Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-08-2002
Reported in : AIR2002Bom258; 2002(3)BomCR29; (2002)2BOMLR564; 2002(2)MhLj590
1. This Court while adjourning the matter on 12thDecember, 2001, had adjourned it with notice to theparties that the matter on the adjourned date would beheard both on admission and final hearing. In the lightof that, Rule. Heard forthwith. 2. Petitioners, M/s. Down Mangor ValleyResidents Welfare Association, are registered under theSocieties Registration Act. One of its aims andobjectives is to provide for a childrens park/garden inthe open space identified as Plot C of property known asBabquiadi surveyed under Survey No.59, P.T. SheetNo.150, Mangor Hill, Vasco da Gama. The petitioner no.2is the Joint Secretary of petitioner no.1. The Presidentand the Joint Secretary have been duly authorised by aResolution of petitioner no.1 to file the presentpetition. A few facts which are relevant for the purposeof disposal of this petition may now be set out. LateBruno Lizardo Fernandes was the owner of the propertywhich is the subject-matter of the present petition. Thesaid owner had applied to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Jan-08-2002
Reported in : (2002)1UPLBEC313
K.T. Thomas, J. 1. We are sad that the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India (for short 'the disciplinary committee') despite being the acru statutory body entrusted with the upkeep of the probity of legal profession in India opted to treat a very grave professional misconduct in a comparatively lighter vein. The disciplinary committee held an advocate guilty of breach of trust for misappropriating the asset of a 'poor' client. But having held so, the disciplinary committee has chosen to impose a punishment of suspending the advocate from practice for a period of three years.2. The delinquent advocate filed this appeal under Section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'). We told him that in the event of this Court upholding the finding of misconduct, he should show cause why the punishment shall not be enhanced to remove his name from the roll of the Bar Council of the State concerned. Notice on that aspect has been accepted by Mr. M. M. Kashyap, learned Coun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-08-2002
Reported in : AIR2002SC548; 2002(2)ALT10(SC); (2002)1CALLT16(SC); (2002)2CompLJ264(SC); [2002(1)JCR397(SC)]; JT2002(1)SC1; (2002)1MLJ139(SC); RLW2002(1)SC161; 2002(1)SCALE43; (2002)2SCC6
1. We are sad that the disciplinary committee of the Bar Council of India (for short 'the disciplinary committee') despite being the acru statutory body entrusted with the upkeep of the probity of legal profession in India opted to treat a very grave professional misconduct in a comparatively lighter vein. The disciplinary committee held an advocate guilty of breach of trust for misappropriating the asset of a "poor" client. But having held so, the disciplinary committee has chosen to impose a punishment of suspending the advocate from practice for a period of three years.2. The delinquent advocate filed this appeal under Section 38 of the Advocates Act, 1961 (for short 'the Act'). We told him that in the event of this Court upholding the finding of misconduct, he should show cause why the punishment shall not be enhanced to remove his name from the roll of the Bar Council of the State concerned. Notice on that aspect has been accepted by Mr. M. M. Kashyap, learned Counsel for the appe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-07-2002
Reported in : 2003ACJ1286; AIR2003AP23; 2002(4)ALT310
ORDERMotilal B. Naik, J. 1. Since a common question of law is raised in all these appeals, they are being heard and decided together by this common order.2. These appeals are preferred under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 by the Union of India, represented by the General Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad, against five different awards made by the Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad.3. On behalf of the appellant-Railways in these appeals, a common question of law is urged before this Court contending that the payment of compensation in respect of an 'untoward incident' arises if the deceased are the bonafide railway passengers with a valid ticket and there should be an accidental fall of the deceased passenger from the train carrying passengers.4. Before answering the legal issue raised before us, we shall now discuss, in brief, facts of each case separately.5. CMA No.2374 of 1998 : This appeal is filed against the order in OAA No. 130 of 1997 dated 6-7...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-06-2002
Reported in : 2003(6)ALD16; 2003(2)ALT110
ORDERY. Somayajulu, J.1. This revision arises out of the order in R.A.No.134 of 1994 on the file of the Chief Judge, City Small Causes Court, Hyderabad.2. Narayana Rao Pataley (hereinafter called the deceased), filed R.C.No.231 of 1988 under Section 10(3)(a)(iii)(b) of the A.P. Buildings (Lease, Rent and Eviction) Control Act, 1960 (the 'Act'), seeking eviction of the respondent from the non-residential premises bearing No.3-6-341 (hereinafter called 'building') alleging that he, who was not in occupation of any other non-residential premises, had let out the building to the respondent for 11 months on a monthly rent of Rs.950/- besides the amenity charges under a lease deed dated 1-7-1984, needs it for running a Charitable Clinic and Diagnostic Centre therein with the help and assistance of his son Dr.Manohar Pataley, a qualified Doctor and grand son Anil, a Medico, who assured their cooperation in running and continuing the charitable clinic as trustees both during his life time and ...
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 : US Supreme Court
Decided on : May-28-2002
Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyo Kabushiki Co. - 535 U.S. 722 (2002) OCTOBER TERM, 2001 Syllabus FESTO CORP. v. SHOKETSU KINZOKU KOGYO KABUSHIKI CO., LTD., ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT No. 00-1543. Argued January 8, 2002-Decided May 28, 2002 Petitioner Festo Corporation owns two patents for an industrial device. When the patent examiner rejected the initial application for the first patent because of defects in description, 35 U. S. C. 112, the application was amended to add the new limitations that the device would contain a pair of one-way sealing rings and that its outer sleeve would be made of a magnetizable material. The second patent was also amended during a reexamination proceeding to add the sealing rings limitation. Mter Festo began selling its device, respondents (hereinafter SMC) entered the market with a similar device that uses one two-way sealing ring and a nonmagnetizable sleeve. Festo filed suit, clai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Decided on : May-28-2002
Federal Maritime Comm'n v. South Carolina Ports Authority - 535 U.S. 743 (2002) OCTOBER TERM, 2001 Syllabus FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION v. SOUTH CAROLINA STATE PORTS AUTHORITY ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-46. Argued February 25, 2002-Decided May 28, 2002 South Carolina Maritime Services, Inc. (Maritime Services), filed a complaint with petitioner Federal Maritime Commission (FMC), contending that respondent South Carolina State Ports Authority (SCSPA) violated the Shipping Act of 1984 when it denied Maritime Services permission to berth a cruise ship at the SCSPA's port facilities in Charleston, South Carolina; and praying that the FMC, inter alia, direct the SCSPA to pay reparations to Maritime Services, order the SCSPA to cease and desist from violating the Shipping Act, and ask the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina to enjoin the SCSPA from refusing berthing space and passenger services ...
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!