Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-09-2002
Reported in : 100(2002)DLT306
Dalveer Bhandari, J. 1. These appeals are directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned Single Judge in Suit Nos. 1626 of 1983 and 1627 of 1983. Both the suits were clubbed and evidence was recorded only in Suit No. 1626 of 1983 titled Holiday Inns Inc. v. Kapoor Holiday Inn and on the strength of the evidence in the said case both the suits were disposed of by a common judgment and decree dated 21.5.1986. The appellants herein are defendants in suits and the respondent herein is the plaintiff.2. The respondent company. Holiday Inn Inc is a registered company of the United States of America and has acquired global reputation. The respondent learnt that the appellants were using the words 'Holiday Inn' on its visiting cards, menu cards, tariff cards, stationery and other printed materials relating to its lodgings and restaurant, towels, crockery, cutlery, key, chains/rings and diverse goods relating to its lodgings and restaurant. The said use was in flagrant violation ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-09-2002
Reported in : (2002)258ITR106(Mum.)
1. This appeal has been filed by the Department against the order dated August 4, 1994, of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-XII, Bombay, for the assessment year 1991-92. "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in holding that expenditure of Rs. 2.80 lakhs incurred on tele film is allowable as revenue expenditure disregarding the fact that asset acquired with enduring benefit was to be used for the purpose of advertisement of business. He also should have followed the ratio of the decision laid down by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Patel International Film Ltd. [1976] 102 ITR 219. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in deleting addition amounting to Rs. 28,117 disregarding the fact that the object of expenditure incurred on account of stamp duty related to acquisition of asset and is assessable...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-09-2002
Reported in : (2004)89TTJ(Mumbai)48
ORDERA.K. JA.IN, J.M.:This appeal has been filed by the department against the order dated 4th Aug., 1994, of the learned Commissioner (Appeals)-XlI, Bombay, for the assessment year 1991-92.2. The department has raised the following grounds of appeal.'1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in holding that expenditure of Rs. 2.80 lakhs incurred on tele-film is allowable as revenue expenditure disregarding the fact that asset acquired with enduring benefit was to be used for the purpose of advertisement of business.also should have followed the ratio of the decision laid down by the Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Patel International Film ITD. : [1976]102ITR219(Bom) .'2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) erred in deleting addition amounting to Rs. 28,117 disregarding the fact that object of expenditure incurred on account of stamp duty related to acqui...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Aug-13-2002
Reported in : [2002(95)FLR1158]; ILR2002KAR5321; 2002(6)KarLJ79; (2003)ILLJ658Kant
1. The Management, appellant being aggrieved by the order of the learned Single Judge passed in W.P. No. 12408 of 1996, dated 27-1-1999 has preferred this writ appeal.2. The brief facts of the case are as follows.--The respondent was working as Deputy Manager, Production Control, Naval Division under the appellant-company. He was charge-sheeted by a charge-sheet dated 21-10-1994 for certain acts of misconduct of drawing unauthorisedly certain silver materials for Naval equipment division where there was no requirement of silver parts and he also failed to store them safely in appropriate stores and he failed to produce them when asked by his superiors and other charges as mentioned in the charge-sheet.3. The respondent submitted his explanation to the charge-sheet. The explanation was not satisfactory and the Management, appellant decided to hold an enquiry in the matter. An Enquiry Officer was appointed. The Enquiry Officer held the enquiry in accordance with law and in accordance wit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Aug-13-2002
Reported in : JT2002(6)SC310
ORDER1. The appellant along with his lady friend, Jyoti was charged under Sections 302 and 307 IPC read with Section 34 IPC for having committed the murder of one Ramkaran Mishra and also for inflicting injuries on one Narendra Kumar, PW2 on 26.6.1995 between 8.30 p.m. and 10 p.m. at Indore. Learned additional sessions judge, Indore found the said Jyoti not guilty of the offence alleged against her hence acquitted her, while the appellant was found guilty of the offence under Section 302 IPC hence sentenced himto undergo imprisonment for life for having committed the murder of said Ramkaran Mishra. He also found the appellant guilty for the offence under Section 307 IPC and sentenced him rigorous imprisonment for 7 years for having caused injuries with the intention to cause death of Narendra Kumar, PW2.2. The appellant's appeal before the High Court of Madhya Pradesh having failed he is before us in this appeal by leave. However, it should be noticed that on 18.9.2001 leave was grante...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Aug-14-2002
Reported in : AIR2002SC2994; 2002CriLJ3915; 2002(3)Crimes218(SC); JT2002(6)SC106; 2002(5)SCALE605; (2002)6SCC700; [2002]SUPP1SCR550
