Jammu and Kashmir Court March 1999 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.
Anil Kohli Vs. Executive Officer, Municipal Council, Jammu and ors.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Mar-22-1999
Reported in: AIR2000J& K57
ORDERMunicipal land measuring 18012 Sft situated at Shakti Nagar was allotted in favour of M/s Kohli and Sons @ 200/- P.M. under Section 207 of Municipal Act. Whereas the said land was required for public purposes, it was therefore, resumed by cancelling the allotment. M/s Kohli and Sons Akhoor Road Jammu were accordingly informed vide letter No. 294-96/RB dated 23-7-1979. The allottee was also asked to surrender possession of the said land, and Whereas allottee preferred an appeal before the Minister of Local Self Govt. against the said order and the appeal was dismissed; and Whereas the firm was directed vide notice under Section 66-B vide No. 76/RB dated 28-5-1982 to show cause by or before 14-6-1982 why an order of eviction be not made against the firm; and Whereas in response to the above notice the firm filed objections that said land was no more property of the Municipality and that their case for allotment of the said piece of land was being processed by Nazool Authorities; and...
Sushil Kumar Khajuria and ors. Vs. State
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Mar-22-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ682,2003(3)JKJ168
A.M. Mir, J.1. This bunch of revision petitions has landed into this Bench by virtue of an order of reference made by a learned Single Bench of this Court on 24.8.1998. The question raised through the medium of these petitions is, as to whether or not C.B.I. Organisation is within its powers to investigate an offence in the State of Jammu & Kashmir and produce a challan before a criminal Court of competent jurisdiction. 2. The revision petitioners are public servants. C.B.I. registered cases against them, conducted investigation and finally produced challans. In Cr. Rev. Petition No. 89, the Additional Sessional Judge Jammu charged the accused for offences under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, and 468/471-RPC vide an order dated 21.12.1982 and in rest of the revision petitions accused was charge-sheeted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate Jammu under Section 409-RPC on 9.12.1986.3. Interestingly for the last twelve years these revision petitions have only adorned the over-burdened shelves of th...
State of Jammu and Kashmir Vs. Sheela Devi and ors.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Mar-22-1999
Reported in: 2000CriLJ2531
ORDERM.Y. Kawoosa, J.1. One Suresh Kumari daughter of Amar Nath was married to respondent No. 2-accused. For the last 5 years she remained issueless as a result of which her mother-in-law, husband and brother-in-law who are respondents/accused respectively used to taunt her with an intention to drive her from the house or to compel her to dissolve the marriage with respondent No. 2. On 9-9-1997 also she was nagged by the accused as a result of which she drenched herself with kerosene oil and committed suicide. Concerned police station registered a case against the respondents under Section 306, RPC and after the investigations, found the accused guilty of offence under Section 306, RPC. The case was committed to the Sessions Judge, Kathua for trial. Sessions Judge, Kathua, discharged all the accused persons from the charge levelled against them and charge was not framed against any of the respondents. Learned Sessions Judge, Kathua in his judgment held:-On the reading of this section t...
A.K. Soni Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Mar-22-1999
Reported in: [2001]248ITR241(J& K)
1. In pursuance of the provisions contained in the Voluntary Disclosure of Income and Wealth Act, 1976, the petitioner made some voluntary disclosures.2. The above statute deals with three types of voluntary disclosures. The first is covered by Section 3 of the Act. The second type of disclosure isvisualised by Section 14. This disclosure of income is for those cases where a search and seizure has been made. The third type of disclosure is dealt with by Section 15. This deals with voluntary disclosure of wealth.3. The petitioner submits that the voluntary disclosure in the present case was made in terms of Section 14. He had paid the tax on the disclosed income in two phases, i.e., 50 per cent, before 31st of March, 1976, and 50 per cent, by 31st March, 1977. It is submitted once that the payment was made in terms of Section 14, then the Revenue was not justified in levying interest. It is this levy of interest which is the subject-matter of challenge in this petition.4. Learned counse...
Union of India (Uoi) and anr. Vs. Om Prakash Baldev Krishan
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Mar-22-1999
Reported in: AIR2000J& K79
Sharma, J. 1. This Civil 1st Appeal is directed against the judgment and decree dated 18-5-1989 passed by a learned single Bench of this Court. The admitted facts of the case are that a dispute arising out of a contract was referred to Brig. B.V. Ahuja, the then Deputy Director General Border Roads for adjudication in terms of the contract agreement. The arbitrator made the award on 3-6-1987. After the award was filed in the Court, the appellants applied for setting aside the same under Sections 30 and 33 of the Arbitration Act (for short the Act) on various grounds. The learned single Bench made the award rule of the Court after disallowing pendent lite interest amounting to Rs. 4,57 lacs, allowed by the arbitrator.2. Thejudgment and decree impugned is assailed on the grounds : (i) that the learned single Judge failed to appreciate that the award had been made after the period of limitation prescribed under the Act had expired and as such was invalid (ii) that the arbitrator misconduc...
