’ within the aforesaid definition [Section 3(x) of the Army Act, 1950]. and it is the bounden duty of all Army Personnel to act against a militant or a terrorist