Bisheshwar Prasad Singh, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order of the High Court of Madras dated 21st September, 2002 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 293 of 1990 filed by the appellants against the judgment and order of the Sessions Judge dated 3rd August, 1990 whereby appellants 1 and 2 were found guilty of the offences under Sections 341, 302/109 IPC and appellant No. 3 was found guilty of the offence under Section 341 and 302 IPC. The appellants have been sentenced to 6 months rigorous imprisonment under Section 341 IPC and life imprisonment under Section 302/109 and 302 IPC. The High Court by the impugned judgment and order dismissed the appeal and affirmed the judgment and order of the trial court.2. Special leave was granted limited to the question as to whether the offence proved falls under Section 304 IPC and whether the conviction and sentence under Section 302, 302/109 IPC calls for modification.3. Appellant No. 1, Munuswamy is the father of appellants 2 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Aug-14-2002
Reported in : AIR2003Raj128; 2003(1)WLC495; 2003(2)WLN383
Arun Kumar, C.J. 1. This batch of appeals and D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3879/2001 raise common questions of law and, therefore, they were heard together and are being disposed of by this judgment. The only additional point raised in D. B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3839/2001 is that it challenges vires of Section 3(36) of the Rajasthan Municipalities Act, 1959 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Act) read with Rule 3, Sub-rule (9) of the Rajasthan Municipalities (Motion of No Confidence Against Chairman and Vice-Chairman) Rules, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as 'No Confidence Motion Rules') on the ground that these are violative of Articles 14 and 243-R of the Constitution of India. Though, several legal issues have been raised in these cases, the foremost point is, as to whether nominated members of a Municipal Board, who have been meetings of the Board, should be counted in total no confidence in the Chairman or Vice-Chairman of the Board.2. As per facts on record, no confidence m...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Aug-16-2002
Reported in : AIR2002SC3018; (SCSuppl)2002(4)CHN202; 2002CriLJ3939; 2002(4)Crimes5(SC); JT2002(6)SC144; 2002(5)SCALE608; (2002)7SCC11; [2002]SUPP1SCR556
Brijesh Kumar, J. 1. Maha Singh and the appellant Hardeep, father and son respectively have been prosecuted for murder of one Rajinder Singh. The Sessions Court on trial of the case acquitted Maha Singh but convicted the present appellant Hardeep under Section 304 Part-I IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/-, in default whereof further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months.2. Aggrieved by the said order, Hardeep filed an appeal to the High Court against his conviction and sentence and the State of Punjab filed an appeal against the acquittal of Maha Singh as well as against acquittal of Hardeep under Section 302 IPC in place whereof he had been convicted under Section 304 Part-I IPC as indicated earlier. A revision was also preferred by Baljeet Singh against the said order passed by the Sessions Court. The High Court by order dated September 20, 2000 allowed the appeal of the State and convicted the a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-16-2002
Reported in : AIR2003Delhi211; (2003)134PLR1
Usha Mehra, J.1. Appellant/plaintiff submitted her tender for the supply of 5000 street light brackets on 4th of June, 1965 to the respondent. The said tender was accepted and the supply order was placed on her on 8th June, 1965. According to the plaintiff, the said supply order contained incomplete information. The details were missing with regard to type of hold to be provided in the refectories. That the complete details were supplied to her only on 9th August, 1965, hence the delay in supply. Moreover for lack of details and delay in furnishing the details she suffered losses. She, thereforee, made claim for the balance payment, damages, interest and refund of the earnest money as well as the price of the goods supplied in excess, total claim amounting to Rs. 14,000/-.2. That the suit of the appellant was contested by the respondent inter alia, on the grounds that complete information was furnished in the supply order dated 8th June, 1965. Moreover as and when any information was s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-19-2002
Reported in : 2003(1)MPHT397
Ajit Singh, J. 1. Appellant Kishan, the sole accused person in this case, has been convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life by IInd Additional Sessions Judge to the Court of Sessions Judge, Chhindwara, vide impugned judgment dated 23-2-89 for causing the murder of Patiram, the deceased in the case. He has also been convicted under Section307 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo seven years rigorous imprisonment for attempting to commit the murder of Sukhchand (P.W. 4). Both the sentences are to run concurrently. Appellant has been found guilty of causing fatal injuries on the person of deceased Patiram and causing grievous injuries to Sukhchand (P.W. 4) by means of a 'lathi' at about 9.00 a.m. on 21-4-87 at Dewardha Nala. 2. Briefly stated the facts giving rise to this appeal are as under :-- The appellant used to sell illicit liquor from his house. On 21-4-87 Sukhchand (P.W. 4) and Patiram, while returning after attending...
Tag this Judgment!