Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC771; [1995(70)FLR146]; JT1994(6)SC124; 1995LabIC1063; (1995)IILLJ370SC; 1994(4)SCALE108; 1994Supp(3)SCC502; [1994]Supp3SCR393; 1994(3)SLJ102(SC)
orders. mohan, j.1. respondent no. 1 was a confirmed senior district judge in the m.p. judicial service. he was appointed as a member of the central administrative tribunal (c.a.t. in short) at jabalpur on 25.6.1986. he assumed office on 30.6.1984. he sought voluntary retirement from service in the state which was a requisite under rule 5 of the central administrative tribunal (salaries allowances and conditions of service of chairman, vice-chairman and members) rules, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as 'the rules').2. respondent no. 1 retired as a member of the central administrative tribunal on 17.2.1991. his pension for the judicial service in the state, was fixed at rs. 1967 and rs. 292 as a member of the central administrative tribunal at jabalpur. after commutation, the pension came to rs. 1470 p.m. for m.p. judicial service and rs. 292 for services in central administrative tribunal, total into rs. 1761 per month.3. while respondent 1 was member in the c.a.t., he sought an option to refund his earlier pensionary benefits of m.p. judicial service to union of india to get a single consolidated pension by clubbing both the services instead of two pensions, one as a senior district judge of m.p. judicial service and as member of c.a.t. in the alternate, he wanted that his service of four year and eight months in the c.a.t. be added to his qualifying service for fixation of pension under rule 8-a of all india service (death-cum-retirement benefit) rules, 1958 (hereinafter .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC994
hidayatullah, j.1. the petitioner hamid raza has moved this court under article 32 of the constitution, previous to this the petitioner had obtained a certificate of fitness from the judicial commissioner of vindhya pradesh on 4-1-1956 to appeal against the order dated 7-5-1955 passed on writ application no. 25 of 1955. though the petitioner deposited the amount of security, as well as the printing charges, he took recourse to article 32, as a more expeditious and adequate remedy.2. the petitioner carries on business as a manufacturer of bidis under the name and style of hamid raza manufacturing company rewa. in the year 1953, the vindhya pradesh tendu leaves act, 1953, was enacted and it came into force on may 19, 1954. in pursuance of a provision therefore the petitioner applied to the appropriate authority on january 19, 1955, for a licence. his application is annexure 'a'. on february 4, 1955, the divisional forest officer, rewa, declined to grant him a licence stating as the reason therefore as follows :'with reference to your above application i have to inform you that no licence for tendu patti, will be issued as the tendu patti of this division were auctioned.'a week later the petitioner made a second application for licence. he also interviewed the divisional forest officer and the chief conservator of forest vindhya pradesh, rewa. though he heard nothing in reply to his application, it appears that he was informed orally that no licence would be granted to him.3. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC1157; 1997(1)ALD(Cri)670; 1997(1)ALT(Cri)705; 1997(1)BLJR606; 1997(1)Crimes199(SC); JT1997(3)SC26; 1997(2)SCALE312; (1997)4SCC65; [1997]2SCR420
orderk.t. thomas, j.1. leave granted.2. judicial restraint is a virtue. a virtue which shall be concomitant of every judicial disposition. it is an attribute of a judge which he is obliged to keep refurbished time to time, particularly while dealing with matters before him whether in exercise of appellate or revisional or other supervisory jurisdiction. higher courts must remind themselves constantly that higher tiers are provided in the judicial hierarchy to set right errors which could possibly have crept in the findings or orders of courts at the lower tiers. such powers certainly not for belching diatribe at judicial personages in lower cadre. it is well to remember the words of a jurist that 'a judge who has not committed any error is yet to be born'.3. the context for making the aforesaid prefatory words is the grievance expressed by the appellant braj kishore thakur, a senior district & sessions judge of bihar judicial service over the caustic and severe censure made against him by a single judge of the patna high court in an order cancelling the bail granted to two accused involved in an offence under section 20(b)(i) of the narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances act, 1985, for short 'ndps act'. the aggrieved sessions judge moved the high court to have those disparaging remarks expunged but instead of getting them erased learned single judge used the opportunity to reiterate those deprecatory remarks with aggravated severity. hence the said session judge has come .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1967SC1044; (1967)69PLR761; [1967]2SCR618
subba rao, c.j.1. this appeal by certificate is preferred against the decree of the high court of judicature at allahabad decreeing the suit filed by the respondents for possession of the plaint schedule property. 2. shri thakur radhaballabhji, the deity, represented by yasodanandan as next friend, filed o.s. no. 61 of 1946 in the court of the 2nd civil judge, kanpur, against the appellants for a declaration that the deity was the proprietor of house no. 49/54 situate in ban bazar in the city of kanpur, for possession thereof and for mesne profits. the case of the plaintiff (1st respondent herein) was that lala jagan prasad, the 2nd defendant to the suit, was the manager and sarvarakar of the deity, that the said manager executed a sale deed dated january 13, 1942, conveying the said property to one lala behari lal, the 1st defendant to the suit, for a consideration of rs. 10,000 and that the sale, not being for necessity or for the benefit of the idol, was not binding on the deity. it was further alleged that, as the 2nd defendant had taken no steps to recover the property, in order to safeguard the rights of the idol the suit was filed through jagan prasad, who was one of the devotees and worshipper of the deity and who had been taking keen interest in the management of the temple where the deity is installed. to that suit the alienee was made the 1st defendant and the manager, the 2nd defendant. 3. the 1st defendant set up the case that the suit property did not constitute .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1969SC851; (1969)1SCC455; [1969]3SCR400
