Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-09-1996
Reported in : 1996IAD(SC)600; AIR1996SC1321; 1996(1)ARBLR153(SC); JT1996(1)SC222a; 1996(1)SCALE237; (1996)2SCC132; [1996]1SCR245
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. Heard learned Counsel, for the parties. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated October 8, 1991 passed by the Division Bench of Gauhati High Court in Civil Revision Case No. 74 (SH) of 1989. The aforesaid decision was made by the Division Bench of the High Court on a reference by a learned Single Judge of the Gauhati High Court in the said Civil Revision Case No. 74 (SH) of 1989. The learned Single Judge having disagreed with a decision by a Single Bench of the Gauhati High Court in Union of India v. D.S. Nanda & Co., in Civil Revision No. 33(H) of 1985 (1991 GLJ 400) that no revision lies against the appellate judgment passed in the appeal Under Section 39 of the Arbitration Act, referred the Revision Case to the Division Bench for deciding the maintainability of the Revision Petition filed under Rule 36A of the Rules for the Administration of Justice and Police in the Khasi and Janitia Hills 1937, against the appellate order dated March 28, 1968 pa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-10-1996
Reported in : 1996IIAD(SC)634; AIR1996SC2111; 1996(4)ALT18(SC); 1996(2)BLJR1064; (1996)3GLR342; JT1996(5)SC1; 1996(4)SCALE364; (1996)4SCC332; [1996]Supp2SCR671
ORDERS. Saghir Ahmad, J.1. 'Similia Similibus Curantur' (Like Cures Like) is the basis of a system of therapeutics known popularly as Homoeopathy. It is based on the premise that most effective way to treat disease is to use drugs or other agents that produce the symptoms of the disease in healthy persons. This theory had its origin in or about 460 B.C. when the Greek physician, Hippocrates, noted the similarity between the effect of some drugs and the symptoms of the diseases they seemed to relieve. It was, however, in the late 18th Century that this theory was tested and popularised by German Physician, Christian Friedrich Samuel Hahnemann as a new form of therapeutic treatment after six years test study of scores of drugs on himself and others. Ultimately, in 1796, he published his findings in a leading Medical journal under the caption 'on a New Principle for Ascertaining the Curative Power of Drugs' which set in motion a process of continued research in all directions including it...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Apr-25-1996
Reported in : 1996IVAD(SC)87; AIR1996SC1910; 1996(1)ALD(Cri)874; 1996(2)ALD(Cri)43; 1996(2)ALT(Cri)131; (1996)98BOMLR842; 1996CriLJ2510; 1996(2)Crimes228(SC); JT1996(4)SC495; 1996(4)SCAL
ORDERB.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. Leave granted. Heard Counsel for the Parties.2. Respondent, K.K. Jagtiani, was an Assistant Engineer in the service of the Municipal Corporation, Greater Bombay. On the basis of a complaint received, a trap was laid. The respondent was caught accepting the money. The Municipal Commissioner granted sanction for prosecuting the respondent and another employee under Section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (the Act) and Sections 161 and 165 of the Indian Penal Code on January 4, 1988. On that date, the respondent was in receipt of basic minimum salary which was less than Rupees twelve hundred per month. In due course, a charge-sheet was filed against the respondent in the court of Special Judge, Greater Bombay under Sections 5(1)(d) and 5(2) of the Act and Sections 161 and 165 of the India Penal Code. The learned Special Judge took cognizance of the offences and framed charges. The respondent raised a preliminary objection that the sanction granted ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-11-1996
Reported in : 1996IIIAD(SC)400; JT1996(3)SC556; 1996(3)SCALE8; (1996)8SCC674; [1996]3SCR214