Kewal Krishan and ors. Vs. Smt. Krishna Devi and ors.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Mar-22-1999
Reported in: 2001ACJ1029,AIR2000J& K89
Sharma, J.1. The only question involved in these letters Patent Appeals is, whether a copy of Insurance Policy produced by the insurer along with the returns could be excluded from consideration by the Motor Vehicle Accidents Tribunal (for short the Tribunal) while determining the extent of liability on the ground that it had not laid the foundation for reception of secondary evidence in accordance with the provisions of the Evidence Act? This question has arisen because the Tribunal excluded attested copy of Insurance Policy produced by the insurer on the ground that there was non-compliance of Order 11, Rules 12 and 14 of the Code of Civil Procedure and Section 65(a) of the Evidence Act.The 1st appellate Court reversed this finding and answered the question as follows :--'In the present case, it goes without saying that appellant-company had pleaded its limited liability and had discharged its obligation of placing a copy of Insurance Policy on record. No objection was raised casting...
Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Mar-22-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4030
O.P. Sharma, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Udhampur dated March 24, 1995 by virtue of which the appellant has been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/- under Section 302 of Ranbir Penal Code.Mr. Bakshi, appearing for the appellant, argued that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge against the appellant because of the two versions of the occurrence. According to him, it is the admitted case of the prosecution that the occurrence was witnessed only by prosecution witnesses, namely, Sagar Singh, Shashipall and Raj Kumar. However, the presence of PW Sagar Singh on spot is excluded by both PWs Shashipall and Raj Kumar. So the statement of PW Sagar Singh, argued Mr. Bakshi, could not be believed.He next argued that, according to PW Raj Kumar alias Raju, the deceased had challenged the accused/appellant to come out of his shop and the moment he came out, the former gave him a blow of 'Kahi' (an ...
Sat Pal and anr. Vs. State of J. and K.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Mar-22-1999
Reported in: 1999CriLJ4033
O.P. Sharma, J.1. The prosecution story as unfolded in evidence is that on 14-9-1991 the cattle belonging to the accused persons had trespassed in the land of the deceased and caused extensive damage to wheat crop. The deceased had seized the cattle and kept them in his compound. After sometime, Vidya Devi, A-I approached the deceased for return of the cattle. The deceased told her that until the damage is assessed by the Numberdar, he would not allow her to take away the cattle. On this, A-I forcibly took the cattle out of the compound of the deceased. The deceased in order to prevent her from taking away the cattle, intercepted her the village lane, which is the place of occurrence. As he used force to retrieve the cattle, appellants hit him on the head with the lathi which proved fatal. They have been convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for life under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Ranbir Penal Code by judgment dated 27-3-1993 passed by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge...
Harcharan Singh Vs. S. Bhagat Singh and ors.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Mar-16-1999
Reported in: AIR2000J& K92
ORDERM.Y. Kawoosa, J.1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. This Civil Revision Petition has been filed against the order dated 1-6-1998 passed by the learned Musniff, Kathua, whereby he has rejected the application of the applicant for impleading him as party-defendant in the suit. Facts barely needed for the disposal of the Revision Petition are that plaintiff is the son of defendant-1, who has filed the suit against his father claiming two reliefs. 1) Relief of declaration to the effect that the document 'Farkhatti' alleged to be executed by defendant No. 1 be declared as cancelled, and 2) defendants be restrained from changing and alienating the existing property. It may be mentioned here that respondents 5 and 6 are co-sharers and other respondents are strangers. Defendant No. 1 after executing the 'Farkhatti' has executed power of attorney in favour of other respondents. Applicant is also the son of defendant No. 1, who has alleged that he is in possession of chunk of land i...
New India Assurance Co. and ors. Vs. Roopawati Bhat and anr.
Court: Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on: Mar-12-1999
Reported in: AIR2000J& K7
Doabia, J.1. The complainant having received the amount after arriving at a settlement and after giving a receipt indicating full and final satisfaction, filed a complaint before the State Commission. It was contended that as there was delay in the matter of settling the claim, therefore there was deficiency of service. In these circumstances. Interest was claimed for the period the matter remained pending with the Insurance Company. 2. A claim was registered. This was resisted on the ground that the complainant having given a receipt for full and final settlement, therefore, the complainant was not entitled to claim the interest. 3. The State Commission came to the conclusion that the receipt given by the complainant was only regarding the quantum of compensation. If there was any deficiency, then that would not be covered under the receipt of satisfaction given by the complainant. As there was delay in the matter of payment of compensation the Commission came to the conclusion that t...