Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2008(3)JKJ517
Nirmal Singh, J.1. Present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 30.09.1997, passed by the learned Special Judge, Anti-corruption, Jammu, whereby the appellant has been convicted and sentenced under Section 5(1) (c) read with Section 5(2) of the P. C. Act, to undergo rigorous imprisonment of 5 years and pay a fine of Rs. 2 lacs (Rupees two lacs only). In default of payment of fine aforementioned, the appellant has been directed to undergo further RI for a period of one year. The appellant has also been convicted and sentenced under Section 409 RPC by the Special Judge Anticorruption, Jammu, to undergo RI for a period of 7 years and also to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only). In default of payment of fine, the appellant has to undergo RI for a period of one year. Both the sentences have to run concurrently.2. Briefly stated facts of the case are as under:The appellant remained posted as salesman at Sales Depot Batote of Food and Supplies Department in the year D...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2008(3)JKJ610
Nirmal Singh, J.1. Petitioners are seeking writ in the nature of certiorari quashing order No. l21-B of 2004 dt. 31st of Jan 04, whereby the respondents have created an additional post of Senior Legal Assistant in the grade of Rs. 6500-10500/- and placement of post of Legal Assistant in the grade of Rs. 5500-9000/-. Direction is also sought to respondents to release the grade of Rs. 6500-10500/- in favour of the petitioners.2. Petitioners who came to be initially appointed as Junior Assistants in the year 1988 and 1992 respectively were promoted to the post of Senior Assistant in the year 1993 and 1997. In the year 1995 and 1996, they acquired the qualification of LLB for which permission was given to them by the respondents. After completion of the said qualification, they were posted in the legal cell and were entrusted the job of amending the court cases on behalf of the department. In view of their performance in the said legal cell, they were re-designated as Legal Assistants w.e....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2008(3)JKJ399
Sunil Hali, J.1. This revision petition has been filed by the petitioners against the order of 3rd Additional District Judge, Srinagar, who vide his order dated 02.11.2006 set-aside the order of the trial court dated 3rd of March, 2005.2. That the plaintiff/respondent filed a suit seeking declaration to the extent that she is entitled to raise construction of five storey shopping cum commercial complex in accordance with the revised site plan submitted by her on the ground of deemed permission/sanction as provided in Section 7(iii) of the Jammu and Kashmir Control of Building Operation and Revised Regulations Act 2001 and further a decree of perpetual injunction restraining the defendants from causing any interference into construction activities undertaken by the plaintiff in accordance with the said site plan. An application for temporary injunction was also filed.3. The brief facts of the case are that vide building permission order No. 571 of 2002 dated 3rd of January, 2002, the pl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2008(3)JKJ643
Sunil Hali, J.1. Three revision petitions have been preferred by different petitioners against Order dated 17.05.2008 passed by the learned Principal District Judge, Srinagar for setting aside the same. The facts in all three petitions are same and are being disposed of by a common judgment.2. Four suits entitled as (a) Habla Banoo v. Bakshi Anwar Aftab and Ors.; (b) Saleema banoo v. Bakshi Anwar Aftab and Ors. (c) Nusrat banoo v. Bakshi Anwar Aftab and Ors. and (d) Neelofar Jan v. Bakshi Anwar and Ors. came to be filed before the Court of learned Principal District Judge, Srinagar for specific performance with consequential relief of possession in respect of building known as 'Hotel Pamposh' with land underneath and appurtenant thereto measuring 13 kanals and 19 marlas and 120 sft. situated at Kothibagh, Srinagar. The genesis of four suits is that a deal was struck by the plaintiffs/petitioners with respondents 1 to 3 for the sale of Hotel Pamposh for a total consideration of Rs. 62 l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2008(3)JKJ405
Sunil Hali, J.1. Present revision petition is directed against the order passed by 2nd Additional Munsiff Srinagar on an application seeking condonation of delay for setting aside an ex-parte decree. A civil suit came to be filed by the respondent in the year 1992, for correcting his date of birth from 9.3.59 to 12.2.62. It is alleged in the plaint that the date of birth recorded by BOSE was wrong. The petitioners/plaintiffs date of birth was 12.2.62. This plea of the plaintiff is based on a certificate of birth issued by Municipal Authorities in October 1991. It is also contended that the date of birth of the petitioner and of his elder brother was same that is 9.3.59, whereas two brothers were born on two different dates. It is also averred in the plaint that the school authorities had wrongly recorded the date of birth of the plaintiff as 9.3.59 instead of 12.2.62.The plaintiff had objected this at that point of time, incorrect date of birth was recorded. The plaintiff has stated th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2008(3)JKJ631
