Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jun-13-2002
Reported in : (2003)105BOMLR609
A.B. Palkar, J.1. Applicant No. 1 - Dhanraj Mills Pvt. Ltd. (D.M.L. for short) is a party notified under the provisions of Special Courts (TORTS) Act of 1992. Applicant No. 2 - Killick Financial Services Ltd. (K.F.S.L. for short) is a wholly owned subsidiary of respondent No. 3 - Killick Nixon Ltd. (K.N.L. or Killick for short). Respondent No. 1 - Global Trust Bank (G.T.B. for short) is a banking company. Respondent Nos. 3 to 15 are all judgment debtors of D.M.L. Decrees have been passed by this Court against these respondents by consent and the total amount payable under all these decrees is Rs. 50,10,65,560/-. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 have guaranteed payment under all the decrees and defaults have been committed by respondent Nos. 3 to 15 in payment of decretal dues probably as they are all belonging to the group of K.N.L. Respondent Nos. 5 to 15 have filed various applications in this Court for reliefs specially for reduction of Interest in decrees passed against them and these appli...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jun-13-2002
Reported in : (2002)3CALLT78(HC)
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, J.1. Petitioners, the allottees of a stall at Hogg Market, were served with a notice asking them to pay the arrears of stallage payable from the year 1990 as detailed in annexure 'P-10' to the present writ application. It was further threatened by the Deputy Manager, Hogg Market in the said demand notice that in default of payment of the amount mentioned therein, appropriate step against the petitioners including disconnection of electric supply in the stall will be taken.2. Being dissatisfied, the petitioners have come up with the present writ application.3. Mr. Basu, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners could not dispute the fact that the petitioners have not paid the amount; he however laboriously contended that in view of the provisions contained in Section 573 of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation Act, 1980 ('Act') the respondents can at the most realize arrears of stallage for the last three years. Mr. Basu contends that arrears beyond ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Mumbai
Decided on : Jun-12-2002
Reported in : (2003)(159)ELT446Tri(Mum.)bai
1. This appeal is against the order of the Commissioner revoking the licence issued to the appellant to function as a Custom House Agent at Kandla under the Customs House Agent Licensing Regulations, 1984 (hereinafter Regulation).3. We are not able to accept the ground in the appeal that the order was passed by the Commissioner ex parte without giving the appellant opportunity of being heard, in that the Commissioner passed an order without granting hearing in spite of a request made in letter 21-12-99.In this letter, while the applicant denied each of the charges in detail, it did not ask for any hearing. Regulation 23 of the Regulations which prescribed the procedure for suspending or revoking the licence contained in Sub-regulation (6) provisions for the agent to submit within a period of not more than 60 days from the receipt of the enquiry officer any representation he may wish to make against it.Sub-regulation (7) provides that after considering the report and representation the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jaipur
Decided on : Jun-03-2002
Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ1CAT
1. The applicant, who was one of the senior members of Rajasthan Administrative Service (RAS, for short), was selected for appointment on promotion to Indian Administrative Service (IAS, for short) by the Selection Committee which held its meeting at Jaipur on 23.01.95. He is aggrieved on account of the denial by the respondents to promote him and the inaction exhibited by them in his matter. The applicant has, therefore, approached this Tribunal by means of the present O.A. under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, claiming the relief that the circular No. 14015/54/95-AIS(I) dated 12thJanuary, 1996, issued by the Department of Personnel and Training, Government of India, be quashed as being against the statutory provisions and the respondent No. 2, State of Rajasthan, be directed to appoint him in IAS from the select-list dated 23.01.95, hereinafter referred to as 1995 select-list.2. The promotion of the members of the State Civil Service to IAS is governed by the p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-31-2002
Reported in : (2004)1CompLJ50(SC); (2003)184CTR(SC)450; [2003]263ITR707(SC); JT2003(Suppl2)SC205; 2003(8)SCALE287; (2004)10SCC1
Srikrishna, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals by special leave arise out of the judgment of the Division Bench of Delhi High Court allowing Civil Writ Petition (PIL) No. 5646/2000 and Civil Writ Petition No. 2802/2000. The High Court by its judgment impugned in these appeals quashed and set aside the circular No.789 dated 13.4.2000 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (hereinafter referred to as 'CBDT') by which certain instructions were given to the Chief Commissioners/Directors General of Income-tax with regard to the assessment of cases in which the Indo - Mauritius Double Taxation Avoidance Convention, 1983 (hereinafter referred to as 'DTAC') applied. The High Court accepted the contention before it that the said circular is ultra vires the provisions of Section 90 and Section 119 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') and also otherwise bad and illegal. 3. It would be necessary to recount some salient facts in order to appreciate the plethora...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Sikkim
