Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-15-2008
Reported in : 2008(3)ALLMR234; 2008(3)BomCR63; (2008)IIILLJ292Bom; 2008(3)MhLj739
Roshan Dalvi, J.1. The Petitioner belongs to Maratha caste by birth. She is married to a person belonging to Mahadev Koli, Scheduled Tribe. The Petitioner claims to belong to Mahadev Koli, Scheduled Tribe by virtue of her marriage to her husband.2. The only question for determination in this Writ Petition is whether she can claim the advantages and benefits granted to Mahadev Kolis by virtue of her marriage.3. The Petitioner has relied upon a couple certificate which does not grant the benefits claimed by her. She has also relied upon the Government Resolutions (G.Rs) dated 19th October 1959 and 16th May 1966 encouraging inter-caste marriages under which she would be eligible to all concessions granted to that Scheduled Tribe.4. The Petitioner was appointed Junior Assistant by Respondent No. 3 on 29th December 2003 under the quota reserved for Scheduled Tribe. She submitted documents for issue of Caste Certificate showing that she belonged to Scheduled Tribe which was not by birth but ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Feb-18-2008
Reported in : 2008(4)ALLMR369; 2008(4)BomCR862; 2008(3)MhLj151
C.L. Pangarkar, J.1. These four appeals can be decided together since identical questions are involved in them.2. The facts are as follows:The Government of Maharashtra issued a Gazette Notification on 6-4-1988 acquiring the land in question for Khumari Talao, Minor Irrigation Project. The Land Acquisition Officer passed an award against the State on 26-6-1992. A reference was made under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act to Civil Court and the references were registered as Land Acquisition Cases. In the said reference cases there were three non applicants namely (1) State of Maharashtra (2) Land Acquisition Officer and (3) Collector. The Civil Court passed an award in the said cases on 31-1-2001. Dissatisfied with the award the Executive Engineer of the Minor Irrigation Division Nagpur preferred these appeals. The appeals came to be presented on 6-6-2001. Later on Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation (hereinafter referred to as VIDC) moved an application for adding it as pa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-18-2008
Reported in : AIR2009SC1290; 2008BusLR335(SC); (2008)2MLJ1140(SC); 2008(3)SCALE24; (2008)4SCC380; [2008]82SCL435(SC); 2008(1)LC339(SC)
C.K. Thakker, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Both these appeals have been instituted against common judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (Original Side) dated February 20/21, 2006 in Appeal Nos. 449-450 of 2005 in Company Petition No. 857 of 2004. First appeal has been filed by Severn Trent Water Purification Inc. while the second appeal is filed by Chloro Controls (India) Pvt. Ltd. 3. The facts giving rise to the present appeals, in brief as noted by the Division Bench of the High Court are as follows. 4. Severn Trent Water Purification Inc., USA (hereinafter referred to as "Severn Trent") filed a petition for winding up the Capital Controls (India) Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as 'the Company') on just and equitable grounds under Section 433(f) of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The learned Company Judge by his order dated 21st April 2005 admitted the company petition. Aggrieved thereby two appe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-19-2008
Reported in : 149(2008)DLT205; 2008(101)DRJ283
..... at least twenty electors of the constituency as proposers and at least twenty electors of the constituency as seconders; (c) in the case of a seat reserved for sikkimese of nepali origin, by an elector of the constituency as proposer:provided further that no nomination paper shall be delivered to the returning officer on a day which is a public holiday .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Feb-20-2008
Reported in : AIR2008AP134; 2008(2)ALD785; 2008(2)ALT474; II(2008)DMC43
Nooty Ramamohana Rao, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree rendered by the Family Court, Hyderabad in OP No. 43 of 1997 instituted by the respondent-husband under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act seeking annulment of the marriage that took place between them on 15-11-1989. This tragic case unfolds the grave impact, an otherwise innocuous piece of information not being put forth at the very beginning, will have, upon the conjugal life of two highly qualified individuals.2. The respondent-husband who hails from Hyderabad City has pursued his career in a performing art - a dance form of India. His mastery over this Fine art has taken him to shores as far as New York City where he settled down in 1981 and eventually became a citizen of the United States of America. Upon an informal introduction by a common friend, they came in close contact with each other facilitating exchange of views and then agreed to get united in wedlock. By then both the parties are beyo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : House of Lords
Decided on : Feb-20-2008
