Jammu and Kashmir Court August 2002 Judgments

Jandk Housing Board Vs. Romesh Chander Gupta

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

ORDERTejinder Singh Doabia, J. 1. The Jammu and Kashmir Housing Board has been called upon to compensate the complainant-respondent who had preferred a complaint before the State Commission constituted under the Jammu and Kashmir Consumer Protection Act. A finding stands recorded that the appellant Board did not complete the construction of the flat and the same was not made habitable. It was stated that there was delay in the matter of completing the construction and handing over the possession. Accordingly compensation to the tune of Rs: 50,000/- has been allowed to the complainant. An amount of Rs. 5,000/- has also been allowed as litigation expenses. In case of non-payment within a period of 30 days, the complainant was held entitled to interest at the rate of 12 per cent. It is this order, which is subject-matter of challenge in this appeal. 2. The facts as projected in the complaint and the material which came before the Commission be noticed. In response to an advertisement noti...

R.K. Salhotra Vs. Income Tax Officer

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: (2003)179CTR(J& K)258

1. This is an appeal preferred under Section 260A of the IT Act. The short question of law which has been projected in this appeal is whether the incentive bonus, which is allowed to a Development Officer of Life Insurance Corporation of India is to be taken into consideration for assessing the total taxable income of such an officer and if it is to be calculated, then the further plea which has been put across is that whether only such portion of the allowance/bonus which is certified as having been incurred by the concerned officer in the performance of his duties should be taken as exempted under the provisions of Section 10(14) of the aforesaid Act. The other plea which has been put across is that the CBDT issued a circular giving certain directions and that acquired force of law and notwithstanding the fact that this may be contrary to the provisions of the IT Act, nevertheless, this can and in fact, has been given effect to. Thus, the issues which are required to be gone into in ...

R.K. Salhotra Vs. Ito

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: [2002]125TAXMAN624(NULL)

ORDERThis is an appeal preferred under section 260A of the Income Tax Act. The short question of law which has been projected in this appeal is whether the incentive bonus, which is allowed to a Development Officer of Life Insurance Corporation of India is to be taken into consideration for assessing the total taxable income of such an officer and if it is to be calculated, then the further plea which has been put across is that whether only such portion of the allowance/bonus which is certified as having been incurred by the concerned officer in the performance of his duties should be taken as exempted under the provisions of section 10(14) of the aforesaid Act. The other plea which has been put across is that the Central Board of Direct Taxes issued a circular giving certain directions and that acquired force of law and notwithstanding the fact that this may be contrary to the provisions of the Income Tax Act, nevertheless, this can and in fact, has been given effect to. Thus, the is...

Abdul Aziz Mir Vs. Javaid Ahmad Khan

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2003CriLJ2942,2003(2)JKJ70

R.C. Gandhi, J.1. This Revision Petition has been preferred against the order No. 107-11/DMS dated 27-07-2002, passed by the District Magistrate, Srinagar.2. The brief facts are that an application dated 09-05-2002 came to be presented before the District Magistrate, Srinagar, invoking his jurisdiction under Section 133 Cr.P.C. for removal of Bandsaw Mill of the petitioner situated at Iqbal Colony, Zainakoot, Srinagar, on the ground that it has been installed in the residential area and is a source of noise and pollution and thereby has made the human life hazardous and difficult. The District Magistrate, Srinagar, endorsed the application to the subordinate Officers for report. The Patwari, in his report dated 1.1.2002, has submitted that the Bandsaw Mill is situated in Khasra No. 2133/262. The noise of the Bandsaw, being driven by Diesel Engine, effects the education of the children living in the nearby houses. The people are facing difficulty because of noise pollution. The report o...

Smt. Yash Rani Rohmetra and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi)

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: AIR2003J& K47

ORDERS.K. Gupta, J.1. Aggrieved by the award dated 4-5-1994 passed by the Arbitrator (Ex-Officio District Judge, Jammu), the petitioners/appellants have preferred this appeal under Section 10 of the Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1968 to impugned its correctness and prayed for enhancement of the award. A cross-Appeal bearing No. 130/1994 has also been filed by the respondents for setting aside the award, whereby the rental compensation has been enhanced by allowing recurring increase after every five years. Out of the totality of the land measuring 16 kanals and 3 marlas containing in Khasra No. 216 located at village Jugwal. Tehsil R.S. Pura, District Jammu, is stated to have been occupied by the Army since 3-1-1973. This land was, however, requisitioned under the Jammu & Kashmir Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act 1968') by the Deputy Commissioner, Jammu on 6-8-1974. The petitioners/appellants ...