Decided on : May-28-2002
Reported in : 2004CriLJ4416
Ripusudan Dayal, C.J. 1. All these appeals challenge the Judgment and Order of the learned Sessions Judge, East & North, Sikkim at Gangtok convicting them under Sections 366 and 376 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code and sentencing each of them under Section 376 with rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years and a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months and under Section 366 of Indian Penal Code to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 4 years and a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in case of default of payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months. Substantive sentences of imprisonment were directed-to run concurrently. 2. All the appellants and one Sukbir Tamang are taxi drivers and stood trial before the Sessions Judge in Criminal Case No. 15 of 1998. However, before the case could be decided by the learned Sessions Judge, Sukbir Tamang absconded. The victim is Ms. Luki Subba who is a reside...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Patna
Decided on : May-24-2002
B.N.P. Singh, J.1. While only mother and her son were in the house, it is alleged that in the intervening night of 2nd/3rd April, 1984, miscreants, having scaled over roof of house with help of bamboos, gained their access in the inner apartment of the house and coercing the house inmates, removed wearing apparel, ornaments and cash and decamped with the booty. It was alleged that when Lal Babu having identified one of them, raised alarm, shouting for help, Kesho Ahir shot him dead and with these accusations, fardbeyan of mother of the deceased was recorded by Shri M.P. Sharma, Sub-Inspector of police of Sonbarsa Police Station at 8.30 a.m. on 3rd March, 1984, pursuant to which first information report was drawn up. The police came in action, collected evidences, recorded statement of witnesses, visited the place of occurrence, sent the dead body to mortuary for post mortem examination, and having received post mortem report, concluded investigation and laid charge sheet before the Co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : May-17-2002
Reported in : 98(2002)DLT348; 2003(66)DRJ38
S.L. Agarwal, J.1. By this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C.'), petitioner is seeking quashing of the complaint (Kalandra), under Section 103 of the Delhi Police Act, (for short, 'D.P.Act'), and the proceedings thereon pending trial in the court of ACMM, Delhi.2. The allegations in brief, are that Anti-kidnapping cell of the Police received information that the petitioner, who is working as a beldar (labourer), in the MCD, has been indulging in illegal activities of bringing arms and drugs from the Nepal border; and that some cash and other articles are lying burred in his jhuggi at Vijay Nagar. The information was recorded vide DD No. 7 dated 10.7.97 at P.S. R.K. Puram and was also brought to the notice of Senior Officers. The police visited the jhuggi but it was found locked. The report was kept pending. On 11.7.97 at 6:30 a.m. the police again received information that the petitioner was available at jhuggi. The police party proce...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : May-15-2002
Reported in : 2002(3)AWC2271; (2002)2UPLBEC1720
G.P. Mathur, J. 1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been filed by 175 students of Smt. Harpyari Devi Inter College, Rohai, district Hathras (Mahamaya Nagar) praying that a direction be issued to Madhyamik Shiksha Parishad, U. P. (Board of High School and Intermediate Education, Allahabad) to allot roll numbers to them and to permit them to appear in the High School examination which was scheduled to commence on 18.3.2002. 2. There is an institution known as Smt. Harpyari Devi Inter College, Rohai, district Hathras (Mahamaya Nagar) (hereinafter referred to as theinstitution), which is recognised by the Board of High School and Intermediate Education, U. P., Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as the Board) in accordance with U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The institution, however, does riot receive grant-in-aid from the State Government. The writ petitioners claim that they are regular students of High School class...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : May-14-2002
Reported in : 2002CriLJ3671
Imtiyaz Murtaza, J.1. The present appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 30-7-2001 passed by X Addl. Sessions Judge, Aligarh in Session Trial No. 1193 of 1999 whereby the appellant is convicted under Section 364 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo 10 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/-; under Section 376(2) I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5000/-; under Section 201 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo 3 years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 5.000/- and under Section 302 IPC and sentenced to death.2. The brief facts of the case are that complainant Bijendra Singh resides in front of P.A. Batalian in mohalla Sukhrawali police station Quarsi district Aligarh along with his family. One constable Subhash Singh of 45 Batalian comes to his house to take milk. On 29-1-1998 at about 9.00 a.m. Subhash along with Bijendra Singh Solanki constable of the same Batalian came to his house. The complainant...
Tag this Judgment!