Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: armed forces tribunal act 2007 section 32 condonation Page 11 of about 68,096 results (0.381 seconds)

Jul 08 2019 (SC)

Randhir Singh Vs. Union of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... in that behalf must either be articulated in writing or be available on record, specially when the matter can be considered on merits by a tribunal, with the coming into force of the armed forces tribunals act, 2007. 5 11 in a review petition5 filed by the union of india, the earlier judgment was clarified on 16 february 2017 in the ..... behalf of the appellant has submitted that this would meet the ends of justice. 15 we accordingly allow the appeal and modify the impugned order of the armed forces tribunal in the above terms. the appellant shall stand discharged from service on the completion of the minimum pensionable service with the result that he would be ..... chandrachud, j judgment12 admit. this appeal arises from a judgment of the armed forces tribunal at its chandigarh regional bench dated 7 december 2015. the appellant was enrolled on 29 october 1996 in the 43 armed brigade and was at the material time posted as acting lance dafadar1. it is alleged that on 11 august 2007 while on duty .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 05 2016 (SC)

Union of India and Ors. Vs. Vishav Priya Singh

Court : Supreme Court of India

..... satisfaction in that behalf must either be articulated in writing or be available on record, specially when the matter can be considered on merits by a tribunal, with the coming into force of the armed forces tribunals act, 2007.21. we now deal with the question as to what kind of offences can be tried by an scm. an scm can try any ..... an appeal from the decision of an scm did weigh with the high court of delhi but that factor would stand modified with the enactment of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 which came into force on and with effect from 16.02.2008. he further submitted that note 5 below section 120 considered by the high court was already deleted vide ..... offence punishable under the act by virtue of sub-section (1) of section 120 but this general principle is subject to the provisions appearing in sub-section (2) .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 2017 (HC)

Ex Sub Maj Prem Nath Soni vs.union of India and Ors

Court : Delhi

..... ble mr. justice anil kumar chawla judgment indira banerjee, j1 in this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged an order dated 08/04/2013 passed by the armed forces tribunal, dismissing the application being oa no.45/ 2012 filed by the petitioner, seeking a direction on the respondents to inter alia grant the petitioner honorary commission taking ..... not sit in appeal over decisions not to grant honorary commission, based on policy guidelines. the onus was on the petitioner to demonstrate that the respondents acted illegally in not awarding points for courses undertaken at the school of languages. the petitioner has also not been able to demonstrate that the courses conducted at ..... name had not been published in the list of personnel who had been granted honorary commission in august 2012, he sought information under the right to information act, regarding the points given to him and the cut-off points for grant of honorary commission, but the information was not supplied to him.7. the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 19 2013 (TRI)

Jagdish Pal Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Armed forces Tribunal AFT Chandigarh Bench Chandimandir

..... been vitiated. as such the same are liable to be quashed in totality. the tribunal has clear power for quashing the conviction as per section 16 of the armed forces tribunal act, 2007 which reads as under:- 16. re-trial. (1) except as provided by this act, where the conviction of a person by court-martial for an offence has been quashed ..... , he shall not be liable to be tried again for the offence by a court-martial or by any other court. (2) the tribunal shall ..... only exercise this power when the appeal against conviction is allowed by reasons only of evidence received or available to be received by the tribunal under this act and it appears to the tribunal that the interests of justice require that an order under this section should be made :- provided that an appellant shall not be retried under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 22 2017 (HC)

Sep/Clerk s.k. Nair vs.union of India & Ors.

Court : Delhi

..... satisfaction in that behalf must either be articulated in writing or be available on record, specially when the matter can be considered on merits by a tribunal, with the coming into force of the armed force tribunal act, 2007 .33. in the premises, we hold that it is not imperative that an scm be convened, constituted and completed by co of the ..... an scm. we think it necessary to underscore that it is not proper to convene an scm merely because the offence(s) with which a sepoy of the force is charged finds mention in the enumeration contained in these three sections. what is of preeminence in convening an scm is that it should be found imperative that ..... it is absolutely imperative and immediate action is called for. we quote herein below the relevant paragraphs from vishav priya singh (supra): 19. section 116 of the act empowers the co of any corps, department and detachment of the regular army to hold an scm and specifically states that he alone shall constitute the court. sub-section .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 2002 (HC)

Husen Aba Bahadur Deceased by His Heirs Anawar Husen Bahadur and ors. ...