1. this appeal under section 116-a of the representation of the people act, 1951, is directed against the judgment and order of the high court of gujarat in election petition no. 3 of 1967, setting aside the election of kanti prasad jayshankar yagnik, appellant before us, to the gujarat state assembly from mehsana state assembly constituency under section 123(2), section 123(3) and section 100(1)(b) of the representation of the people act, 1951- hereinafter referred to as the act.2. the high court held that certain speeches made by shambhu maharaj, with the consent of the appellant, amounted to 'corrupt practices' within the meaning of sections 123(2), section 123(3) of the act. since we are in agreement with some of the conclusions arrived at by the high court it is not necessary to deal with all the speeches made by shambhu maharaj, but only with the speeches which the high court held to amount to 'corrupt practices within the meaning of sections 123(2), section 123(3). before we set out the impugned passages from the speeches we may give a few preliminary facts.3. the poll for the election was taken on february 21, 1967, and the result of the election declared on february 22, 1967. purshottamdass ranchoddas patel, the petitioner in the high court and respondent before us, secured 16,159 votes whereas the appellant secured 23,055 votes. the other candidates, who were respondents to the petition secured 720 votes, 1,017 votes and 454 votes, respectively. the petition out of .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1983SC634; 1983(1)SCALE534; (1983)3SCC237; [1983]2SCR1009
..... ' it seems to us that a working test for deciding whether a tax is compensatory or not is to enquire whether the trades people are having the use of certain facilities for the better conduct of their business and paying not patently much more than what is required for providing the facilities. ..... though patent injustice to the operators of stage carriages in fixing lower returns on the tickets issued to passengers should not be encouraged, a reasonable return on investment or a reasonable rate of profit can not be the sine qua non of the validity of the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1984SC127; [1984(48)FLR448]; 1984LabIC691; (1984)ILLJ368SC; 1984(1)SCALE539; (1984)3SCC127; [1984]3SCR252; 1984(16)LC500(SC)
..... in the letters patent appeal, the corporation stated that in view of the impugned act, there was no necesscity for proceeding with the appeal and the division bench of calcutta high court made no order on the said appeal. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1986SC2019; [1986]161ITR824(SC); 1986(2)SCALE355; (1986)4SCC297; [1986]3SCR674
..... all that the assessee was entitled to on the valuation dates was the right to have the trust administered and, as the high court has observed, having regard to the several considerations patent in this case that the settlement was an english settlement created by an englishman who was resident in england, that it was an english will proved in england and the trustees were residents in england and moreover that the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1988(1)SCALE984
orderin view of our judgment delivered today in civil appeal no. 1110 of 1986 entitled union of india and ors. v. madhu milan syntex pvt. limited and anr., this special leave must be dismissed as we have upheld the judgment and order dated november, 24, 1984 passed by the division bench of the madhya pradesh high court which is challenged to a certain extent in this special leave petition. the special leave petition is, therefore, dismissed with no order as to costs.
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC1384; [1995]83CompCas82(SC); 1995(1)CTC393; JT1995(2)SC441; 1995(1)SCALE525; (1995)2SCC479; [1995]2SCR1; 1995(1)LC463(SC)
ordera.m. ahmadi, cj.1. the short question which arises for consideration in the present appeal is whether the national consumer disputes redressal commission (hereinafter called 'the national commission') constituted under section 20 of the consumer protection act, 1986 (for short 'the 1986 act') had jurisdiction to adjudicate upon a claim for compensation arising out of a motor vehicle accident, notwithstanding the jurisdiction conferred on a claims tribunal constituted under the motor vehicles act, 1988 (for short 'the 1988 act'). the factual matrix in which this question arises for consideration, briefly stated, is as under.2. shri k. kumar was travelling from kombakonam to thanjavur on the night between 2nd and 3rd june, 1990 in an omnibus which met with an accident near village vayalur while trying to avert a bullock-cart. it appears that when the bus driver was in the process of over-taking the bullock-cart, the bullocks got panicky whereupon the driver swerved the bus to the left and ran into the branches of a tree on the road side resulting in damage to the vehicle; the window panes having been smashed. as the vehicle suddenly swerved and the driver applied the brakes shri k. kumar who was sitting in the center of the rear seat was thrown in the front and hit against the iron side-bar, sustaining a serious head injury. subsequently he succumbed to the injury. the consumer protection council, tamil nadu, on behalf of the legal representatives of the deceased lodged a .....
Tag this Judgment!