Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-02-2002
Reported in : [2003]42SCL177(HP)
Arun Kumar Goel, J.1. This case has a chequered history and pleadings of the parties in Company Petition No. 5 of 2001 makes an interesting reading. With a view to properly appreciate and understand the case as was projected on behalf of the parties at the time of hearing, few facts which are relevant and necessary for deciding this appeal need to be noted.2. Parties had business dealings between them. Appellant had admittedly supplied some material to the respondent, who had been making payments from time to time regarding such supplies. Appellant claims that as on 1-4-1999 a sum of Rs. 1,21,93,169.48 paise was due and outstanding payable by the respondent to it. This amount was inclusive of interest up to 31-3-1999. Further case of the appellant is that 8 cheques of the total value of Rs. 27,82,799 were issued by the respondent towards the outstanding amount. These were dishonoured when presented to the bankers of the respondent for encashment with the endorsement exceeds arrangement...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Sep-03-2002
Reported in : JT2002(8)SC238
ORDER1. Accused No. 5, who stood charged along with four others under Sections 148/447/ 302/307/323/149 IPC before the learned additional sessions judge, Bhatinda in S.C. No. 82 of 14.10.91 RT 9 of 30.10.92 and was acquitted by the trial court, but, on an appeal by the state, convicted by a division bench of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in criminal appeal No. 56- DBA of 1996, is the appellant before us. 2. The case of the prosecution , as disclosed from the evidence led in is that : PW-3, along with his wife, his brother Kaka Singh , the deceased and his wife accompanied by a labourer had gone for picking cotton in their lands and as they were in the process of doing so, Gurjant Singh, (the appellant herein), and Atma Singh armed with 'gandasas', Gurbax Singh and Bachint Singh armed with 'spears', Geja Singh and three more persons armed with 'dangs' arrived on the spot and Atma Singh raised a lalkara that the complainant party be taught a lesson for buying their land and he gave ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-04-2002
Reported in : AIR2003Bom15; 2002(4)ALLMR617; 2002(6)BomCR637; (2002)4BOMLR760; 2003(1)MhLj804
D.B. Bhosale, J.1. These two writ petitions involve common issue as to whether parties before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short 'Consumer Forum') and Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short, 'State Commission') are entitled to be represented by authorised agents who are not enrolled under the Advocates Act, 1961 and such Authorised Agents have the right of audience. The counsel appearing for the parties confined their arguments only on the aforesaid issue and hence we have not gone into the facts and merits of the complaints filed before the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short, 'Consumer Forum') by the petitioners. 2. The petitioners in the first writ petition (Writ Petition No. 1147 of 2002), who are advocates by profession, filed complaint bearing No. 428 of 2000 against respondent Nos. 2 and 3 - tour operators before respondent No. 1-Consumer Forum complaining deficiency in their service. It is the case of the petitioners that after numerous adjourn...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Sep-05-2002
Reported in : 2002(4)AWC3221
M. Katju, J.1. This writ petition has been filed for a writ of certiorari calling for the entire record in respect of allotment of retail outlet situated at Waheed Nagar, district Sant Ravidas Nagar and for quashing the entire selection process.2. The petitioner has also prayed for a mandamus directing the respondent not to interfere in the running of the retail outlet situated at Waheed Nagar, district Sant Ravidas Nagar by the petitioner. The petitioner further prayed that the respondents be directed not to issue any letter of intent in favour of respondent No. 4 or any of the other empanelled candidates.3. It is alleged by the petitioner that the Government, of India had taken a policy decision by which it allowed parallel marketing In petroleum and its products and the market was opened up for private entrepreneurs, and thus the monopoly which was being exercised by the four oil companies, namely. Indian Oil Corporation, Bharat Petroleum, I.B.P. and Hindustan Petroleum, was ended. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on : Sep-06-2002
Reported in : (2003)(86)ECC478
1. On 9.5.99, the respondent was intercepted at the Customs Barrier at Nepalganj Road on his way from Nepal to India, by officers of the Customs. 41 Indian currency notes of the denomination of Rs. 500 were recovered alongwith currency notes of lower denomination from his person and the same were seized by the officers believing that the currency notes of denomination of Rs. 500 were liable to confiscation under Section 111 (d) of the Customs Act. After recording a statement of the respondent under Section 107 of the Customs Act, the department booked a case against him and accordingly issued a show-cause notice to him for confiscating the currency notes and imposing penalty on him.The original authority ordered absolute confiscation of the seized goods worth Rs. 20,500 (Rs. 500 x 41) and imposed on the appellant a personal penalty of Rs. 500 under Section 112 of the Customs Act. The appeal preferred by the party against the order of the original authority was allowed by the Commissio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jodhpur
