Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-19-2008
Reported in : 156(2009)DLT172
Gita Mittal, J.1. This writ petition has been filed by Aditya Khanna assailing the action of the respondents in revoking his passport bearing No. F 4812183 without issuance of a notice to show cause and grant of an opportunity to represent against the proposed action. The action is assailed also on the ground of malafide and that no order has been communicated to him till date.2. Certain public allegations into the administration and management of the United Nation Oil for Food Programme in Iraq were made. As a result, the United Nations Security Council appointed an independent high level inquiry headed by Mr. Paul Volcker, a former chairman of the United States Federal Reserve to look into the administration and management of the programme in Iraq. On 27th October, 2005 the Volcker Committee submitted its fifth and final substantiative report setting out the manner in which Iraq had manipulated the programme to dispense contracts on the basis of political preference and to derive ill...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Dec-08-2008
Reported in : 2009ACJ1189
V.B. Gupta, J.1. By this common judgment, I shall dispose of the above two appeals filed by the Appellant-Insurance company.2. These two appeals have been filed under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short as 'Act') against the impugned judgment dated 12th September, 2007 passed by the Dr. T.R. Naval, Judge, MACT (for short as 'Tribunal').3. Brief facts of this case are that on 18th July, 2004 at 1.20 P.M., deceased Mukesh Jain, was driving his two wheeler scooter No. DAI-1835 on which his son namely Master Shashank Jain was pillion rider. When they reached near SDM office, Geeta Colony, Delhi, all of a sudden the offending motorcycle bearing No. DL-7S-G-3282 being driven by its driver respondent Jatin Singh, in a very rash and negligent manner, without blowing any horn, tried to overtake the scooter of the deceased and in that process struck against the scooter of the deceased with a great force due to which the deceased and his son were thrown on the road. The decease...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : May-21-2008
Reported in : 2008CriLJ3480; 2008(3)KLT150
ORDERV. Ramkumar, J.1. In this Revision filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. the petitioner who was the accused in S.T. No. 5437 of 1996 on the file of the J.F.C.M., Kodungallur, challenges the conviction entered and the sentence passed against him concurrently by the courts below for an offence punishable under Section 292(2) (a) and (b) I.P.C.2. The case of the prosecution can be summarised as follows:On 22-09-1996 at about 5.15 p.m. in the shop run under the name and style of 'Ikkas Gents Corner', 'Ikkas Videos and Audios' bearing building No. 54/53 (B) of Methala Panchayat in T.K.S. Puram Desom within the limits of Kodungallur Police Station, the accused was found in possession for sale/hire/distribution of obscene blue film video cassette depicting a man and woman in a completely nude posture indulging in carnal intercourse appealing to the prurient interests of the viewers and arousing corrupt and sexual feelings of persons who chanced to view the video cassette....
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 : Kerala
Decided on : Nov-07-2008
Reported in : 2009(1)KLJ89
ORDERK. Hema, J.1. Can an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code ('the Code', for short) for anticipatory bail be permitted to be withdrawn?2. According to prosecution, petitioner's husband (A9) was the President of a Bank and he is an active politician also. In pursuance of criminal conspiracy hatched among him and various accused including petitioner (A21), an amount of Rs. 75 lakhs (which is more than the permissible limit of loan which could be sanctioned by the Bank) was advanced to petitioner's firm, on the strength of mortgage by deposit of title. Thereafter, the title deeds which were deposited in Bank were clandestinely taken out by the accused from the Bank, and properties covered by the deeds were sold. The President, Secretary, other office bearers of the Bank and loanees criminaly conspired to commit offences of misappropriation, forgery, falsification of accounts etc., and caused a huge loss to the bank by misappropriation of its funds. Vario...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Sep-30-2008
Reported in : AIR2009Ker76; [2009]149CompCas409(Ker)
