Court : Chennai
W.P.No.24078 of 2011 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India praying for a Writ of mandamus directing the respondents to conduct repoll with respect to 239 booths inasmuch as the polling conducted with respect to 239 booths is marred by poll violence, booth capturing, rigging etc. Apart from the same being infringed in not conducting the same in a free and fair manner.W.P.No.24132 of 2011 filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issue of a Writ of Declaration, declaring that the poll conducted to the booths in Ward Nos.48, 49, 76, 101, 103, 104, 107, 111, 117, 118, 122, 126, 130, 171, 172, 179, 184 and 193 in Chennai City Municipal Corporation mayor and councilor post as null and void and consequently directing the respondents to conduct re-poll to all the booths in Ward Nos.48, 49, 76, 101, 103, 104, 107, 111, 117, 118, 122, 126, 130, 171, 172, 179, 184 and 193 Chennai City Municipal Corporation Mayor and respective councilor posts and direct ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
T.S. THAKUR, J. 1. Leave granted.2. The High Court of Judicature at Bombay has while dismissing Writ Petition No.1810 of 2008 filed by the appellant herein refused to interfere with the order dated 20th February, 2008 passed by the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Amravati. The Committee in turn had declared that the appellant was a ‘Koshti’ by Caste and not a ‘Halba’ which is a notified Scheduled Tribe. The facts giving rise to the present appeal lie in a narrow compass and may be summarised as under: Shri Shivaji High School, Dongaon, of which respondent No.5 happens to be the Head Master, invited applications in terms of advertisement dated 20th July, 1995 against three vacant posts of teachers in the said school. One each of these two posts was reserved for Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe Candidates. The third post was ostensibly in open category and required a minimum qualification of B.P.Ed., which the appellant herein did not posse...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Civil Revision Petitions filed under section 25 of the Tamil Nadu Buildings (Lease and Rent Control) Act, as against the judgment and decree dated 03.01.2012 of the Rent Control Appellate Authority viz., VIII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in RCA Nos.523 and 522 of 2010 confirming the fair and decreetal order dated 21.07.2010 of the Rent Controller of the XVI Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras in RCOP No.2093 of 2009.G.RAJASURIA, J.ORDER1. Animadverting upon the judgment and decree dated 03.01.2012 passed by the Rent Control Appellate Authority viz., VIII Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai in RCA Nos.523 and 522 of 2010 confirming the fair and decreetal order dated 21.07.2010 passed by the Rent Controller, XVI Judge, Court of Small Causes, Madras in RCOP No.2093 of 2009, these civil revisions petitions are focussed.2. The parties are referred to hereunder according to their litigative status and ranking before the learned Rent Controller.3. A summation and summarisation of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J.1. Leave granted.2. This matter arises in execution and this appeal has been preferred by one of the judgment debtors challenging the common final judgment and order dated 11.11.2011 passed by the High Court of Delhi in C. M. (M) No. 1093 of 2011 and E.F.A. No. 15 of 2011.3. Decree holders and judgment debtors are co-sharers of a property bearing No. 1-87, Ashok Vihar, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the 'suit property'). Late Rameshwar Dass Gupta filed a suit for partition of the suit property and after passing a preliminary decree, a final decree was passed and the suit property was ordered to be sold in public auction and sale proceeds were directed to be distributed among the shareholders.4. Decree holders filed execution petition and vide order dated 20.11.2009, the auction sale was scheduled to be held on 9.1.2010. However, objector/J.D.2 Shri Ram Karan Gupta (appellant herein) moved an application seeking stay of auction sale scheduled to be held on 9.1.2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1974]96ITR50(Bom)
Desai, J. 1. This is a reference by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Bombay Bench 'C', under section 66(1) of the Indian Income-tax Act, 1922. The reference arises out of the assessment proceedings under the Indian Income-tax Act for the assessment years 1957-58 and 1958-59, the relevant account years being Samvat years 2012 and 2013. Necessary facts material for the purpose of this reference are as follows : The assessee is one Gordhandas K. Vora who is the only son of one Kishandas Vora and a grandson of one Sir Manmohandas Ramji, sir Manmohandas had three sons, Kishandas, Narandas and Bhagwandas. During his lifetime Manmohandas gifted to his son, Kishandas, shares of several companies. Kishandas died intestate in 1930 and on his death his son Gordhandas inherited those shares; they became ancestral property in his hands. A son was born to Gordhandas in 1953. It is the agreed position that the property that Gordhandas inherited in this manner from his father, Kishandas, was ancestr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : I(1990)DMC352
A.D. Tated, J.1. This petition is directed against the judgment and order dated 29th May 1986 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Criminal Revision Application No. 204 of 1986 whereby he allowed the revision against the order dated 13th March 1986 whereby the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Court No. 4, Pune, dismissed the application filed by Respondent No. 1 Mukund Martand Chitnis for discharge under Section 245(2), Criminal Procedure Code.2. The facts leading to the present petition, shortly stated, are that the Petitioner Smt. Madhuri Chitnis and respondent No. 1 Mukund Chitnis were married on 15th July 1983. Immediately thereafter their relationship got strained and the petitioner had to leave the house of her husband on 6th August 1983 and since then she is not residing with her husband. On 31st October 1983 Respondent No. 1 filed Complaint Case No. 494 of 1983 against the Petitioner and her near relations for the offences punishable under Sections...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [2005(106)FLR697]
P.V. Hardas, J.1. By this petition, the petitioner prays for striking down the amendment dated 16.7.1998 to Item No. 5 under Schedule III of the 1979 Rules altering the mode of recruitment and essential qualifications and making it retrospective on the ground that it is a mala fide exercise of the power and bad in law. The petitioner also prayed for quashing and setting aside the appointment of respondent No. 3 to the post of Lecturer and the further appointment of respondent No. 3 to the post of Asst. Professor in the Department of Biochemistry as well as the promotion and appointment of respondent No. 3 to the post of Asst. Professor. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of a writ of mandamus directing respondent No. 1 to consider the case of the petitioner for appointment to the post of Lecturer in the Department of Biochemistry under the unamended 1979 Rules from the date on which respondent No. 3 was appointed.2. The facts, in brief, as are necessary for the decision of thi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1961Kant69; AIR1961Mys69; 1961CriLJ398
ORDER1. The learned First Additional Sessions Judge, Dharwar has made this reference in regard to proceedings in six criminal cases pending before the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Third Court Cadag. The reference was made in consequence of revision petitions filed in each of the cases by the same person, Ranganagowda, who was arrayed as an accused in each one of the cases. The circumstances leading to the revision petitions are narrated in the order of the learned Judge resulting in the reference. In brief, it may he stated that in the course of investigation of a complaint of theft, the house of Ranganagowda was searched on 15-7-1952 and a large number of articles were seized. On the basis of the identification of articles by various persons who had laid complaints before the Police in respect of thefts alleged to have taken place from 25-6-1949 onwards the Cadag Town Police placed ten charge-sheets against Ranganagowda and others. While Ranganagowda figured in each one of the ch...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1959Kant106; AIR1959Mys106; 1959CriLJ498; ILR1958KAR254; (1958)36MysLJ434
ORDER1. This is an application for special leave to appeal from an order of acquittal parsed by the Second Magistrate, Bangalore City. ThePetitioner made a written complaint to the Police that, on the evening of 8-9-1956, the Accused trespassed into his house, assaulted him and caused him hurt. After investigation, the Bangalore North Police placed a charge-sheet against the Accused in the Court below. After inquiry, charges were framed against the Accused for offences under Sections 448 and 324 of the Indian Penal Code and after trial the Accused were acquitted.2. It is thus seen that the case was one instituted in the Court by the Police and not by the Petitioner. The question for consideration is whether the petitioner is entitled to apply for special leave under Section 417, Sub-section 3 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It reads :'If such an order of acquittal is passed in any ease instituted upon complaint and the High Court, on an application made to it by the complainant in t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : 2001(4)KarLJ627
ORDER1. The defendant in a suit for recovery of money of Rs. 2,84,110/- has preferred this revision, questioning the correctness or otherwise of the order passed by the Trial Court in LA. under Sections 94 and 151 of the CPC directing the defendants to furnish the security for the suit claim.2. It is the case of the plaintiff that the defendant had failed to repay the money taken for the construction of the house at Whitefield. She has also borrowed Rs. 50,000/- on 16-9-1991 by executing on demand promissory note. When the cheques given by her were dishonoured on presentation, complaint in CC No. 16023 of 1990 was tiled before the VIII Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate. The Magistrate in that case ordered to take action against accused under Section 193 of the IPC read with Section 430 of the Cr. P.O. for tampering the Court records believed to have been committed by the accused to suit the defence. The defendant was originally working as a Gazetted Officer in Government of Karn...
Tag this Judgment!