Court : Jharkhand
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI W.P.(S) No. 4389 of 2013 .. Nand Kishore Rai . Petitioner Versus 1. The State of Jharkhand.2. The Principal Secretary, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, HEC, Dhurwa, Ranchi.3. The Engineer -in-Chief, Road Construction Department, Government of Jharkhand, Project Building, HEC, Dhurwa, Ranchi.4. The Superintending Engineer, Road Division, Dumka.5. The Executive Engineer, Road Construction Department, Road Division, Deoghar. . Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DR. S.N. PATHAK For the Petitioner : Mr. Saurav Arun, Advocate Mr. Amit Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Shyam Sunder Kumar, Advocate For the Respondents : Mr. Jai Prakash, AAG07 Dated 17th November, 2017 Petitioner has approached this court with a prayer for quashing of letter dated 21.11.2007 as contained in Annexure-7 to this writ application, only to the extent that the respondents have illegally changed the date of joining of the petitioner as 20.1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (2008)110BOMLR456; 2008BusLR314(Bom); 2008(125)ECC208; 2008(151)LC208(Bombay); 2008(229)ELT173(Bom); 2009[16]STR669
F.I. Rebello, J.1. Rule. By consent of the parties heard forthwith.2. Respondent No. 4 is a secured creditor of certain immovable and movable assets of M/s. Rotex Textile Mills Ltd. now in liquidation, having advanced money to M/s. Rotex Textile Mills Ltd. As there was a default in payment of the dues, Respondent No. 5 issued a public notice on 8th February, 2007, inviting bids for the immovable and movable assets secured in its favour as set out in the public notice. At the auction held on 10th March, 2007, Petitioner was declared as the highest bidder. Consequent thereto, Petitioner made full and final payment of the said consideration on 22nd March, 2007 and requested Respondent No. 4 to release the possession letter for the land and building, plant and machinery and the relevant original documents. Respondent No 5 as the Asset Recovery Management Services of Respondent No. 4 issued sale certificate for the immovable property and also sale certificate for the movables.3. Respondent ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1969)71BOMLR529; 1969MhLJ552
Chandurkar, J.1. This is a second appeal by the legal representative of a decree-holder whose application for execution of the decree obtained by his father against the respondents has been rejected by both the Courts below as barred by limitation.2. Facts which are necessary to appreciate the dispute between the parties are that in Civil Suit No. 30 of 1956 one Mangalram obtained an ex parte decree against the defendants-respondents, on February 14, 1957 in the Court of the Small Causes, Amravati. After the decree, the decree-holder died on August 30, 1957. On December 3, 1958, the appellant, who is the son of the deceased decree-holder, filed an application purporting to be one under Order XXI, Rule 16, Civil Procedure Code before the executing Court below and the prayer in that application was that 'his: name may kindly be allowed to be substituted in place of the decree-holder and he be kindly allowed to execute the decree... '. A notice of this application was issued to the judgme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1993)95BOMLR160
Bhimrao N. Naik, J.1. This is the petition filed by Obstructionists in Obstructionist Notice No. 263 of 1979 taken out by the Respondents-Decree holders.2. Few facts which are relevant for the purpose of this petition are that the dispute relates to two blocks of rooms adjoining each other situated on the ground floor of House No, 62/K, at Parel village, Bombay-12 and one Gajanan Moreshwar Thakur was the tenant of these premises. This Gajanan Thakur died on 1st February, 1955. The following geneology is necessary to ascertain the rights of the Petitioners to this Petition.Gajanan Thakur died on 1.2.55 Org. Tenant:(7) (Mother-Smt. Renuka) died in 57.(8) (Widow-Smt. Anasuya) died in 59.------------------------------------------------------------------------| | | | | |(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6)Madhukar | (Sharad died Suresh Piroj Mhatre Miss Revati| on 22-7-78) (Married got married| daughter) in 61. Mrs.| | Seema Patil.|Naresh (died on 27-11-78)|Mrs. Asha-Petitioner No. 1. (Widow)|Kum. Shyam...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1985]60STC328(Kar)
Rajasekhara Murthy, J.1. In W. P. No. 1218 of 1981 filed by the petitioners who is the owner of lorry bearing Reg. No. MEG 5711, the provisions of section 28A of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957, as amended by Act 27 of 1969, are challenged as beyond the competence of the State Legislature. 2. The petitioner's lorry, when checked by the Assistant Commercial Tax Officer (ACTO), Sagar, on 29th March, 1980 at Billeswar Village, Hosanagar Taluk, was found transporting 69 bags of arecanut without any documents in respect of the goods under transport. A notice was issued by the ACTO, Sagar, under section 28A(4) of the Act, to the driver and the petitioner, the owner of the vehicle, to show cause why penalty of Rs. 4,200 should not be levied for contravention of section 28A(2) of the Act. The statement of the driver was recorded on 29th March, 1980 and the reply was also filed by the petitioner stating that the arecanut belonging to nearby villagers was being transported in his lorry to Saga...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : [1991(62)FLR478]; ILR1990KAR2804; (1991)ILLJ523Kant