ORDERThottathil B. Radhakrishnan, J.1. The petitioner availed different financial assistance from different creditors, including respondents 1, 6 and 7. In 2005, the BIFR issued an order under the provisions of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 hereinafter, the SICA, for short in pursuance to a reference made to it under Section 15 of SICA. In spite of those guidelines issued as per Ext. P2, nothing worked out and going by Ext. R3(g), the Indian Bank addressed BIFR, requesting to take suitable misfeasance proceedings against the company under the provisions of the SICA. It brought to the notice of BIFR that the movable assets of the company have already been stolen; the premises of the factory are under the control of anti-social elements; due to militant labour present in front of the factory, it is very difficult to enter into the factory and no workers have got their settlements ever since the factory closed; no security is available in the factory even to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Sep-25-2008
Reported in : 2009ACJ2272
Nair Harun-Ul-Rashid, J.1. Right of succession of illegitimate children born to Christian parents is the bone of contention cropped up for consideration in this case. While considering this, following issues arise for consideration:(i) Whether the requirement of a central legislation recognising the right of illegitimate children of all classes irrespective of their religion to inherit the property of their parents is the need of the hour?(ii) Whether illegitimate children born to Christian father and mother are entitled to inherit the property of their father under the Indian Succession Act?(iii) Whether children born to parents living as husband and wife during the subsistence of the father's first marriage are legitimate or illegitimate in the eyes of law?2. The appeal is directed against the award passed by Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Pala in O.P. (MV) Nos. 1073 and 1270 of 1995. The case of the appellants in brief is as follows:The deceased Dr. Antony was a 36-year old doctor...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Jan-25-2008
Reported in : (2008)3GLR2173
Anant S. Dave, J.1. In this application, which is preferred by the State of Gujarat under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, learned Judge (Coram : D.H. Waghela, J.) vide order dated 29.10.2007 issued Rule making it returnable on 2nd November, 2007. On 18th December, 2007, when another cognate matter being Criminal Misc. Application No. 12646 of 2007 of co-accused was listed for hearing, order dated 12.12.2007 passed by the apex court in Contempt Petition (Cri.) No. 8 of 2007 in Writ Petition (Cri.) No. 6 of 2007 was brought to the notice of this Court by the learned Counsel appearing for the parties where reference was made to Criminal Misc. Application Nos. 12646 of 2007 and 12644 of 2007 pending before this Court, the hearing of which was fixed on 18th and 20th December, 2007 respectively. Accordingly, on 18th December, 2007, oral order came to be passed in Criminal Misc. Application No. 12646 of 2007 by this Court by directing the Registry to list both the abov...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : May-15-2008
Reported in : (2008)3GLR2635; LC2009(1)168
K.A. Puj, J.1. The plaintiff, namely, Troikaa Pharmaceuticals Ltd., has filed Regular Civil Suit No. 2486 of 2007 in the City Civil Court at Ahmedabad praying for permanent injunction restraining the defendants, their servants, agents, dealers, distributors, stockists from manufacturing, marketing and using the impugned design registered under No. 186992 in Class 28 on 16.10.2001 in respect of D Shape Tablet and/or any tablet, which is having similar shape and configuration or material reproduction of the plaintiff's registered design. The plaintiff has also prayed for permanent injunction restraining the defendants from printing, publishing, using, marketing, coping or imitating the impugned design of tablet, its drawings and parts thereof and restraining them from committing infringement of the design of the plaintiff. The plaintiff has also prayed for direction to the defendants to pay the sum of Rs. 50,000/- for the damage caused to the plaintiff on account of infringement of the p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Decided on : Oct-24-2008
Reported in : 2009CriLJ1693
D.N. Patel, J.1. The present appeal has been preferred against the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 19th November, 2003 passed by learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Court No. 9. Ahmedabad City in Sessions Case No. 103 of 2002 and Sessions Case No. 194 of 2002. whereby the present appellant, who is original accused No. 1 has been held guilty for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to undergo life imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 20,000/-. The appellant is also convicted and sentenced to undergo imprisonment of six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, further sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment of one month, for the offence punishable under Section 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act. Rest of the accused persons were given benefit of doubt and had been acquitted. Against this order, the original accused No. l- appellant has preferred this appeal.2. Necessary brief facts of the case, are as un...
Tag this Judgment!