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : 2003(1)ALLMR178; 2003(1)BomCR627; (2003)2BOMLR630; 2002(4)MhLj786

..... suit land within the prescribed period to respondent no. 1 landlord and the tribunal and, therefore, the purchase had become ineffective for which proceedings under section 32p of the act will have to be initiated. the tribunal further observed that respondent no. 1 landlord was a serving member of the armed forces between december 13, 1955 and december 10, 1959 when he was given discharge ..... . the tribunal has also held that from the material on record, in particular the deposition of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 20 1987 (SC)

Beda Nand Singh and ors. Vs. Director General, Central Industrial Secu ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Reported in : 1987(0)BLJR836; JT1987(3)SC137; (1988)ILLJ242SC; 1980Supp(1)SCC790

..... in the writ petition. in view of section 3(1) of the central industrial security force act, 1968, there can be no doubt that the appellants were members of the armed force of the union, as held by the tribunal. that being so, the tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the applications in view of section 2(a) of the administrative ..... tribunals act, 1985.4. we accordingly allow the appeals, set aside the judgment and order of the ..... 1986 at the stage of admission returned the application on the ground that the tribunal had no jurisdiction to entertain the application made inasmuch as the appellants admittedly were members of the armed force of the union by reason of section 2(a) of the act.3. after hearing learned counsel for the parties, we feel that in the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 08 1968 (HC)

Bapu Dnyanu Patil Vs. Sadashiv Ramchandra Joshi

Court : Mumbai

Reported in : (1969)71BOMLR402; 1969MhLJ789

..... mental or physical disability of the tenant ceases to exist; (iv) within one year from the date on which the tenant ceases to be a serving member of the armed forces ;provided that where a person of such category is a member of a joint family, the provisions of this sub-section shall not apply if at least one member of ..... of any land after it is purchased .by a tenant under section 32 should be disposed of in the manner laid down in section 15 of the act. section 32g- requires the tribunal constituted for the purpose of this group of sections to issue notices and determine the price to be paid for the lands by the tenants giving it certain ..... before the special deputy collector failed. the landlord took a revisional application to the revenue tribunal which was heard by a bench consisting of the president, and a member of the tribunal. the tribunal set aside the order on the ground that as section 32p of the act was applicable and as the tenant had not exercised the option within one year of .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 17 2011 (HC)

M/S.Advani Oerlikon Ltd. Vs. Machindra Govind Makasare and ors.

Court : Mumbai

..... the constitution confers on every high court a power of superintendence over all courts and tribunals throughout the territory, in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, excepting any court or tribunal constituted by or under any law relating to the armed forces. the distinction between articles 226 and 227 of the constitution is that while proceedings under ..... of private rights of the parties and the object is to ensure that the law of the land is implicitly obeyed and that various authorities and tribunals act within the limits of their respective jurisdiction. consequently, it has been held that proceedings by way of a writ would not be appropriate in a ..... (ii) in excess of jurisdiction; or (iii) as a result of a failure to exercise jurisdiction. similarly certiorari can be issued where the court or tribunal acts illegally or improperly as for instance in breach of the principles of natural justice.6. having said this, it is well settled that while exercising the jurisdiction under .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 1986 (HC)

Shiv Kumar Tiwari Vs. Union of India and ors.

Court : Gujarat

Reported in : (1986)2GLR1038; (1987)ILLJ386Guj

..... central government staff. if the petitioner is treated to be a servant belonging to the armed force of the union, administrative tribunals act, 1985, will not be applicable in view of the provisions under section 2 of administrative tribunals act, 1985. 3. mr. patel, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, and also mr. ..... , from the foregoing discussion, it is very clear that the petitioner who belongs to the railway protection force comes under the category of 'an armed force of the union' and as such, the provisions of the administrative tribunals act, 1985, will not be applicable to him. if that be so, there is no question of ..... petitioner herein is a railway servant or a servant belonging to the armed force of the union. if the petitioner belongs to the railway protection force coming under the indian railways act, 1890, naturally, the matter has to be placed before the administrative tribunal constituted for the purpose of dealing with the disputes regarding the .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //