Court : Chennai
Decided on : Sep-09-1998
Reported in : [1999]98CompCas205(Mad)
S.S. Subramani J.1. I will first deal with W. P. No. 9843 of 1998, filed by the petitioner for issuance of writ of mandamus, directing the respondents to suspend all the recovery or take over proceedings initiated by respondents Nos. 1. and 2 against the petitioner herein, in view of the provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985, in pursuance of the application filed before the third respondent by the petitioner under Section 15 of the Act, and pass such further or other orders as this court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.2. In the affidavit filed in support of the writ petition, it is stated that the petitioner-company is a public limited company promoted by the deponent and his brothers. It is involved in the processing of LPG. It also carries out importing, storing and distribution of LPG. In 1995, the Central Government announced the liberalisation policy in the field of LPG. In order to satisfy the wide gap in demand and s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Oct-21-1998
Reported in : 1998(3)CTC236; (2001)8SCC676; AIR2001SC2861
ORDERJudgement Pronounced by Shivaraj Patil, J.1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.2. In these appeals, in the tight of the contentions raised by the parties, the only question that needs to be answered is, whether Bharathidasan University, Palkalai Perur, Tiruchirappalli in this State of Tamil Nadu, should seek approval of AH India Council for Technical Education to start technicalcourses in the University or to start a Technical Institute to conduct technical courses. For convenience, hereafter we will refer to the said University as 'University' and the All India Council for Technical Education as 'Council'.3. Writ Appeal No.1308 of 1998 is filed by the University and Bharathidasan Institute for Engineering and Technology. Writ Appeal No.1309 of 1998 is filed by a student, who was respondent No.4, impleaded in the Writ Petition No.14558 of 1998 and Writ Appeal No.1326 of 1998 is filed by another student, who was not a party in the writ petition, but after seeking leave from...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-11-1998
Reported in : [2000]102CompCas33(Mad); 1998(2)CTC754; (1999)IMLJ481
ORDER1. This revision is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, by third respondent in Transferred Application No.100 of 1996, on the file of Debts Recovery Tribunal, Madras. Respondent herein filed C.S. No. 852 of 1989, on the Original Side of this Court. When the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 came into force, the suit was transferred before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, and was numbered as Transferred Application No.100 of 1996.2. Respondent filed the suit against the defendants for recovery of more than Rs. 21 lakhs and interest at quarterly rests, and for consequential reliefs. From the body of the plaint, it could be seen that the first defendant company availed financial assistance in the nature of Term Loan and Cash Credit Facilities, as per application dated 19.11.1985. The same was sanctioned by respondent as per sanction letter dated 30.12.1985. As security for the loan, machineries were hypothecated, Computers, floppies, ri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-10-1998
Reported in : 1999(2)KarLJ231
ORDER1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri Srinivas holding brief for Sri Mahantesh S. Hosmath and Sri M.H. Ibrahim, learned Government Pleader.2. This revision arises from the order dated 13-12-1993 passed by the learned Civil Judge, Mandya, dismissing the revision petitioner's application under Section 18(3) of the Land Acquisition Act as has been barred by time.3. The facts of the case in the nutshell are that, in land acquisition proceedings, award was given by the Special Land Acquisition Officer, which award is dated 1-10-1990. Revision petitioner was paid the compensation to the tune of Rs. 9,222/- as per voucher dated 14-10-1992. The voucher was passed for payment on 14-10-1992. The revision petitioner after receipt of the amount filed a protest note with prayer that the amount assessed is too low and unsatisfactory and the matter should be referred to the Civil Court for decision under Section 18. This way he made prayer for reference being made under Section 18 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Nov-11-1998
Reported in : (1999)1MLJ481
ORDERS.S. Subramani, J.1. This revision is filed under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, by third respondent in Transferred Application No. 100 of 1996, on the file of Debts Recovery Tribunal, Madras. Respondent herein filed C.S.No. 852 of 1989, on the Original Side of this Court. When the recovery of debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993 came into force, the suit was transferred before the Debts Recovery Tribunal, and was numbered as Transferred Application No. 100 of 1996.2. Respondent filed the suit against the defendants for recovery of more than Rs. 21 lakhs and interest at quarterly rests, and for consequential reliefs. From the body of the plaint, it could be seen that the first defendant company availed financial assistance in the nature of term loan and cash credit facilities, as per application dated 19.11.1985. The same was sanctioned by respondent as per sanction letter dated 30.12.1985. As security for the loan, machineries were hypothecated, comp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-06-1998
Reported in : 1998(5)KarLJ199
ORDER1. The petitioner by this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has prayed for issuance of writ, order or direction to the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularisation and for reallotment of the sites in question and to reallot the sites in question in favour of the petitioner and to issue possession certificates to the petitioners and to cancel or withdraw the sites granted in favour of respondents 2 and 3. Petitioner has further prayed for grant of such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit.2. Petitioner in the writ petition has stated that she has purchased a revenue site bearing No. 3 measuring 40' x 36' formed in Sy. No. 15/2 of Kathriguppa Village under registered sale deed dated 10-4-1974 from her vendor Smt. B.N. Suguna for valuable consideration. She has asserted that from the date of purchase of aforementioned site, petitioner has been in peaceful possession and enjoyment of the said site. Petitioner's case is that her n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-11-1998
Reported in : AIR1998Kant288; ILR1998KAR1637; 1998(3)KarLJ47
G.C. Bharuka, J.1. The short question involved in this appeal is as to whether the resolution dated 26-2-1993 passed by the respondent-Agricultural Produce Market Committee purporting to cancel the allotment/sale of Site No. 9 in Block 'H', measuring 60' x 120' of Sy. No. 1 in Srigandha Kavalu, Kasaba Hobli, Shimoga City, being the notified market yard, can be held to be legally permissible on the part of the said Market Committee. Since the learned Single Judge by his impugned order has answered the said question in the affirmative, therefore, the present appeal by the writ petitioner.2. The respondent-Market Committee has been established under Section 9 of the Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation) Act, 1966 (in short 'the APMC Act') having the jurisdiction over the entire market area of Shimoga. It is now an accomplished fact that as provided under the provisions of the Act the said Market Committee has been established for ensuring better regulation of buying and se...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-02-1998
Reported in : II(1999)DMC150
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. Through this appeal the appellant challenges the judgment and order dated 23.12.1994 passed by the 4th Additional Sessions Judge, Satara, in Sessions Case No. 36/1994, whereby he has been convicted and sentenced in the manner stated hereinafter:(i) Under Section 302, Indian Penal Code to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- in default to undergo 6 months R.I.;(ii) Under Section 323, Indian Penal Code to suffer 6 months R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/- in default to undergo 8 days R.I.The substantive sentences of the appellant were ordered to run concurrently.2. In short the prosecution case runs as under:The appellant alongwith his son Adam (absconding accused), Adam's wife Chivchiv and second wife Alaki (absconding accused) at the time of the incident was residing in a hut created in the land of one Dnyanu Shinde in Village Patkhal, District Satara. In the adjoining huts the informant Phonya PW 6, his father Meharlal PW 9, his mother Rand...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jul-24-1998
Reported in : I(1999)DMC724
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. Through this appeal, the State of Maharashtra (Appellant) challenges the judgment and order dated 30.11.1984, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, in Sessions Case No. 129 of 1984, acquitting the respondent for an offence punishable under Section 302, IPC.2. In short, the prosecution case is that the deceased Shashikala, daughter of Dagadu Anyaba Kamble PW 1, was married to the respondent about 9 to 10 months prior to the incident. After marriage, she stayed for a couple of months at the house of the respondent situated in Indira Nagar Zopadpatti Pune-Alandi Road, Pune. During Diwali, she came to the house of her father. After Diwali, her father sent through her some clothes to the respondent. The respondent came to him and threw those clothes. Shashikala expected that the respondent would beat her. Consequently, Dagadu Kamble brought her to his place at Khed. After she was with him for a week there, the respondent along with his father Dhondiba came and bo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-10-1998
Reported in : 1999CriLJ471
Vishnu Sahai, J.1. The appellant aggrieved by the Judgment and order dated 31-12-1996, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gadhinglaj, Kolhapur, in Sessions Case No. 41 of 1996, convicting and sentencing him to undergo 10 years R.I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- in default to suffer R.I. for 1 1/2 years, for an offence under Section 304(2), I.P.C, has come up in appeal before us.2. In short, the prosecution case is that the deceased Dhulappa was husband of the informant Surekha Naik PW 4. He had a brother Antu who died sometimes prior to the incident leaving behind his widow Ambubai and three sons. It is said that illicit relationship between the appellant and Ambubai developed and on this score, Dhulappa was not on talking terms with the appellant.Both Dhulappa and appellant used to stay in contiguous houses in Naik Galli, Nosari Tal, Gadhinglaj, District Kolhapur.On 9-7-1996, at about 9 to 9.15 p.m. Dhulappa was talking with his niece Irappa PW 5, on the verandah of the appell...
Tag this Judgment!