Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-07-2004
Reported in : AIR2004SC5152; 2004(5)CTC209; JT2004(8)SC464; (2005)1MLJ105(SC); RLW2005(1)SC19; 2004(8)SCALE601; (2004)11SCC672
S.B. Sinha, J. 1. Interpretation of Section 104 of the Code of Civil Procedure (for short, 'the Code') vis-a-vis Clause 15 of the Letters Patent of the High Court of Madras is in question in these appeals.BACKGROUND FACTS:2. Although these appeals involve common questions of law, the tactual matrix of the matter would be noticed from Civil Appeal No. 689 of 1998.3. The First Respondent herein filed a suit against the Appellant herein in the Court of II Addl. Subordinate Judge, Coimbatore which was marked as O.S. No. 403 of 1974, The said suit was decreed on or about 15.4.1976. An execution petition was filed by the First Respondent-decree holder for executing the said decree. In the said execution proceeding for realization of the decretal amount the property belonging to the Appellant herein was put to auction. The validity of the said auction came to be questioned by the Appellant by filing an Execution Application on or about 8.10.1979 praying therein for setting aside the court auc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-05-2004
Reported in : JT2004(5)SC117; 2004(5)SCALE574; (2004)6SCC126
G.P. Mathur, J. 1. This appeal by special leave has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 4.6.1999 of a Full Bench of High Court of Punjab & Haryana whereby Letters Patent Appeal preferred by respondent no.4 Gurcharan Singh was allowed, the judgment and order dated 13.8.1992 of the learned Single Judge allowing the writ petition filed by the appellants Pohla Singh and others was set aside and the writ petition was dismissed.2. Dhanna Singh (father of Gurcharan Singh respondent no.4) had been allotted land by way of a military grant in Sind (Pakistan). On partition of the country he migrated to India. He was initially allotted 79.39 standard acres of land in Village Budhlada, Tehsil Mansa, District Bhatinda which on account of report of Patwari in some Revenue Proceedings was reduced to 68.68 standard acres. In the year 1955, The Pepsu Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act was promulgated and section 3 thereof provides that the permissible limit shall mean 'thirty standard ac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-15-2004
Reported in : (2004)187CTR(SC)219; [2004]266ITR721(SC); JT2004(1)SC375; 2004(1)SCALE425; (2004)10SCC201
CASE NO.:Appeal (civil) 1532 of 1993PETITIONER:State of West BengalRESPONDENT:Kesoram Industries Ltd. and Ors.DATE OF JUDGMENT: 15/01/2004BENCH:V.N.Khare CJI & R.C.Lahoti & B.N.Agarwal & S.B.Sinha & A.R.LakshmananJUDGMENT:JUDGMENTDELIVERED BY:R.C.LAHOTI, J.S.B.SINHA, J.WITHCivil Appeal Nos. 3518-3519 and 5149-54 of 1992, 1532-1533 and 2350 of 1993and 7614 of 1994 and C.A. Nos. 297, 298 and 299 of 2004 (Arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 3986 of 1993, 11596 and 17549 of 1994) with W.P. (C) Nos. 262,515, 641 and 642 of 1997, 347 and 360 of 1999, 50 and 553 of 2000, 207, 288and 389 of 2001 and 81 of 2003 and Civil Appeal Nos. 5027, 6643 to 6650 and6894 of 2000 and 1077 of 2001Decided On: 15.01.2004JUDGMENTR.C. Lahoti, J.This batch of matters, some appeals by special leave under Article 136 ofthe Constitution and some writ petitions filed in this Court, raise a fewquestions of constitutional significance centering around Entries 52, 54and 97 in List I and Entries 23, 49, 50 a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-09-2004
Reported in : (2004)2CompLJ193(SC); (2004)3MLJ159(SC); 2004(3)SCALE175; (2004)3SCC658; [2004]51SCL132(SC)
P. Venkatarama Reddi, J.1. This is an appeal under Section 55 of the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 (referred to hereinafter as 'the Act') against the order of the Commission in R.T.P. Enquiry No. 1616 of 1987. The commission, having held that the appellant indulged in certain restrictive trade practices prejudicial to public interest, directed the appellant to desist from indulging in such practices in future and to amend the offending clause in the dealership agreement. The Commission further directed the appellant not to give effect to the termination of dealership of the complainant (2nd respondent herein) and to ensure the supply of Philips products 'at least to the extent of the supply made in the year 1985' subject to the placement of necessary orders by the complainant.2. The factual background leading to the filing of the complaint is as follows:The appellant Company manufactures and sells certain audio products. It has a vast network of dealers--about 18...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-12-2004
Reported in : AIR2004SC5088; 2005(5)ALLMR(SC)42; 2004(4)AWC3699(SC); 2004(3)BLJR2145; 2005(3)BomCR430; (2004)4CompLJ255(SC); IV(2004)CPJ40(SC); [2005(1)JCR22(SC)]; JT2004(8)SC607; 2004(3
A.K. Mathur, J. 1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter to be referred to as 'the Commission'), New Delhi whereby the Commission has dismissed the original petition of the appellant on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties.2. Brief facts which are necessary for disposal of this appeal are as follows.The appellant is the wife of one deceased A.K. Garg who was admitted to the National Heart Institute (hereinafter referred to as 'the Institute') for medical treatment and because of the negligence of the doctors of the Institute he could not get proper medical treatment and ultimately he died. The deceased A.K. Garg was employed as Electrical Engineer in I.D.P.L, Vir Bhadra (Rishikesh). The deceased was drawing a salary of Rs. 8000/- per month at the time of his death. He left behind his family members namely; (i) Smt. Savit Garg (wife), (ii) Smt. Sushila Garg (mother), (iii) Shri Ankul Garg (son), (iv...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Aug-04-2004
