Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Aug-08-2008
Reported in : JT2008(8)SC650; 2008(11)SCALE233; 2008AIRSCW6322
P. Sathasivam, J.1. Challenging the order of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 19.9.2002 in Criminal Appeal No. 812 of 1980 acquitting Kishanpal Singh, Suresh Singh, Mahendra Singh @ Neksey Singh, Jaivir Singh, Sheodan Singh and Bahar Singh (Accused Nos. 2, 4, 7, 8, 9 & 10), the State of Uttar Pradesh has filed this appeal.2. The case of the prosecution is as follows:On 21.6.1978 at 3.30 p.m., the sixteen accused persons gathered at the door of Gyan Singh and made a criminal conspiracy for killing Kaptan Singh and Raj Mahesh as they were harassing them unnecessarily. At about 4.00 P.M., Onkar Singh, Kishanpal Singh, Vijaipal Singh, Suresh Singh, Naresh Singh, Daulat Singh, Mahendra Singh @ Neksey Singh, Jaivir Singh, Sheodan Singh and Bahar Singh (Accused Nos. 1to10) reached at the place of occurrence with firearms. Onkar Singh (Accused No. 1), Naresh Singh (Accused No. 5), Daulat Singh (Accused No. 6) and Sheodan Singh (Accused No. 9) had guns while others had country-ma...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Aug-13-2008
Reported in : (2010)27VST202(All)
Prakash Krishna, J.1. The dealer opposite party carries on the business of manufacture and sale of P.V.C. Sheets and has been granted eligibility certificate under Section 4-A of U.P. Trade Tax Act for the period from 19-8-1991 to 18-8-1999. Similar exemption has been granted to it in respect of inter State sales under notification No. 1094 dated 27-7-1991 issued by the State Government in exercise of powers conferred on it under Sub-section (5) of Section 8 of the Central Sales Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the Act). Under the said notification, the dealer opposite party is entitled to claim total exemption in respect of inter State sales for the two assessment years. In the subsequent years, such a dealer is entitled to exemption at the rate prescribed in Annexure-1 to the notification. The dispute in the present case relates to the third assessment year from the date of grant of eligibility certificate. Under the notification, exemption is granted at 10% of the rate of tax nor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Aug-13-2008
Reported in : AIR2009Ker9; 2008(3)KLJ92
ORDERM. Sasidharan Nambiar, J.1. While computing the period of limitation for execution of the decree under Article 136 of Limitation Act, whether date of decree is to be excluded or the period of 12 years is to be computed inclusive of the date of decree. This is the question to be resolved in the revision petition.2. Petitioner is the judgment debtor and respondent the decree holder in O.S. 856/1993 on the file of Principal Sub Court, Thiruvananthapuram. A decree for realisation of money was passed on 30.6.1994. E.P. No. 223/2006 for execution of the decree was filed on 30.6.2006. Case of the judgment debtor is that the period of limitation expired on 29.6.2006 and therefore the execution is barred by time. Case of the respondent decree holder is that as the date of the decree is to be excluded while computing the period and so the execution petition is within time. Executing court as per the impugned order found that date of the decree is to be excluded and if so, the execution peti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Aug-20-2008
Reported in : 2008(11)SCALE504; 2008(2)LC1133(SC); 2008AIRSCW5914
Mukundakam Sharma, J.1. These appeals, which are filed by the complainant, are against an order of acquittal passed by the Patna High Court on 9th August, 2000, whereby the Division Bench acquitted the respondents while allowing the appeals filed by them questioning the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by Additional Sessions Judge II, Gaya on 22nd December, 1997 in Sessions Tr. Nos. 177/1995 and 134/1995.2. Satendra Sharma, respondent No. 1 in Crl. Appeal 553/2001 was tried for offences punishable under Section 364, Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the `IPC') and Section 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 while Pankaj Sharma and Ramakant Sharma, respondent Nos. 1 and 2 respectively in Crl. Appeal 554/2001 were tried for offences punishable under Section 364, Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC for murder of one Ajay Sharma (hereinafter referred to as the `deceased'). The trial court found that all the three respondents are guilty and sentenced ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Aug-20-2008
Reported in : 2008(38)PTC69(Del)
ORDER11.08.2006After some arguments learned Counsel appearing for the appellant seeks permission to withdraw this application with liberty to approach the learned single judge. Permission is granted. The application stands disposed of as withdrawn with liberty as prayed.Records of the learned single judge shall be returned forthwith. The same shall be made available as and when the appeal is taken up for hearing. Dr. Mukundakam Sharma, JHima Kohli, J.August, 11, 2006.12. The defendant thereafter moved the present application, IA No. 13850/2006. The Division Bench made the following order, on 31-1-2008, (on an application of the plaintiff, for modification of its previous order, permitting the defendant to approach this Court):31.01.2008Present : Mr. Abhay Nath, Proxy Counsel for the appellantMr. Shailen Bhatia with Ms. Amita Kapur for the Respondent.FAO (OS) No. 232/1999.Counsel appearing for the parties state that the application, which is filed by the respondent seeking for a directi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Aug-21-2008
