Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jan-10-1994
Reported in : AIR1994Ker179
Paripoornan, J. 1. This is a public interest litigation. It concerns the famous Sree Krishna Temple, Guruvayur -- a very ancient temple of unique importance worshipped and held in great reverence by millions all over the country. The temple owns extensive movable and immovable properties and endowments. The temple has its own heritage and traditions of renowed referred memory, which adds grandeur and majesty to it over the entire globe. Shri C.K. Rajan, Chennara House, P.O. Nhamanghat, via. Kunnamkulam sent a communication to one of us (Paripoornan, J.) dated 3-2-1993 highlighting gross irregularities, corrupt practices, maladministration and mismanagement in Sree Krishna Temple, Guruvayur. A statement from Shri C.K. Rajan was recorded by the Registrar of this Court on 11-2-1993. He owned the sending of the petition, its content, etc. Gross irregularities, misadministration and various lapses were disclosed. The matter was placed before My Lord the Chief Justice, who, by order dated 11...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Cochin
Decided on : Jan-13-1994
Reported in : (1994)49TTJ(Coch.)240
This is a Miscellaneous Petition preferred by the Revenue in relation to the order of the Tribunal dt. 21st May, 1993 in ITA Nos. 589 & 590/Coch/1988. The assesses is an engineering construction company with previous year ending on 31st March of every year. The concerned assessment years are 1982-83 and 1983-84.2. For the asst. yr. 1982-83, the assessee had purchased machinery and equipments of the tune of Rs. 11,95,18,733 in connection with its major contract for execution of Mussayeb-Kerbala - Najaf-Samawa Railway Project at Iraq in association with Indian Railway Construction Company. In addition, it also purchased machinery worth Rs. 1,85,42,528 in connection with work in India. It claimed investment allowance to the extent of Rs. 3,22,79,957 after creating the necessary reserve.3. For the asst. yr. 1983-84, the assessee had purchased machinery and equipments to the tune of Rs. 3,18,38,260 for the execution of its work in Iraq. It had also purchased machinery worth Rs. 1,22,44...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Jan-17-1994
Reported in : (1994)1CALLT301(HC),98CWN499
Rabin Bhattacharyya, J.1. A combined application under Section 115 of the C.P.C. and also under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been directed by the aggrieved petitioner-Eastern India Motion Picture Association to dislodge the order being Order No. 33 dated 28.4.93, passed by the City Civil Court, 3rd Bench, Calcutta in Misc. Case No. 1338 of 1992.2. It will be unnecessary to make a full disclosure of the facts as there is no slim dispute between the parties regarding the factual exposure of the case centring round the revision. However, for appreciation, a brief synopsis of the case is highlighted. It is undisputed that the suitor and exhibitor of the feature films carrying on business under the name and style of 'Chaitali Cinema' at Bhangar Bazar, P.S. Bhangar, Dist.-South 24-Parganas. The suitor was constrained to file the above name Title Suit before the City Civil Court for declaration alongwith consequential reliefs among which the injunction was one. The learned cou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Jan-20-1994
Reported in : AIR1995Ker57
ORDER1. Revision petitioner in this C.R.P. is the second defendant in O. Section 811 of 1993 and petitioner in I. A. 3082 of 1993. She filed a petition under Section 10 of the C.P.C. for staying all further proceedings in the said suit till the disposal of O.S. 106 of 1993 instituted by her. By the impugned order the learned Munsiff did not allow the prayer for stay; but allowed consolidation of the two suits. The said order is under challenge in this revision.2. It is an admitted case that the subject matter in both the suits is the same. Defendants in O.S. 106 of 1993 are the plaintiffs in O.S. 811 of 1993. In that the plaintiff in O.S. 106 of 1993 and her husband are the defendants. Thus the parties in both the suits are substantially the same particularly when according to the petitioner, the 2nd defendant has no independent claim and that he is looking after the property as her husband. Both the suits are for a decree of permanent injunction. The earlier instituted suit is O.S. 10...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-02-1994
Reported in : (1994)48TTJ(Del)621
ORDERR. M. MEHTA, A. M. :These are cross appeals, preferred by both the parties, being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A) on various grounds. These came up for hearing before the Special Bench constituted by the President Along with the appeal of Indian Communication Network (P) Ltd. in the circumstances narrated in the order of the Tribunal in the latter appeal. Taking up for consideration the assessed appeal, the first ground raised reads as follows :'1. Your appellant submits that, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) IX erred in law in not allowing excise duty as claimed by your appellant in the sum of Rs. 81,60,723 under the provisions of S. 43B of the IT Act, 1961.'2. The assessed in this case is a public limited company, engaged in the manufacture and sale of various kinds of food products, like 'Nescafe' instant coffee, Lactogen baby food, 'Maggi' noodles, Cerelac baby cereal, etc.3. In the year under consideration, there was a change in the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Feb-09-1994
