Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
Decided on : Dec-22-2006
Reported in : (2008)LCAPTEL203
1. By this petition, under Section 121 of the Electricity Act, 2003, (for short 'the Act') the petitioner seeks the following reliefs: a. Order and direct the Appropriate Commissions to ensure that all generating companies and licensees abide by the provisions of the Act in so far as they relate to sale and purchase of electricity at regulated tariffs. b. Order and direct the Appropriate Commissions to fix the trading margins for trading licensees. c. Order and direct the Appropriate Commissions to review trading operations/ sales undertaken by generating companies and licensees within their jurisdiction and, where necessary, initiate proceedings for recovery of excess amounts charged by the generating companies and/ or licensees. d. Pass such other or further order(s) and/or direction(s) as may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the present case.2. It is averred in the petition that the petitioner has no personal interest in the present petition except as a consume...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Apr-27-2006
Reported in : 2006(4)AWC3281
Devi Prasad Singh, J.1. Controversy relates to interpretation of Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Whether against an order issuing notice to defendants on an application for temporary injunction filed under Order XXXIX, Rules 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure, a revision under Section 115 of the Code of Civil Procedure shall be maintainable is the question involved in the present writ petition?2. Plaintiffs opposite parties No. 2 to 6 had filed a Regular Suit No. 129 of 2006 in the Court of Civil Judge, Senior Division Lucknow for permanent injunction. According to plaintiffs they are migrants from Pakistan and settled in this country during the partition years. The Government of India had rehabilitated them in various parts of the country. According to plaintiff respondents, the Cantonment Board had allotted to plaintiffs family the shops in question. They have got certain gumties on Nehru Road near Sadar Bazar Chauraha, Cantonment Lucknow, alleged to be allotted to th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-02-2006
Reported in : 2006(5)ALT661
ORDERP.S. Narayana, J.1. The relief prayed for by the writ petitioner, Nimmaka Jayaraju, is for a writ or direction, more particularly one in the nature of writ of mandamus directing the District Collector -Respondent No. 5 to initiate prosecution against respondent No. 7, and direct respondent No. 2 to recover pay and allowances paid to respondent No. 7 while he represented as Member of Lok Sabha and also direct respondent No. 4 to recover pay and allowances paid to respondent No. 7 during the periods he represented as member, legislative Assembly and pass such other suitable orders.2. The interim relief prayed for is for a direction to respondent No1 to dismiss respondent No. 7 as Cabinet Minister of the Government of Andhra Pradesh during the pendancy of the writ petition and pass such other suitable orders.3. This Court ordered notice before admission on 9-6-2006 and the learned Government Pleader for General Administration Department had taken notice and requested time to file cou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Oct-24-2006
Reported in : 2006(6)ALT523; 2007(1)CTC97; AIR2007AP57; 2007(2)AIRKarR382(FB)
..... with the public conscious, with public good and public interest, declare such practice to be opposed public policy and that the courts have to bear in mind the principles contained in the preamble to the constitution of india. when the precedents are lacking, the court can always be guided by principles underlying the fundamental rights and directive principles enshrined in our constitution of india. the court, ..... appropriate declaration under section 34 of the specific relief act, read with article 59 of the schedule under the limitation act, 1963. the writ petition is not a proper remedy.89. following the decision in property association of baptist churches (1 supra), another learned single judge in karimnagar education society, karimnagar v. the district registrar, ..... main submissions, learned counsel placed reliance on muppudathi v. krishnaswami air 1960 madras 1 (fb.), komal chand v. state : air1966mp20 , state of kerala v. the cochin chemical refineries ltd. : [1968]3scr556 , hiralal agrawal v. rampadarath singh : [1969]1scr328 , jogi das v. fakir ..... it is not open to the judges to make a sort of referendum or hear evidence or conduct an inquiry as to the prevailing moral concept. such an extended extra-judicial enquiry is wholly outside the tradition of courts where the tendency is to 'trust the judge to be a typical representative of his day and generation'. our law-relies, on the implied insight of the judge on such matters. it is the judges themselves, assisted by the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Mar-03-2006
Reported in : 2006(3)BomCR66; (2006)IIILLJ824Bom
D.Y. Chandrachud, J.1. Principally two questions of law have arisen for the determination of this Court in these proceedings:-(i) Whether the expression 'unprotected worker' means (as the Petitioner submits), a worker not protected by labour legislation or whether the expression means a manual worker who is engaged or to be engaged in any scheduled employment as defined in Section 2(11) of the Maharashtra Mathadi, Hamal and Other Manual Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1969; and -(ii) Whether a Mathadi worker who has been engaged directly by an employer would fall outside the purview of the Maharashtra Mathadi, Hamal and Other Manual Workers (Regulation of Employment and Welfare) Act, 1969. 2. We shall in the course of the order briefly advert to the relevant provisions of law having a bearing on the subject matter of this case and of the precedents in the field. For the reasons which we would indicate, we are respectfully of the view that the interpretation placed i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jun-02-2006
