Jammu and Kashmir Court December 1998 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.
Himalaya Construction Vs. Executive Engineer
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Dec-30-1998
Reported in: AIR2000J& K19
1. An arbitrator entering upon a reference under an arbitration agreement by virtue of his holding an office in connection with the affairs of the State of Jammu and Kashmir cannot make an award when he ceased to hold the office on account of his having demitted the office having retired from service is the main argument put across by the learned Addl. Advocate General who is appearing for the State functionaries. The other questions which have arisen are whether an award could be given vis-a-vis a matter regarding which any of the parties approached a civil Court would have failed on account of bar limitation. Misconduct has also been attributed to the arbitrator. The basis for this is that the arbitrator did not permit the appellants to have the assistance of a legal practitioner. In addition to the jurisdictional points referred to above argument vis-a-vis rate of interest which could be awarded when proceedings are taken under the Arbitration Act is also being adverted to by both t...
Tariq Ahmad Gogia Vs. State and ors.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Dec-29-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ2166
ORDERSyed Bashir-Ud-Din, J. 1. Tariq Ahmad Gogia has been detained for a period of twelve months in terms of Section 8 of J. & K. Public Safety Act under orders of April 22, 1998 of District magistrate Srinagar-respondent No. 2. This order is impugned in this petition by the petitioner through his father.2. Detenu is alleged to have been arrested on 27-2-1998 and thereafter taken in preventive detention as above. It is alleged that the provisions of Public Safety Act regarding reference of his detention case to Advisory Board and producing the detenu before the Advisory Board have been violated. The detenu has been detained on vague, indefinite and omnibus allegations. The order suffers from non-application of mind and lacks in subjective satisfaction. The detenu has not been served with order of detention nor the material referred in the grounds has been supplied to him. The grounds of detention have not been supplied to the detenu in the language which he understood. The detention gr...
Shahid Sheikh Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir and ors.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Dec-28-1998
Reported in: 2000CriLJ298
ORDERArun Kumar Goel, J. 1. This revision is directed against the order dated 23-12-1997 passed by Sessions Judge, Jammu. By means of impugned order it has been held that on examination of the materials on record there exists prima facie case against the petitioner and respondents 2 to 4 for sending them to trial, and consequently charge under Section 3 of J & K Prevention & Separation of Sabotage Act, 1965; Sections 302/307 read with Section 120-B, RPC has been ordered to be framed against the petitioner and respondents 2 to 4.2. Case as setup in the Court below against all the accused is that on 29-3-1997 respondents with a criminal intent planted explosive device (RDX) in an Ambassador Car as also in its dicky. While doing so accused were well aware that explosion of RDX would cause loss of human lives as well as property. This car was brought pursuant to a conspiracy hatched on the night intervening 15-16 March, 1997 at Baba Muslim Hotel, Talab Kharikan, Jammu, when it was decided ...
Krishan Chand Ganesh Dass Girdari Lal and Co. Vs. Inspecting Assistant ...
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Dec-11-1998
Reported in: [2001]248ITR196(J& K)
T.S. Doabia, J.1. The circumstances under which this petition has come to be filed be noticed.2. The petitioner is an assessee under the Income-tax Act, 1961. It submitted its return for the assessment year 1985-86. The assessment was made on November 29, 1985. The income as indicated by the assessee wasaccepted. While making this assessment, the Assessing Officer took note of the past practice. This was followed. The total turnover, the taxable income was determined by applying a fixed percentage of 11 per cent.3. The further fact is that on January 15, 1987, a letter was addressed to the assessee. In this, it was pointed out that a search and seizure was conducted at the premises of the assessee. Some stock registers were seized. These registers indicated some facts and figures regarding closing stocks. The stock which was in transit was also said to have been indicated.4. On the basis of the information so acquired, the Inspecting Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Jammu, who is ...