Reported in : ILR1994KAR1370; 1994(5)KarLJ63
R. Ramakrishna, J.1. The appellant - Airbus Industrie is a groupment D'lnterest created under the Laws of France engaged in the business of manufacturing passenger and cargo aircraft since 1969. The first aircraft manufactured by them was called Airbus A-300, The second aircraft called A-320 was introduced later and was supplied to various renowned Airlines all over the world.2. Respondent No. 10, the Indian Airlines Corporation purchased about 20 aircrafts A-320. One such aircraft purchased by respondent No. 10 was an aircraft bearing registration VT-EPN. On 14.2.1990 this aircraft bearing registration VT-EPN was a schedule passenger flight from Bombay to Bangalore being flight No. IC 605. In the course of this flight while attempting to land at Bangalore Air Port at 13-03 hours contacted ground approximately 2,300 feet before the beginning of runway No. 09 within the boundary of Golf Association and immediately thereafter hit the embankment which was the boundary wall of the Golf Cou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-11-1994
Reported in : 1994IAD(Delhi)713; 53(1994)DLT785; (1994)IILLJ1078Del
C.M. Nayar, J.(1) These two writ petitions have been filed by the Management and the Workman Shri N.L. Khosla to impugn the Award dated August 29, 1990, of Shri Ajit Bharihoke, Presiding Officer, Labour Court Viii in a reference No. F.26 (92)/68-Lab. dated 25/26.3.1968, made by the Lt. Governor of Delhi in exercise of the powers purported to have been conferred by Sections 10(1)(c) and 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). (2) Shri N.L. Khosla was employed by the erstwhile 'Roneo Limited' as a Salesman in the year 1962 in New Delhi office on probation on a salary of Rs. 200.00 per month. Shri Khosla was also entitled to commission over and above the salary, which he received. The letter of appointment dated August 16,1962, was issued to the petitioner and the operative part reads as follows: 'RONEOLIMITED H.O.for India P13 Mission Row Extn Calcutta. Incorporated in England Ref. 44 16th August, 1962. Mr.N.L. Khosla, 11/19 East Patel Nagar, Ne...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Feb-14-1994
Reported in : AIR1994Ker308
Varghese Kalliath, J. 1. This isa public interest litigation. Petitioner is a society registered under the Travancore-Cochin Charitable, Literary and Scientific Societies Act. It claims that it is involved in legal research legal literacy and espousing public interest causes before Courts.2. In this petition the petitioner wants to spearhead and underscore the high potency danger involved in allowing to continue the operation by the first respondent a 10,000 tonne Ammonia Storage Tank in Willingdon Islandin Port Area.3. The first respondent the Fertilizers and Chemicals Travancore Ltd., Udyogamandal is a public sector undertaking. It is engaged in the production of fertilisers. O. 27% of the shares in the Company is held by the public, the balance being held by the Government of India, the Government of Kerala, the Government of Tamil Nadu and the Government of Andhra Pradesh. Its manufacturing units for production of chemical fertilisers are Cochin Division at Ambalamedu and Udyogaman...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Jammu and Kashmir
Decided on : Feb-14-1994
S.C. Mathur, C.J.1. A single individual, Sukesh Chander Khajuria, has filed this writ petition seeking ban on private medical practice by doctors in the service of the State Government and for creation and assurance of proper, adequate and hygienic medical facilities for the citizens of the State. The petition has been claimed to have been filed in public interest. The petitioner has claimed himself to be a social activist and President or member of several social organisations. A few facts necessary for the disposal of the writ petition may be stated:2. Government doctors likely to be affected by the petition fall in two categories: (1) those posted at Primary Health Centres and Hospitals; (2) the posted at institutions imparting medical education . Doctors belonging to the second category are governed by Jammu and Kashmir Medical Education (Gazetted) Service Rules, 1879. Said doctors along with other Government servants are governed by Jammu and Kashmir Public Men and Public Servants...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Feb-17-1994
Reported in : (1994)IMLJ438
Raju, J.1. The above writ petitions involve for determination certain common and identical issues currently in controversy in the medical circles and consumer litigation relating to the applicability or otherwise of the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (Central Act 68 of 1986), (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'), to facilities made available by hospitals providing medical care and members of medical profession treating a patient, in the realm of diagnosis and treatment. 2. A brief reference to the stage and circumstances of the case which led to the filing of the above writ petitions individually would be necessary to appreciate the nature of the grievance sought to be vindicated by the parties on either side. Writ Petition No. 1953 of 1992 as the amended prayer stands, has been filed by two medical practitioners (husband and wife) for a writ of prohibition, prohibiting the respondents from exercising their jurisdiction against the medical practitioners on the basis ...
Tag this Judgment!