Chhattisgarh Court July 2014 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Vridhichand Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-17-2014
1. Questioning the legality, validity and correctness of the judgment affirming the applicants conviction for offence under Section 25(1B) (b) of the Arms Act, 1959 (henceforth the Act, 1959) and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.2,000, the applicant has preferred the instant revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (henceforth CrPC). 2. The prosecution case, in brief, as unfolded during the course of trial, is as under:- 2.1 On 15-2-2005, at around 7:05 p.m., on a secret information received to the Assistant Sub-Inspector B.P. Rajwade (PW-2), who, on that date, was a Head Constable in Police Chowki Koriya, when they were on patrolling duty, that one person is roaming around with a Gandasa, which is a prohibited arms and upon which, they reached on the spot and seized the gandasa admeasuring 10.5 inches long, width 2 inches and total length of the Gandasa is 14.5 inches which is an arms within the measuring of ...
C.S. Tiwari Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-16-2014
1. Invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (henceforth Cr PC), applicant C.S. Tiwari, Executive Director (Works) and Occupier of Continuous Casting Shop, Bhilai Steel Plant, Bhilai has filed the instant revision calling in question the order dated 29-04-2005 passed by the State Industrial Court, Chhattisgarh, Raipur in Criminal Appeal No.8/M.P.I.R.Act/IV /2003 (State of Chhattisgarh v. C.S. Tiwari) and Criminal Appeal No.9/M.P.I.R.Act/IV/2003 (State of Chhattisgarh v. C.S. Tiwari) by which the State Industrial Court reversed the order of acquittal dated 30-04-2003 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Labour Court, Durg in Criminal Case No.480/2000/ Factory Act/Fatal (Inspector of Factories v. C.S. Tiwari) and Case No.481/Category-4/2000/Factory Act/Cri. (Inspector of Factories v. C.S. Tiwari) and sentenced the applicant to pay fine of Rupees One Lakh. 2. The necessary facts, as projecte...
Rekhraj Baghel Vs. High Court of Chhattisgarh and Another
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
1. The petitioner has called in question the decision of respondent No.1 declaring him to be ineligible to participate in the District Judge (Entry Level) Direct Recruitment Examination, 2014 on the ground that on the cut off date i.e. 1.1.2014 he has not attained the age of 35 years. 2. The subject recruitment is governed by the provisions contained in the Chhattisgarh Higher Judicial Service (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 2006. Rule 7 of the said Rules provides thus:- 7. Qualification for direct recruitment under clause (c) of sub-rule 1 of rule 5- (i) No person shall be eligible for appointment by direct recruitment unless, he or she- (a) is a citizen of India, (b) has attained the age of 35 years and has not attained the age of 45 years on the first day of January in the year in which applications for appointment are invited, provided that upper age limit shall be relaxed upto a maximum limit of 3 years for the candidates belonging to Scheduled Caste, Scheduled Trib...
Arjun Gop and Another Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
1. Invoking the revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (henceforth Cr. P.C.), the applicants, two in numbers, languishing in jail, have filed the instant revision questioning the legality and correctness of the order dated 18-6-2014 passed by the appellate Court in Criminal Appeal No. 19/2004 declining to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 389(1), Cr. P.C. to suspend the sentence during the pendency of the appeal. 2. The facts, in brief, are as under: 2.1 Applicants Arjun Gop and Manoj Das stood convicted for offence under Sections 34(1)(a), 34(2) and 59-A of the Chhattisgarh Excise Act, 1915 (henceforth the Act, 1915) and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.25,000 each. It is also stood on record that as on 18-6-2014, applicant Arjun Gop had remained in custody for six months and four days and applicant Manoj Das for four months. 2.2 In an appeal filed under Se...
M/s. Manav Mandir Hotel Vs. Regional Provident Fund Commissioner and A ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
1. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 24-08-1999 (Annexure P-4) passed by the respondent No.1/Regional Provident Fund Commissioner (for short 'the RPFC') in a proceeding under Section 7A of the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short 'the Act, 1952') and the appellate order dated 18-07-2005 (Annexure P-7) passed by the Employees Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short 'the Tribunal') holding that the provisions of the Act, 1952 is applicable to the petitioner establishment by clubbing it with Manav Mandir Hotel, Manav Bhojanalya and Uttam Sweets for the purpose of employment strength and is, thus, coverable under the Act, 1952 w.e.f. 01-06-1978. 2. The matter had earlier traveled up to the High Court when the petitioner challenged the order passed by the RPFC on 08-02-1983 to the same effect, which was challenged by the petitioner by filing W.P. No.320 of 1983. In the earlier round of litigation also, enquiry was conduc...