Reported in : 2006CriLJ4759; 132(2006)DLT42; 2006(90)DRJ31
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.1. This revision petition is directed against the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 02.03.2006, whereby the appeal filed on behalf of the petitioner against the order of the Juvenile Justice Board dated 10.02.2006 rejecting the petitioner's bail application, has been dismissed. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner referred to the impugned judgment and in particular paragraph 4 thereof to indicate that it is an admitted position that there is nothing adverse qua the petitioner in the Social Investigation Report. The learned Counsel for the petitioner pointed out that despite the Social Investigation Report being entirely in favor of the petitioner, the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and refused to grant him bail on the ground that if the petitioner were to be granted bail, it would defeat the ends of justice. The exact words used by the learned Additional Sessions Judge while dismissing the appeal ar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Dec-18-2006
Reported in : (2007)109BOMLR483
S.J. Vazifdar, J.1(A). Suit No. 1012 of 1983 is filed for a decree in the sum of Rs. 6,49,209.49/- with interest on Rs. 5,71,337.49/- at the rate of 18% pa. from the date of the suit till payment. In the alternative the plaintiffs have sought a decree against the Defendants in the sum of Rs. 1,17,364.60/- with interest at the rate of 18% on Rs. 1,05,928.58/- from the date of the suit till payment. The suit was originally filed by Dadlani Silk Stores and the present Defendant No. 2, Vishraj Garments Private Limited. By an amendment Dadlani Silk Stores were substituted by the present Plaintiff No. 1, Ramesh Thawardas Dadlani.(B) Suit No. 873 of 1983 is filed by the Defendants in Suit No. 1012 of 1983 for a decree in the sum of Rs. 58,435.44/-together with interest at the rate of 19.50% per annum. Defendant Nos. 1 to 3 in this suit were, at the material time, partners of Defendant No. 4, Dadlani Silk Stores (Original Plaintiff No. 1 in Suit No. 1012 of 1983).2. The parties agreed that the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-13-2006
Reported in : AIR2007SC471; 2007(2)ALD1(SC); 2007(1)AWC524(SC); [2008(2)JCR55(SC)]; JT2007(1)SC24; 2006(11)SCALE482; 2006AIRSCW5879; 2007(1)SCC641
Dalveer Bhandari,J. 1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court delivered in FMAT No. 6 of 1997 dated 10th October, 2002.2. The appellant is aggrieved by the Notification under Section 4 and declaration under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 dated 13th December, 1994 and 23rd June, 1995 respectively published and made by the Government of West Bengal in respect of premises No. 4, Pretoria Street, Calcutta measuring more or less 0.0988 hectare (0.2441 acre). 3. The appellant had challenged the said notification by filing a writ petition before the Calcutta High Court. The learned Single Judge had allowed the writ petition and quashed the notification. The said notification under Section 4 reads as under:NOTIFICATIONCalcutta No. 4364-LA(PW)/3P-21/94/Home (Police)Dated, Calcutta the 13th December, 1994WHEREAS it appears to the Governor that land is likely to be needed for a public purpose not being a purpose of Union namely f...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-11-2006
Reported in : 2007CriLJ122
D.B. Bhosale, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State. 2. Rule, returnable forthwith. By consent of the parties taken up for final hearing. The learned Counsel for the respondents waive service. 3. The question of considerable significance, raised in this writ petition, is that whenever any Magistrate, after having heard and recorded the whole or any part of the evidence in a case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short 'the Act') ceases to exercise jurisdiction therein, either on account of his transfer or retirement, and is succeeded by another Magistrate, whether in view of the provisions contained in Section 143 of the Act, the succeeding Magistrate requires to hold a denovo trial as contemplated under Section 326(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Code') or can act on the evidence so recorded by his predecessor and proceed further from the stage at which he takes over and decide the case as conte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Nov-22-2006
Reported in : [2007(113)FLR234]
R.M.S. Khandeparkar, J.1. Heard. The petitioner challenges the order dated 14.8.2006 passed in Complaint (ULP) No. 150 of 2006 by the Industrial Court, Thane whereby the application, filed by the petitioner seeking for direction to the respondents to allow the petitioner to be represented by an office bearer of the Trade Union during the course of the inquiry against the petitioner, has been dismissed.Few facts relevant for the decision are that the petitioner joined the services in the respondent-company as a plant-operator on 16.11.1992. After having issued the order of suspension on 29.11.2004, a charge-sheet was issued and the inquiry was initiated against the petitioner on 25.12.2004 by appointing Shri D.S. Nimbalkar, a practising Advocate, as the management's representative. The petitioner sought to appoint Shri Patki, Vice-President of the Trade Union of which the petitioner is the member, to be his defence representative in the said inquiry. The said request of the petitioner w...
Tag this Judgment!