Arun Prakash Vs. Jammu Dev. Authority and ors.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Dec-11-1998
Reported in: AIR1999J& K123
ORDERO.P. Sharma, J. 1. The case of the petitioner is that his Unit, namely, M/s. Everest Service Station stands registered with the Industries Department since 1985 and was thus entitled to allotment of one and half Kanals of land for establishing the said Unit: Accordingly, he applied for allotment of land to respondent No. 1. However, while his application was pending, respondent No. 1 made allotment of land measuring 50' x 100' in favour of respondent No. 4 for running a Service Station at Transport Nagar, Jammu vide order dated 24-8-1988. During the pendency of the petition, the respondents, it is also alleged, made further allotments in favour of respondents 5 to 8. The petitioner challenges the allotment of land in favour of respondents 4 to 8 on the ground that it has been made without following any criteria in illegal and arbitrary manner. He also seeks a direction against the official respondents to give him similar treatment by allotting land in Transport Nagar, Jammu.2. In ...
Ali Mohmmad Bhat Vs. Mst Zia Begum and anr.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Dec-08-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ2169
ORDERSyed Bashir-Ud-Din, J.1. Order of February 18, 1998 of Judicial Magistrate Bandipora, in 488, Cr.P.C. proceedings file (miscellaneous) of 1989 on the file of Bandipora Judicial Magistrate's Court, awarding maintenance of Rs. 250/- to Mst. Zia Bequm and Rs. 300/- to Farooq Ahmad S/o; AH Mohmmad Bhat from 29-8-1989 (date of filing of application), is impugned in this revision.2. Mst. Zia Bequm on her behalf and on behalf of her son Farooq Ahmad Bhat, filed an application for maintenance before Judicial Magistrate Bandipora on 29-8-89, on the ground that her husband AH Mohmmad Bhat and father of Farooq Ahmad Bhat, has turned out both mother and son from her matrimonial home after said AH Mohd Bhat brought his first wife Mst. Sara to his house. Mst Zia Begum is not being paid maintenance although.3. After the process for maintenance proceedings were initiated by the Magistrate, it appears that though the non-applicant AH Mohmmad failed to appear during the period from 20-12-89 to 12-2...
ishfaq HussaIn Beigh Vs. State of J. and K. and anr.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Dec-08-1998
Reported in: 1999CriLJ3098
ORDERSyed Bashir-Ud-Din, J. 1. 1. Ishfaq Hussain Beigh, petitioner was arrested by Security forces on 14-2-1998 from his residence at Ikhrajpora, Srinagar. Later on, he was detained under Section 8 of the Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, by District Magistrate Srinagar Respondent No. 2, under order dated 30-4-1998 (Annexure A) for a period of 15 months. The father of detenu Ishfaq Hussain Beg has challenged his detention on following grounds:--2. The detention order suffers from non-application of mind and has been passed mechanically. The detaining authority has not shown awareness about the custody of detenu in the regular case nor any reason has been given for simultaneously detaining him under the provisions of Public Safety Act despite his detention in the regular case. The order of detention as also the material on which grounds of detention have been based, have not been served on him. The copy of FIR as also the other material referred to in the grounds of detention has not...
Wasthim Travels and Tours Vs. J. and K. Bank Ltd. and anr.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Dec-03-1998
Reported in: AIR1999J& K88
1. This appeal is directed against the order dt. 15-10-1998 passed by the Jammu and Kashmir States Consumers Protection Commission, whereby complaint of the appellant herein (complaint No. 219/95) was not entertained on the grounds that it contained stale claims. 2. The factual matrix of the case is that in the year 1987, the appellant was carrying on the business of a Travel Agent and had organised a tour of the pilgrims to a foreign country. The expenses to be incurred for this pilgrimage were deposited by the appellant in the Saving Account No. 796 maintained by respondent. This was done for the purpose of getting foreign exchange. On 24-1-89, a sum of rupees One Lakh Twenty Thousand was deducted on account of travel Tax. The appellant contends that the said amount could not be deducted because pilgrimage tour had been exempted from paying travelling tax. According to him, the respondent had failed to render service to him as a consumer. 3. Respondent had contested the claim of the ...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›