Reported in : 2004ACJ1441; AIR2004SC4091; 2004(2)ALD(Cri)739; (2004)3CompLJ271(SC); 2004CriLJ3870; 2004(4)CTC309; 112(2004)DLT866(SC); 2004(77)DRJ235; JT2004(6)SC238; 2004(3)MPHT503; 200
D.M. Dharmadhikari, J. 1. Leave to appeal is granted.2. The appellant who is a Doctor (Plastic Surgeon) is in the dock as an accused on the charge under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code [for short the 'IPC'] for causing death of his patient on 18.4.1994. The patient was operated by him for removing his nasal deformity. It may be mentioned at the outset, that the Anesthetist who was assisting the surgeon in the operation was also made co-accused but it is reported that he died pending the trial. The proceedings, therefore, stand abated against him.3. The appellant urged before the Magistrate that the medical evidence produced by the prosecution, does not make out any case against him to proceed with the trial. The learned magistrate in deciding to proceed with the trial recorded following reasons in the impugned order dated 28.11.1998 passed by him :-'Postmortem report is very categorical and very clear and it has been clearly mentioned therein that death was due to the complicatio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-29-2004
Reported in : I(2005)ACC51; AIR2005SC446; 2005(1)AWC220(SC); JT2004(10)SC173; 2004(10)SCALE28b; (2005)1SCC444
G.P. Mathur, J. Civil Appeal No. 6341/20021. This appeal, by special leave, has been preferred against the judgment dated 23.72002 of Allahabad High Court by which the scheme dated 13.2.1986 published under Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 and the approved scheme published on 29.5.1993 was quashed.2. In order to appreciate the contentions raised by learned counsel for the parties, it is necessary to mention the essential facts, as the case has a long history. The Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (for short 'UPSRTC') prepared a draft scheme to nationalize Saharanpur-Shahdara-Delhi route and the same was published on 29.9.1959 in accordance with Section 68-C of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1939 (hereinafter referred to as the 'old Act'). The scheme was challenged by a number of operators and the High Court by its judgments dated 31.10.1961 and 7.2.1962 upheld the scheme as against 50 operators, but quashed the same as against 32 and 18 operators who had filed two gro...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-02-2004
Reported in : AIR2004SC2060; (SCSuppl)2004(4)CHN77; 2004(4)CTC35; JT2004(4)SC139; (2005)139PLR224; 2004(4)SCALE163; (2004)7SCC505
S.H. Kapadia, J. 1. Both the above civil appeals raise common question of law and fact and, therefore, they are disposed of by this common judgment. For the sake of convenience, facts in Civil Appeal No. 1257 of 1999 are mentioned hereinbelow.2. Late Sardarni Chanan Kaur widow of Sardar Triloki Nath Singh (deceased) was the owner of a kothi and lands admeasuring 90 kanals bearing khasra No. 4971 situated at Circular Road, Kapurthala (hereinafter referred to for the sake of brevity as 'the said property'). It is not in dispute that late Sardarni Chanan Kaur was the owner of the said property and that she had executed a registered will on 15.9.1962, whereby she bequeathed the said property to the State Government through Randhir Jagjit Hospital, Kapurthala (hereinafter referred to for short as 'the said Hospital). The bequeath in respect of the said property was made vide paragraph 2 of the will which is reproduced herein below:--'I bequeath my bungalow situated at Circular Road, Kapurth...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-18-2004
Reported in : [2004(101)FLR670]; JT2004(3)SC423; (2004)IILLJ470SC; 2004(3)SCALE383; (2004)9SCC755; 2004(2)SLJ414(SC); (2004)2UPLBEC1313
S.B. Sinha, J.Introduction:1. Whether an agreement despite expiry would prevail over a regulation made under Section 79(c) of the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 (for short 'the Act') as regard the age of superannuation of an employee of the Respondent-Board is the primal question involved in this appeal which arises out of a judgment and order dated 11.9.2001 passed by the High Court of Judicature of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in L.P.A. No. 34 of 2001.FACTUAL BACKGROUND:2. The appellant is a registered Union of the employees of the Madhya Pradesh State Electricity Board (for short 'the Board'). The erstwhile Electricity Board framed regulations in the year 1952 under Section 79(c) of the Act known as General Service Conditions of Board Servants. In the year 1957, the respondent-Board came into existence on re-organisation of the State.3. The State of Madhya Pradesh enacted the Madhya Pradesh Industrial Relations Act, 1960 (for short 'the 1960 Act') with a view to regulate the relations...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-17-2004
Reported in : 2005(1)BLJR460; 2005(3)ESC458; [2005(104)FLR329]; [2005(2)JCR171(SC)]; JT2005(11)SC449; (2005)ILLJ722SC; (2005)9SCC605
A.K. Mathur, J.1. Both these appeals raise common question of law, therefore they are disposed off by this common order.CIVIL APPEAL NO. 37 OF 19982. This appeal is directed against an order passed by the Division Bench of the Patna High Court dated February 14, 1997 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court held that the Tata Main Hospital at Jamshedpur (hereinafter referred to as the 'Hospital') is an establishment within the meaning of Section 2(6) of the Bihar Shops and Establishments Act, 1953 (hereinafter to be referred to as the 'Act') and it is covered by the aforesaid Act. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order this appeal has been filed by the appellant.3. Brief facts which are necessary for the disposal of this appeal are that the Hospital was established by the Management of Tata Iron & Steel Company Ltd in the year 1908 for providing medical facilities to the employees as well as their families and dependent of the Company, and its associated companies namely, TELCO, Tata Yod...
Tag this Judgment!