Sunil Hali, J.1. This Civil 1st Appeal is directed against judgment dated 31-07-2003 passed by the Principal District Judge, Anantnag.2. The plaintiff/respondent No. 1 filed a suit for declaration and possession and for seeking mesne profits against the defendants. The suit was filed by the plaintiff/respondent No. 1 seeking ownership rights on the basis of gift deed dated 06-11-1968 of land measuring 20 kanals under survey Nos. 410 and 1829 situated at Rambirpora, Anantnag. It is averred that as a consequence of gift deed, the plaintiff/respondent No. 1 was put into possession of the aforesaid land. The said gift deed was not challenged by the defendants. The second limb of the suit relates to 3 kanals and 15 marlas of land under survey Nos. 1829, 8 kanals under survey No. 1838 situated at Rambirpora, Aanatnag on the basis of compromise entered into between the plaintiff/respondent No. 1 and one Jalil Khan who was tenant. The basis of this compromise was that an application for resump...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2008(3)JKJ646
Sunil Hali, J.1. Vide order dated 30.06.2007, the petitioner has been charged by the learned Special Judge, Anti Corruption, Kashmir-Srinagar under Section 5(2) of the J&K; P.C. Act read with Sections 161,120-B RPC for having demanded Rs. 1000/- as illegal gratification for releasing pending bills of the complainant Ghulam Mohammad Mir. Aggrieved of the same, the petitioner has filed this petition under Section 561 -A Cr.P.C for quashing order of learned Special Judge Anti Corruption, Kashmir-Srinagar.2. To appreciate the controversy in the present case, factual background is that the complainant Ghulam Mohd Mir son of Abdul Salam Mir resident of Seer Jagir, Sopore lodged a complaint before the State Vigilance Organization, Srinagar on 07.10.2004 in which he alleged that he had been allotted work for Rs. 90,000/-, out of which Rs. 70,000/- stood already released in his favour and the balance of Rs. 20,000/- has been withheld by the concerned Block Development Officer and the accused pe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2009CriLJ2137,2008(3)JKJ391
Sunil Hali, J.1. A complaint came to be filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srinagar directing investigation and registration of the case against the petitioner on 23rd September 2006. The complaint states that the petitioner has procured his appointment as Trainee Engineer on the basis of fraud when he was not a qualified engineer. It is further alleged in the complaint that as a result of this fraud he is holding the post in the Public Sector undertaking without being eligible and qualified for the same and thus caused great monetary loss to the Corporation. This complaint came to be filed under Section 190 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The court without taking cognizance in the matter directed the investigating agency to have the matter investigated under Section 156(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code. That the Magistrate vide its order dated 23rd September 2006 forwarded the complaint to the S.S.P. Crime/Railway with the direction to look and investigate the matter in ligh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : 2008(3)JKJ627
J.P. Singh, J.1. Mr. Ashok Kumar was driving his motor cycle with one Anil Kumar as pillion rider, from Udhampur to Jammu on August 10,2001, when Mr. Ravi T-of 651 of EPU C/O 56 APO, driving rashly and negligently, Army truck No. 9980-12781-P had hit the scooter as a result whereof both the scooter riders received grievous injuries on their person. Ashok Kumar, however, succumbed to the injuries received by him in the accident.2. Arjana Kumari, the wife, Ruderashi and Akanksha, the minor daughters, of Ashok Kumar filed their claim petition No. 395/claim, wrongly shown as claim petition No. 355/claim in the award of the Tribunal, and Anil Kumar, the survivor injured filed his petition No. 391/Claim against Union of India, Ravi-T, driver of the offending vehicle and the Commanding Officer of 651-EPU, before Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jammu.3. Denying its liability to pay the amount claimed in the claim petitions, Union of India and the driver of the Army vehicle attributed the acci...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Reported in : (2009)222CTR(J& K)539,2008(3)JKJ369,[2009]177TAXMAN178(NULL)
J.P. Singh, J.1. Commissioner of Income-tax, J&K;, Jammu, had issued Notice No. CIT/Tech/2008-09/1935 of 5-6-2008 to Raj Kumar alias Raju Chowdhary proprietor M/s. Tawi Chemicals Industries, K.C. Market, Jammu, hereinafter to be referred as, 'the petitioner' to show cause as to why Assistant Commissioner, Circle 2, Jammu's order of 14-12-2007 passed under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2005-06 be not cancelled and a fresh assessment ordered.2. The Commissioner had issued this notice in exercise of his power under Section 263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the Act'). The notice had been issued on the basis of the information and evidence which had come to light during the course of Survey Action under Section 133A of the Act, carried at the factory premises of the petitioner on 14-3-2008. Perusal of the documents impounded, and the statements made by the employees of the company, during the Survey operation, revealed that...
Tag this Judgment!