ORDER1. We have heard learned Counsel on all sides even at the admission stage.2. Leave granted. Intervention application ordered.3. This appeal by special leave arises from the order made on 29.2.1996 in Writ Petition No. 2453/95 by the third learned Judge of the High Court of Delhi whom matter was referred pursuant to the difference of opinion expressed by a Division Bench of the High Court in the orders dated December 6, 1995. The learned Judge agreed with one of the two learned Judges and held that the appellant, nominated under Section 4(e) of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences (AIIMS) Act (25 of 1956) (for short, the 'Act'), not being a scientist - either medical or non-medical representing the Indian Science Congress Association, is not a person within the meaning of that section; he thus being not entitled to be nominated, his nomination is bad in law. The question that arises is : whether in the composition of members indicated in Section 4 of Act comprising different...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-01-1996
Reported in : AIR1996SC2082; 1997(57)ECC1; JT1996(5)SC482; 1996(4)SCALE622; (1996)4SCC433; [1996]Supp2SCR204; [1996]102STC106(SC)
ORDERB.P. Jeevan Reddy, J.1. Leave granted in Special Leave Petitions.This batch of appeals and writ petitions raise the question - whether the tranfer of an Import Licence called R.E.P. License/Exam Scrip by the holder thereof to another person constitutes a sale of goods within the meaning of and for the purposes of the Sales Tax enactments of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala. If it does, it is exigible to sales tax. Otherwise not. The Karnataka and Madras High Courts have taken the view that R.E.P. Licences/Exim Scrips constitute goods and, therefore, on their transfer, sales tax is leviable. Their judgment appears to be influenced mainly by the decision of this Court in H. Anraj Etc. v. Government of Tamil Nadu Etc. [1985] Suppl. (3) S.C.R. 342.2. With a view to conserve precious foreign exchange and to channelise the nation's economy on desired lines, the Central Legislature enacted the Imports and Exports (Control) Act in 1947. Section 3 empowers the Central Government to make pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-01-1996
Reported in : (1996)134CTR(SC)152
B. P. JEEVAN REDDY, J. :Leave granted in Special Leave Petitions.This batch of appeals and writ petitions raise the question - whether the transfer of an Import Licence called REP Licence/Exim Scrip by the holder thereof to another person constitutes a sale of goods within the meaning of and for the purposes of the sales-tax enactments of Tamil Nadu, Karnataka and Kerala. If it does, it is exigible to sales-tax. Otherwise not. The Karnataka and Madras High Courts have taken the view that REP License/Exam Scrips constitute goods and, therefore, on their transfer, sales-tax is leviable. Their judgment appears to be influenced mainly by the decision of this Court in H. Anraj Etc. vs. Government of Tamil Nadu Etc. (1985) Suppl. (3) SCR 342.2. With a view to conserve precious foreign exchange and to channelise the nations economy on desired lines, the Central Legislature enacted the Imports and Exports (Control) Act in 1947. Sec. 3 empowers the Central Government to make provisions by order...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-27-1996
Reported in : 1996IIAD(SC)283; AIR1996SC3035; 1996(1)ALD(Cri)350; 1996(1)BLJR532; 1996CriLJ2003; 1996(1)Crimes156(SC); JT1996(2)SC595; 1996(4)KarLJ464; 1996(2)SCALE462; (1996)8SCC217; [1
ORDERK. Ramaswamy, J.1. Leave granted.2. Despite issuance of non-bailable warrant and attachment of the properties, presence of the respondent could not be secured for executing the warrants as it was reported that his whereabouts were not known. Consequentially, as per the directions of the Court, the Legal Aid Committee assigned Shri S.K. Pasi to assist the Court as a counsel for the respondent. After hearing the counsel for the State and the respondent, we had reserved the judgment on January 30, 1996. However, on February 2, 1996, the respondent was brought and his counsel Shri Sushil Kumar Jain requested the Court to give an opportunity for hearing. Accordingly we heard the matter again. This case also indicates avoidance on the part of the people like the respondent to delay the disposal of the appeal in this Court. When the attempts were found to be unsuccessful, he made appearance in the Court which gave us an insight to adopt such appropriate procedure for securing presence fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-06-1996