Anil Kumar Jain Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-15-2014
1. Questioning the legality, validity and correctness of the impugned judgment dated 15-9-2003 affirming the conviction and sentence awarded to the applicant for offence punishable under Sections 27 (b) (ii) and 28 of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 (henceforth the Act, 1940), sole applicant Anil Kumar Jain has laid the instant revision under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (henceforth CrPC). 2. The prosecution case, as unfolded during the course of trial by the State, is briefly stated as under: 2.1 Complainant Parmanand Washani (PW-1) made a written complaint (Ex.P-7) to Sub-Divisional Officer, Dhamtari on 3-9-1998, who, in turn, forwarded the same to the Deputy Director, Food and Drugs Administration vide memo dated 14-9-1998 (Ex.P-6) stating that some ointment named and styled as Dinesh Kendua Malham is being sold in the rural area without manufacturing licence number, batch number, manufacturing date, expiry date etc. During inquiry of t...
Phillip Chand Goyal and Another Vs. State of Chhattisgarh
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-14-2014
1. Case of the applicants is that they are claiming bail not on the merits of the case but on the sole ground of not getting a speedy trial or in other words because of the delay in trial. 2. Facts of the case are that the applicants are said to have committed murder of the deceased in broad day light and the case was placed before the committal Court on 05.01.2013. The matter after committal was registered as Sessions Trial No.14/2013 by the Sessions Judge who thereafter vide order dated 23.01.2013 transferred the matter to be tried by the third Additional Sessions Judge. 3. From the facts which has been provided by the applicants in the bail application it is reflected that the charge has been framed against the applicants for the offence u/s 302/34 of IPC and 25 (1) (b) (B) of Arms Act. It is further reflected that the evidence in the instant case started on 25.03.2013 and till 28.09.2013 about 18 witnesses have been examined. Subsequently, as the Court was lying vacant, the trial ...
State of Chhattisgarh Vs. The Board of Revenue, Bilaspur and Others
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-14-2014
1. This petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is preferred against order dated 31-1-2009 passed by the Board of Revenue in the matter of appeal preferred by 2nd respondent whereby the Board of Revenue has set aside the order of the Collector, Stamps. 2. Briefly stated facts necessary for determination of the controversy involved in the writ petition are that the 2nd respondent purchased an open land admeasuring 24,614 sq. ft. 0.56.5 acres 0.229 hectares from respondent No. 3 vide sale deed dated 20-4-2005. For the purposes of payment and affixation of stamp duty leviable in respect of the sale transaction, the parties to sale disclose and stated Rs. 19,23,500/- as the valuation of land. However, as per the existing guidelines published by the Collector, the market value of the property being Rs. 21,06,000/-, stamp duty of Rs. 2,08,070/- on the market value of Rs. 21,07,000/- was paid. The registering authority accepted the valuation and proceeded to register the sale ...
M/s. Panch Raghou Taank Ramnivas Sarda and Co. Vs. Hindustan Petroleum ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-11-2014
1. The substantial question of law formulated and to be answered by this Court in this plaintiffs second appeal is as under: Whether both the Courts below are justified in dismissing the plaintiffs suit holding that there is an automatic renewal of lease in favour of defendant ignoring the fact that lease was never renewed under Section 5(2) read with Section 7(3) of the Esso (Acquisition of Undertakings in India) Act, 1974 (Act No. 4 of 1974) or by the agreement between the parties, by recording a perverse finding? [For sake of convenience, the parties would be referred hereinafter as per their status shown in the suit before the trial Court]. 2. Sans unnecessary details, the facts which are essential to be stated for the purpose of disposal of the present second appeal are as under: 2.1 M/s. Pancha Raghou Taank Ramniwas Sarda and Co. (a partnership firm) instituted a suit against the defendant-Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. for eviction and possession of the plot (scheduled sui...
Income Tax Officer (TDS) Raipur C.G. Vs. Naya Raipur Development Autho ...
Court: Chhattisgarh
Decided on: Jul-11-2014
1. The only point involved here is, 'Whether the land acquired by agreement by the Assessee under the Chhattisgarh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 (the Nivesh-Act) is compulsory acquisition within the meaning of section 194 LA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the IT-Act) or not?' It arises in this tax case that is filed against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Raipur Bench, Raipur (the Tribunal) dated 19.07.2013 allowing the appeal of the Naya Raipur Development Authority, Raipur (the Assessee) for the Assessment Year (the AY) 2008-09. THE FACTS 2. Raipur is the capital of Chhattisgarh. The State decided to build a capital city adjacent to the existing Raipur and for this purpose, an authority in the name of Raipur Capital Area Development Authority was constituted under section 64 of the Nivesh-Act. It was later on re-named as Naya Raipur Development Authority, (the Assessee). 3. The Assessee acquired land within its area in the AY 2007-2008 and paid consideration t...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- Next ›
- Last »