Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1986SC1370; [1986]59CompCas548(SC); (1986)1CompLJ91(SC); 1986(8)ECC189; 1985(2)SCALE1289; (1986)1SCC264; [1985]Supp3SCR909
ORDER TO ENABLE THE GOVERNMENT TO TAKE DECISION(.)The Importance of 2nd May, 1983 so frequently mentioned in the telex message is apparently because 2nd May, 1983 was fixed as the cut-off dale for the introduction of the ceiling of 5 per cent in shares of Indian companies by to foreign investors of Indian origin by the Circular No. I/, dated May 16, 1983 issued by the Reserve Bank of India.41. In the meanwhile, on 31.5.83, Punjab National Bank wrote to Escorts Limited incoming them that the thirteen overseas companies had been, making investments in sharer i Escorts Limited in terms, of the scheme for investment by overseas corporate bodies predominantly owned by non-residents of Indian nationality/origin to an extent to extent 60 per cent and that the thirteen overseas had designated them as their banker and M/s. Raja Ram Bhasin & Co. had been designated as the brokers for the purpose of investment. The brokers had advised the bank that up to 28th April, 83, 75,000 equity shares of Es...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC811; 1997(1)Crimes189(SC); JT1997(1)SC160; 1997(5)SCALE406; (1997)2SCC87; [1996]Supp9SCR848
ORDERKuldip Singh, J.1. Shrimp (Prawn) Culture Industry is taking roots in India. Since long the fishermen in India have been following the traditional rice/shrimp rotating acqua culture system. Rice is grown during part of the year and shrimp and other fish species are cultured during the rest of the year. However, during the last decade the traditional system which, apart from producing rice, produced 140 kgs. of shrimp per hectare of land began to give way to more intensive methods of shrimp culture which could produce thousands of kilograms per hectare. A large number of private companies and multi-national corporations have started investing in shrimp farms. In the last few years more than eighty thousand hectares of land have been converted to shrimp farming. India's Marine export weighed in at 70,000 tonnes in 1993 and these exports are projected to reach 200 thousand tonnes by the year 2000. The shrimp farming advocates regard aquaculture as potential savior of developing count...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1987]61CompCas548(Bom)
M.L. Pendse, J.1. The plaintiffs, Tri-Sure India Ltd., have instituted this suit on September 20, 1978, for recovery of sum of Rs. 63,84,792 with interest thereon at the rate of 16.25% per annum from the date of the suit till recovery and costs of the suit from the defendants.2. The plaintiffs were incorporated as a private limited company in West Bengal under the name of Indian Flange Mfg. Co. Ltd. on February 10, 1960. The name was changed to Tri-Sure India (Pvt.) Ltd. on April 22, 1960, and the registered office was transferred to Bombay in the middle of the year 1962. The company was a wholly-owned subsidiary of American Flange Mfg. Co., United States of America. On February 24, 1975, the plaintiffs became a public limited company. The financial year of the plaintiffs is from September 1, to August 31.3. Defendant No. 1 is a partnership firm of chartered accountants and is carrying on business for last over 85 years and has acquired reputation all over the country. Defendants Nos. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1991(61)FLR73]; JT1990(2)SC490; (1990)IILLJ70SC; 1990(1)SCALE878; (1990)3SCC682; [1990]3SCR111; 1990(2)LC293(SC); (1990)3UPLBEC2119
K.N. Saikia, J. 1. This analogous cluster of seventeen appeals by special leave, and a special leave petition involves a common question of law though they arise out of the following respective facts:C.A. Nos. 3241-3248 of 19812. These eight appeals by the Land Development and Reclamation Corporation. Chandigarh are from the Judgment and Order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dismissing its writ petitions challenging the Award dated 2.8.1980 of the Labour Court, Chandigarh holding that the respondents were entitled to reinstatement with back wages except Yaspal (C.A.No. 3242 of 1981) who was to get wages up to 10.10.1978, with benefits of continuity of service. The respondents were workmen under the management of the Corporation and their services were terminated on the ground that the Chairman had no power to appoint them. The Labour Court in its Award held that their services were terminated illegally without payment of retrenchment compensation under the Industrial Disputes Act,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2000SC1296; JT2000(3)SC221; 2000(2)SCALE415; (2000)4SCC640; [2000]2SCR299
S.B. Majmudar, J.1. (Majority view G. B. Pattanaik, U. C. Banerjee, JJ concurring). Leave granted in Special Leave Petition No. 16476 of 1993.2. Both these appeals, on grant of special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, are moved by the State of Bihar, which is common appellant No. 1 in both these appeals. In Civil Appeal No. 9072 of 1996 the Secretary, Department of Personnel and Administrative Reforms. Government of Bihar is appellant No. 2, while in the companion appeal arising from the Special Leave Petition No. 16476 of 1993, the other contesting appellant is the Special Executive Officer-cum-Deputy Secretary, Bihar Public Service Commission, Patna. In both these appeals, a common question of law arises for consideration, namely, whether the Legislature of the State of Bihar was competent to enact the Bihar Reservation of Vacancies in Posts and Services (for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and Other Backward Classes) Act, 1991 (hereinafter referred to as 'the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1997KAR1573