Reported in : 1996IVAD(SC)360; AIR1996SC2426; JT1996(6)SC43; 1996LabIC2054; (1997)1MLJ7(SC); 1996(II)OLR(SC)152; 1996(4)SCALE282; (1996)4SCC37; [1996]Supp2SCR331; (1996)4UPLBEC2845
ORDERS.C. Agrawal, J.1. In Pt. Paramanand Katara v. Union of India and Ors. : 1990CriLJ671 ,this Court in the context of medico-legal cases, has emphasised the need for rendering immediate medical aid to injured persons to preserve life and the obligations of the State as well as doctors in that regard. This petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution raises this issue in the context of availability of facilities in Government hospitals for treatment of persons sustaining serious injuries.2. Hakim Seikh (petitioner No. 2) who is a member of Paschim Banga Khet Mazdoor Samity (petitioner No. 1), an organisation of agricultural labourers, fell off a train at Mathurapur Station in West Bengal at about 7.45 P.M. On July 8, 1992. As a result of the said fall Hakim Seikh suffered serious head injuries and brain haemorrhage. He was taken to the Primary Health center at Mathurapur. Since necessary facilities for treatment were not available at the Primary Health center, the medical offi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-29-1996
Reported in : 1996VIIIAD(SC)101; 1996(4)ALT44(SC); [1997(75)FLR349]; JT1996(9)SC721; (1997)ILLJ569SC; 1996(7)SCALE861; (1996)11SCC236; [1996]Supp8SCR92
B.N. Kirpal, J. 1. The appellant had appointed respondent No. 2 as a doctor in the General Duty Medical Officer Grade-II on 17th May, 1978. The appointment was on ad-hoc basis for a period of six months with effect from 18th May, 1978.2. Along with respondent No. 2 three other doctors were similarly appointed. All the four doctors were posted at the First Aid Posts which are being maintained by the appellant corporation for providing emergency medical services in case of accidents etc. during all the shifts. This ad-hoc appointment to the temporary post was first extended for a period of three months by order dated 30th November, 1978. Second extension was granted for a period of two months by order dated 7th March, 1979.3. The aforesaid temporary appointment of respondent No. 2, along with three other doctors who were appointed with him. Thus continued for a period of eleven months. By office order dated 17th April, 1979 these doctors were informed that on the completion of their term...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-19-1996
Reported in : AIR1997SC2847; JT1997(1)SC40; 1996(9)SCALE613; (1997)7SCC339; [1996]Supp10SCR472
..... advance insurance co. ltd. v. shri gurudasmal and ors. : [1970]3scr881 holding that the amended definition of 'state' in clause (58) of section 3 of the general clauses act applies to interpretation of constitution by virtue of article 372a nor with ..... to parliament even when it enacts a legislation by using entry 49, list i which relates to patents, inventions and designs, and also in the case of a few other entries in list i.93. thereafter, mr ..... high court shall stand modified to the extent it is contrary to this judgment.59. there shall be no order as to costs.a.m. ahmadi, c.j.60. these civil appeals and special leave petitions have been filed against the ..... greater weight to the solemnity and the actual worth, in real terms, of the phraseology of article 289(1).150. however, we find ourselves unable to agree with mr. sen when he contends that the ..... act affects any exemption from taxation enjoyed as of right at the passing of this act by the ruler of any indian state in respect of any indian government securities issued before that date.45. the first distinguishing feature to be noticed is that while section 155 ..... act. taxes levied under these enactments cannot but be union taxation-union taxation in a union territory.39. for all the above reason, we hold that the levy of taxes on property by the punjab municipal act, 1911 (as extended to part 'c' states of delhi by part 'c' states (laws) act, 1950), the delhi municipal corporation act, 1957 and the new delhi municipal council act .....
Tag this Judgment!