J. and K. Bank Ltd. Vs. Mohammad Farooq Rather and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: AIR2003J& K25,2003(2)JKJ48

ORDERR.C. Gandhi, J.1. This revision petition has been preferred against the order dated 1-12-2001 passed by the learned IIIrd Subordinate Judge (Forest Magistrate), Srinagar, whereby, in a suit he has disposed of the following six issues as preliminary issues :1. Whether the suit of the plaintiffs is not maintainable? OPD 2. Whether the plaintiffs have no locus standi to file the suit? OPD 3. Whether plaintiffs have no cause of action? OPD 4. Whether the plaintiffs right to institute the suit is barred by estoppel, if yes, How? OPD 5. Whether the suit of the plaintiffs is hit by misjoinder and non-joinder of necessary parties? OPD 6. Whether the suit has not properly been valued and requisite Court-fee has not been paid? OPD 2. The petitioner has challenged the impugned order on the ground that the trial Court has occasioned failure of justice by deciding these issues as preliminary issues, which could not have been treated as preliminary issues in view of the mandate of Order 14...

State of Jandk and ors. and Prithpal Singh Azad and anr. Vs. Altaf Hus ...

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2003(1)JKJ546

1. All the L.P.A.'s are being disposed of by this common order, as common question of law and facts are involved in the appeals 2. Vide Advertisement Notice No. Pers/Rectt/SIs/Ex-99/A-450 dated 22-02-1999 applications were invited from permanent residents of the State of J&K; for the post of the Sub-Inspector in J&K; (Executive)Police. Apart from other conditions the notices provided for the following :-'5. The applications should be deposited in the offices of respective District Superintendents of Police under proper receipt. Applications incomplete in any manner shall not be entertained. The last date for receipt of application at all District Headquarters is 25-03-1999. All the District SSP of J&K; provinces will submit these apllication forms to their respective Range DIGS by 5th April, 1999. 6. Only those candidates who will be found fit in physical measurement and possessing other prescribed standard will be allowed to compete in outdoor basis. Those candidates who qualify in al...

Farooq Ahmed Chopan Vs. State and ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: 2003CriLJ3670

ORDERB.L. Bhat, J.1. Through the medium of this petition for issuance of writ of Habeas Corpus under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 103 of the Constitution of J and K, the petitioner Farooq Ahmed Chopan who came to be detained pursuant to Detention Order No. 4/JC/01 dated 24-2-2001 issued by respondent No. 2, District. Magistrate, Doda under Section 8 of the J. and K. Public Safety Act, 1978 has sought indulgence of this Court inter alia for quashing the said detention order. It is inter alia maintained in the petition that the petitioner-detenu who is a citizen of India and a permanent resident of J. and K. State was taken into custody on 22-8-2000 by the army personnel, subjected him to severe physical torture and questioning him as to whether he was involved in any anti-national activities.2. That the petitioner was also taken into police custody and thereafter was lodged in Central Jail, Jammu. That while in Central Jail on 24-2-2001 he was handed over a...

Romesh Chander Magotra and anr. Vs. M.M. Khajuria

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: AIR2003J& K62

ORDERS.K. Gupta, J.1. Through the currency of this petition, the petitioners seek the reversal of the order dated 9-2-2002 formulated by the learned District Judge, Jammu on an application of the objectors, herein petitioners in Probate Petition commenced by respondent M. M. Khajuria under Section 62 of the Probate and Administration Act.2. It appears that a petition to probate the Will dated 24-3-1993, alleged to have been executed by one O.P. Khajuria in bequeathing 'Daya Bhawan' located in Gandhi Nagar, Jammu came to be commenced by M. M. Khajuria, claiming to be the beneficiary under the Will. During the course of the proceedings in the Probate Petition an application came to be preferred by the objectors, herein petitioners in stating that a civil suit filed to challenge the Will stated to have been executed by O.P. Khajuria pending in the Court of 2nd Addl. District Judge, Jammu in assailing the competency of the testator to execute the Will and that the present proceedings under...

Employees' State Insurance Corporation Vs. Raj Kumar and Ors.

Court: Jammu and Kashmir

Reported in: (2003)IIILLJ429J& K

S.K. Gupta, J. 1. All these four appeals involve the identical controversy and arising out of the same judgment shall be disposed of by common order.2. Employees' State Insurance Corporation through its Insurance Inspector/ Manager preferred a complaint in File No. 22 against Raj Kumar Choudhary. Managing Partner, Principal Employer of K.C. Joinery Mills, Akhnoor Road, Jammu under Section 85(a) of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as 'the' Act') and another complaint against Raj Kumar Choudhary in File No. 23 under Section 85(e) of the Act. These complaints were instituted somewhere in 1993.3. First complaint forming File No. 22 titled Employees' State Insurance Corporation v. Raj Kumar Choudhary proceeds on the grounds recited in para 3 of the complaint that the accused Raj Kumar Choudhary in his capacity as a principal Employer of accused No. 2 K.C. Joinery Mills, Akhnoor Road, Jammu has failed to pay the Insurance Corporation the contribution as requi...