ORDERR.P. Sethi, C.J.1. Despite half a century of independence, overthrow of the foreign rule, abolition of monarchial system of Governments and the sea changes brought about in the socio-economic-political system in the Democratic Republic of India, the successors-in-interest of the former ruler of Mysore State have challenged the jurisdiction of the Legislature in enacting laws with the purpose of depriving them of the privileges allegedly conferred upon the ruler in lieu of the surrender of sovereignty in favour of the Dominion of India. Claim to the properties has been sought to be protected under the umbrella stated to have been provided by the Instrument of Accession and Articles 294 and 295 of the Constitution of India. The action of the State Legislature in enacting the laws with respect to the properties of the former ruler of Mysore has also been challenged on the grounds of inherent lack of jurisdiction under Part XI read with Schedule 7 of the Constitution of India. In orde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1985SC1416; (1985)87BOMLR563; (1985)3CompLJ45(SC); [1985(51)FLR362]; (1985)IILLJ206SC; 1985(2)SCALE133; (1985)3SCC398; [1985]Supp2SCR131; 1985(2)SLJ145(SC)
D.P. Madon, J.1. The above Appeals by Special Leave granted by this Court and the above Writ Petitions filed either in this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India or in different High Courts under Article 226 and transferred to this Court raise a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of Articles 309, 310 and 311 of the Constitution and in particular of what is now, after the amendment of Clause (2) of Article 311 by the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976, the second proviso to that clause.The Genesis of the Appeals and Writ Petitions2. To understand what questions fall for determination by this Court in these Appeals and Writ Petitions, it is first necessary to sketch briefly how they have come to be heard by this Constitution Bench.3. Article 311 of the Constitution confers certain safeguards upon persons employed in civil capacities under the Union of India or a State. The first safeguard (which is given by Clause (1) of Article 311) is that s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR2004KAR3892; 2004(3)KarLJ505
ORDERN. Kumar, J. 1. In these writ petitions important questions of law as regards the power of the Lokayukta and the Upalokayukta to investigate complaints under the provisions of the Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, the procedure to be followed in such investigations, the effect of the report submitted by the Lokayukta and the consequences that flow from the declarations made under the Act arise for consideration, in addition to the question whether the Lokayukta or Upalokayukta has jurisdiction to investigate a complaint against a Vice-Chancellor of a University.2. The petitioner in W.P. Nos. 25339 and 25340 of 2003 is one Professor S.N. Hegde, Vice-Chancellor, University of Mysore. His case in brief is as under.--The petitioner was appointed as the Vice-Chancellor in September 1997 initially for a period of three years which was further extended for a period of three years in September 2000. His term was to expire in September 2003. He had put in more than 40 years of service in teac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC605A
ORDER1. We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another.' - Jonathan Swift2. Swami Vivekananda said -Religion is not in doctrines, in dogmas, nor in intellectual argumentation; it is being and becoming, it is realisation. This thought comes to mind as we contemplate the roots of this controversy. Genesis of this dispute is traceable to erosion of some fundamental values of the plural commitments of our polity.3. The constitutional validity of the Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993 (No. 33 of 1993) (hereinafter referred to as 'Act No. 33 of 1993' or 'the Act') and the maintainability of Special Reference No. 1 of 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Special Reference') made by the President of India under Article 143(1) of the Constitution of India are the questions for decision herein. The background in which these questions are to be answered is contained in the facts stated in the White Paper on Ayodhya, February 1993, issued by...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC605; JT1994(6)SC632; (1994)6SCC360; [1994]Supp5SCR1
J.S. Verma, J.We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another.- Jonathan Swift1. Swami Vivekananda said -Religion is not in doctrines, in dogmas, nor in intellectual argumentation; it is being and becoming, it is realisation.This thought comes to mind as we contemplate the roots of this controversy. Genesis of this dispute is traceable to erosion of some fundamental values of the plural commitments of our polity.2. The constitutional validity of the Acquisition of Certain Area at Ayodhya Act, 1993 (No. 33 of 1993) (hereinafter referred to as 'Act No. 33 of 1993' or 'the Act') and the maintainability of Special Reference No. 1 of 1993 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Special Reference') made by the President of India under Article 143(1) of the Constitution of India are the questions for decision herein. The background in which these questions are to be answered is contained in the facts stated in the White Paper on Ayodhya, February 1993, issued...
Tag this Judgment!