LORD HOPE OF CRAIGHEAD My Lords, 1. I have had the advantage of reading in draft the opinion of my noble and learned friend Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury. I adopt with gratitude his account of the facts and of the provisions of the contract that have given rise to the dispute. I add these brief comments to explain why, after some initial hesitation, I agree with him that the appeal should be dismissed. 2. For the reasons that were explained in Melville Dundas Ltd v George Wimpey UK Ltd [2007] UKHL18, [2007] 1 WLR 1136, the background to the case is to be found in the provisions of the Housing Grants, Construction and Regeneration Act 1996. Section 108(1) of that Act provides that a party to a construction contract has the right to refer a dispute arising under the contract to adjudication under a procedure complying with that section. Section 109 provides that a party to a construction contract is entitled to payment by instalments for any work under the contract and that the parties a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : House of Lords
Decided on : Feb-20-2008
LORD BINGHAM OF CORNHILL My Lords, 1. In this action the seller (Scottish and Newcastle International Limited) seeks to recover the price of goods sold from the buyer (Othon Ghalanos Limited). SandN is a company based in Scotland, Ghalanos a company registered in Cyprus. The contract related to 11 consignments of cider shipped from Liverpool to Limassol in June-July 2004. The question before the House is whether the English court has jurisdiction to entertain the action. The answer to that question turns, by virtue of article 5(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 44/2001, on whether, as a matter of English law applied to the particular contract made between the parties, the goods were or should have been delivered by SandN to Ghalanos in England. Both Andrew Smith J ([2006] EWHC 1039 (Comm)) and the Court of Appeal (Waller and Rix LJJ: [2006] EWCA Civ 1750, [2007] 1 All ER (Comm) 1027) held in favour of SandN that the English court does have jurisdiction, but Ghalanos challenges the co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad
Decided on : Feb-20-2008
Reported in : (2008)10STR374
1. Vide the impugned orders, the authorities below have confirmed the service tax of Rs. 7,08,791/- along with confirmation of interest and imposition of personal penalties under various sections of Finance Act, 1994. The said tax stands confirmed against the appellant who has provided services as coaching and educational training. The appellant was holding registration for providing of said services. The dispute in the present appeal relates to the period April, 2003 to September, 2003, in respect of the advance fees collected by the appellants prior to 1-7-2003, when the said services were made leviable to tax. The Revenue's contention is that though the fees for the said services were received prior to 1-7-2003, inasmuch as services were provided after 1-7-2003, the appellant would be liable to pay tax on pro rata basis for the period subsequent to 1-7-2003.Apart from arguing on merits demand has also been assailed on the point of limitation. Commissioner (Appeals) accepts that the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Feb-21-2008
Reported in : AIR2008Ori103; 106(2008)CLT126; [2009]148CompCas817(Orissa); 2008(I)OLR702
A.K. Ganguly, C.J.1. This writ petition has been filed by Noble Aqua Private Ltd.- petitioner No. 1, who claims to be a company registered under the Companies Act and petitioner No. 2 is the Managing Director of petitioner No. 1 and the petitioner No. 3 is the wife of petitioner No. 2, the Managing Director of the petitioner-company.2. The petitioners are challenging a notice dated 7.4.2007 ssued under Section 13(4) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security on Interest Act, 2002 (in short 'Securitisation Act'). The basic challenge in the writ petition is that the said notice is in contravention of provision of Section 22 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provision) Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'SICA').The petitioners' case is that it was engaged in the export business of Marine Food Products along with processing and manufacturing of marine food products since 1995. The company was earning profit till 2002-03. But in view ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Feb-22-2008
Reported in : 2008(2)AWC1186
B.S. Chauhan and Bharati Sapru, JJ.1. This writ petition has been filed seeking following reliefs:(i) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned advertisement dated 22.12.2007 issued by U.P. Public Service Commission, Allahabad (Annexure-5 to the public interest petition);(ii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the resolutions dated 30.04.2005, 27.08.2005 and 28.8.2005 passed in Full Court Meeting of this Hon'ble Court (Annexure Nos. 13, 14 and 15 of this public interest petition).(iii) issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to provide reservation quota for physically handicapped persons in all services including judicial services.In fact the challenge in this petition is to the advertisement dated 22.12.2007 issued by the U.P. Public Service Commission to appoint Assistant Prosecution Officers and petitioners are seeking direction that the impugned advertisement be ...
Tag this Judgment!