Reported in : 2008(6)ALLMR817; 2009(1)MhLj371
P.B. Majmudar, J.1. Rule. Learned Assistant Government Pleader waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondents. With the consent of the learned Advocates, rule is made returnable forthwith.2. By filing this petition, the petitioner, who is a student, has raised an important issue for consideration of this Court as to whether at the time of taking Common Entrance Test ('CET' for short) examination, any deviation can be made by the respondents in the matter of giving marks contrary to Rules and instructions given in this behalf.3. The petitioner has cleared her HSC Examination from the Maharashtra State and Higher Secondary Education Board, Pune and secured 62% marks in the subjects of Physics, Chemistry and Biology. The State of Maharashtra, for the purpose of admission for medical and dental courses framed rules and introduced CET. As per the said Rules, the duration of the examination is three hours. The method of answering the questions is also prescribed in the Rules. As per the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-22-2008
Reported in : 2009(3)MPHT196
Sushma Shrivastava, J.1. Appellant has preferred this appeal challenging his conviction and order of sentence passed by Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal in S.T. No. 36/93, decided on 5-4-94.2. Appellant has been convicted under Section 376 of IPC for committing rape on a minor girl aged about eight years and sentenced to Rigorous Imprisonment for seven years by the impugned judgment.3. According to prosecution, on 21-11-92 in the evening at Motinagar, Bhopal, when complainant's daughter aged eight years (hereinafter referred to as 'victim') was playing outside her house, appellant came there and took her to cattle-shed and committed sexual intercourse with her. When she shouted, appellant intimidated and threatened her not to disclose the incident to anyone at her house. When the mother of the girl discovered the injuries oh her private part while giving bath to her, she enquired from her. The girl then narrated the incident of rape to her mother. The matter was then reported to P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Aug-22-2008
Reported in : AIR2009SC552; JT2008(9)SC263; 2008(11)SCALE607; 2008(3)Crimes343; 2008(6)Supreme256
Arijit Pasayat, J.1. Challenge in these appeals is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court accepting the appeal filed by the respondents who were found guilty of offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the `IPC'). The High Court held that if on taking overall view of the case right of self defence is made out or looks probable from the evidence on record, that right should not be construed narrowly because the right of self defence is a very valuable right and it has a social purpose.2. Background facts as projected by prosecution in a nutshell are as follows:The incident occurred on 12.7.1978 at about 5.30 a.m. The respondents 1 and 2 are brothers and sons of Sheo Balak Misra. On the aforesaid date and time the accused respondents armed with knife and lathi respectively arrived at the `Gotha' of the Mohan Mishra (hereinafter referred to as the `deceased') and accused Hari Shanker started beating the de...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Aug-26-2008
Reported in : 2008(4)CHN608,LC2008(3)319,2009(41)PTC689(Cal)
Sanjib Banerjee, J.1. The parties jostle for more leg-space on the Ayurveda bandwagon as it chugs its way to the Occident with its load of mystique and oriental herbs and spices. The plaintiff asserts its exclusive right over the word mark 'Ayur' on the strength of a black and white label registration showing the word 'Ayur' in an unremarkable font with an elliptical band around it. Such label is registered in many classes. The word mark 'Ayu' is registered in favour of the plaintiff in class 5 covering medicinal and like products. On the strength of the word 'Ayur' being the most prominent part of the plaintiff's label registrations and its proprietary right to the word 'Ayu', the plaintiff seeks to stop the defendant's use of any trademark carrying any part of either word over which the plaintiff claims exclusivity.2. Both parties are substantial. The plaintiff's impressive sales figures and advertisement expenses are matched by the defendant's substantial reputation and noticeable p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Himachal Pradesh
Decided on : Aug-27-2008
Reported in : 2008(2)ShimLC510
Deepak Gupta, J.1. This Appeal is directed against the judgment dated 13th April, 2005 passed by a the learned Single Judge of this Court whereby he has held that this Court has no jurisdiction to entertain and adjudicate the objections filed by the present appellant to the award of the Arbitrator.2. The brief facts necessary for decision of the case are that the Nathpa Jhakri Power Corporation which has now been re-named as Satluj Jal Vidyut Nigam Limited (hereinafter referred to as the appellant-objector) entered into a contract with M/s. Continental Foundation Joint Venture which is an unincorporated joint venture between M/s. Continental Construction Limited duly registered under the Indian Companies Act and the Foundation Company of Canada Limited being a Company registered under the laws of Canada. This contract was entered into between the parties for the purposes of the construction of the Nathpa Jhakri Hydro Electric Project. The contract was entered into between the parties a...
Tag this Judgment!