Mohan, C.J. 1. The facts leading to the writ appeal are as follows : The Mysore Chemicals and Fertilisers Ltd., (hereinafter referred to as 'the Fertilisers Ltd., ') was a company carrying on the business of manufacture of chemicals and fertilisers at Balgola, Mandya District, Karnataka State. The company had its own land and building where the manufacturing process was carried on with the help of machinery, which machinery also belonged to the company 2. The company was ordered to be wound up by an order of this Court dated 14th of December, 1972. Long prior to this date, the company had stopped its manufacturing operations and discharged all the workmen. The reconstitution of the company failed. Therefore, its assets were sold by public auction held by this Court. The appellant purchased the said assets of the Fertilisers Ltd., consisting of land, building and machinery on 27th of June, 1975 for a sum of Rs. 85,00,000/-. The sale was confirmed by this Court on 11th of July, 1975. The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : (2007)10VST41(Karn)
ORDERN. Kumar, J.1. The State has preferred this revision against the order passed by the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in S.T.A. No. 69 of 2002, dated December 31, 2002 allowing the appeal and setting aside the levy of penalty under Section 28A(4) of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The facts leading to this dispute are as under:The respondent is a registered dealer under the provisions of the Act dealing in Hero Honda Motor cycles. The goods vehicle bearing No. KA 14/8117 was transporting ten Hero Honda Motor cycles belonging to the respondent on August 28, 2001 to Harihar. As the said goods vehicle did not stop at the sales tax check-post, Harihar, it was chased, intercepted and brought to the sales tax check-post. The person-in-charge of the goods vehicle tendered a letter head issued by the respondent wherein it was stated that they are dispatching ten motor cycles to Nandi Motors, for demonstration. He did not produce the decla...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1968All229
ORDERSatish Chandra, J.1. This is a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for a writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to publish the petitioner's application for a stage carriage permit and consider it along with the renewal application of respondent No. 3.2. It appears that Varanasia Jabalpur Via Mirzapur is an inter-state route lying between the State of Madhya Pradesh and Uttar Pradesh. Under a reciprocal arrangement between the two States the strength of this route for which permits could he issued has been fixed at two. The permits were issued to Sri S. N. Tripathi and Smt. Hur-mazi Begum, respondent No. 3. These permits ware to expire on or about 25th December, 1966. The petitioner being desirous for one of these permits, made an application on 26-9-1966 for a stage carriage permit on this route. In the covering letter to his application the petitioner stated that he was applying under Section 57(2) of the Motor Vehicles Act. He also alleged that both...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Reported in : 1994(II)OLR588
G.B. Pattnaik, J.1. The order of the State Transport Appellate Tribunal (opp. party No. 5) in M. V. Revision No. 10/89. annexed as Annexure-3. is being challenged by the petitioner, a Company Incorporated under the Indian Companies Act and carrying on business of road transport.2. The petitioner had been operating on the route Aska to Durgapur. Opp. party No. 2. State Transport Authority. Orissa, issued an advertisement on 1-9 1986 is respect of the inter- Stata route of Aska to Durgapur covering a length of 654 Kilometres out of which 469 Kilometres is within Orissa and 185 Kilometre is within West Bengal. In accordance with the reciprocal agreement between the two States, the routs was notified Under Section 63(3-B) of the Motor Vehicles Act. 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). An advertisement was issued Under Section 57(2) of the Act on 1-9-1986 inviting applications from intending operators by 1-10-1986. The advertisement was published in the daily newspaper 'The Samaja'....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : II(1991)ACC23; 1992ACJ1137; 44(1991)DLT259
S.N. Sapra, J. (1) The only ground of challenge, raised in this appeal, filed by New India Assurance Co. Ltd., appellant herein, under Section 110-D(1) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939, is that the insurance policy, in favor of the insured/owner, bad lapsed, because, the offending vehicle, had already been sold by the owner to athird person, prior to the date of accident, and, as such the third party liability of the Insurance Company ended. (2) Notice was issued to respondents to show cause, as to why the appeal be not admitted. Respondents I to 9 have filed answer to show cause. The appeal is at the stage of admission. (3) Briefly stated, the facts of the case are : on September 10, 1971 at about 5.30 P.M., Shri Bishan Lal Goel, now deceased, was going on his motor cycle, bearing No. Dho 2745, from Delhi to Ghaziabad on G.T. Road. A car bearing no. Upd 8851, which was driven rashly, recklessly and negligently by the driver, took a sudden turn for going towards petrol pump, and in the ...
Tag this Judgment!