Decided on : Sep-10-2002
Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ174CAT
1. Through this O.A. the applicant seeks quashment of the orders dated 14.6.2001 (Annex. A.1) 25.3.88 (Annex. A-2) passed by the respondent No. 3 and the order dated 28.3.89 (Annex. A-3) passed by the respondent No. 2. It is also prayed that the respondents be directed to refund the amount which has been recovered from him pursuant to the order Annex.A-2.2. The relevant facts arc these. The applicant was employed as Driver 'B' in the office of the 3rd respondent. He was served with a charge-sheet for imposing major penalty vide communication dated 3.10.86. The allegations made against the applicant were that he was co-driver of the engine No. 6272 YDM-4 Train No. 509 and he was responsible for starting the train without authority passing starter No. 26 of road No. 5 routing starter No. 101 which was 197.20 meter away from the starter signal and stopped the train at a distance of 476.60 meter. The applicant in his reply denied the charges. The enquiry was held and the Enquiry Officer d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-11-2002
Reported in : (2003)ILLJ619Bom
R.J. Kochar, J.1. Heard the learned advocates for the parties. Rule. By consent Rule is made returnable forthwith in view of the nature of the Petitions which are being disposed of at this stage itself.2. The Petitioners, the Head Mistress of Fatimadevi English High School and the Trustees and the Secretary of Lucy Education Society, are aggrieved by the impugned Judgment and Order passed by the Appellate Authority under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 in Appeals filed by the respondent-Teachers against the Order dated December 29, 2000 passed by the Controlling Authority under the Act.3. The respondent-Teachers having put in total service of 39 years, 38 years and 34 years respectively in the School, stood superannuated on May 5, 1997, January 31, 1998 and September 20, 1999 respectively. According to them, they were entitled to get gratuity but on failure of the Petitioners to pay they approached the Controlling Authority for the purpose of getting gratuity. It appears that the Con...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-11-2002
Reported in : 2003(153)ELT513(Bom)
A.P. Shah, J. 1. Rule. Respondents waive service. By consent of the parties petitions are taken up for final hearing.2. These writ petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution seek to challenge the order dated 6-4-2002 passed by the Commissioner of Customs, Mumbai directing attachment of the premises bearing Nos. 6/1 and 6/2 situated at Lloyds Garden, Prabhadevi, Mumbai, purchased in the name of M/s. Premium Intertrade Pvt. Ltd. and Vinita Lakhotia respectively towards pending recovery of Government dues from M/s. Om Traders, M/s. Tropical Exotics and M/s. Prime Agricom under Sub-clause (ii) of Clause (c) of Section 142(1) of the Customs Act, 1962 read with Customs (Attachment of Properties of Defaulters for Recovery of Government Dues) Rules, 1995. Writ Petition No. 1394 of 2002 is filed by M/s. Premium Intertrade Pvt. Ltd. and its Director Vinita Lakhotia. Writ Petition No. 1395 of 2002 is filed by Vinita Lakhotia in her individual capacity.3. Briefly stated the facts of the case ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Sep-12-2002
Reported in : 2003(2)ALD(Cri)31; 2003BomCR(Cri)703; 2003(1)MhLj60
R.K. Batta, J. 1. The appellant was tried for rape of prosecutrix, aged about 8 years, under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. In support of the said charge, the prosecution had examined six witnesses. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur vide judgment dated 12-8-1998 held the appellant guilty for the offence under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for ten years as also to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for four months. The appellant was in custody since 16-10-1997 and he was given benefit of set off from that date, under Section 428 of the Code of Criminal procedure. The appellant has challenged the said conviction and sentence in this appeal. 2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the appellant called the prosecutrix to his house by offering peppermint. Accordingly, she went to the house of the appellant where he was alone. Appellant removed the under-wear of the prosecut...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Sep-13-2002
Reported in : 2004ACJ461
S.L. Jain, J.1. Appellants-claimants had filed an application under Section 110-A of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short) for the award of compensation initiating the proceedings arising out of an accident involving a motor vehicle, a tanker lorry/ truck bearing its registration No. GTS 6130 wherein Manoj Kumar Jain, son of appellant Nos. 2 and 3 and husband of appellant No. 1, had met with untimely death at the age of 29 years.2. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Jabalpur, on consideration of the evidence and the materials brought on record by the various parties, had determined that the present appellants, i.e., the wife and parents of the deceased were entitled to an amount of Rs. 3,02,400 towards loss of dependency, Rs. 5,000 towards loss of consortium and Rs. 2,000 for the expenses of the last rites of the deceased, total of which comes to Rs. 3,09,400. Rounding up the figure, the Tribunal awarded a total sum of Rs. 3,10,000 specifying t...
Tag this Judgment!