Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC917; 1981CriLJ341; 1981(1)SCALE179; (1981)2SCC109; [1981]2SCR661
S. Murtaza Fazal Ali, J.1. This appeal by special leave is directed against a judgment dated April 5. 1974 of the Calcutta High Court by which the order of the trial court was set aside and the case was remitted for fresh hearing in the light of the directions given by the High Court. The High Court further directed that the Commitment Inquiry held by Mr. R.P. Roy Chowdhury, who was the trial Magistrate, should be held by some other Magistrate.2. The facts of the case lie within a very narrow compass and the central controversy turns upon the interpretation of Section 14 of the Official Secrets Act, 1923 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). It appears that a complaint was filed on the 20th March 1969 against 38 accused persons under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3, 9 and 10 of the Act. The charges against the accused were no doubt very serious and concerned the security of the State, as the accused persons are alleged to have passed on some military secret...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1975All315
K.N. Singh, J. 1. A Full Bench of this Court consisting of three Judges referred this petition to a larger Bench as in their opinion certain observations made and conclusions drawn by a Full Bench of this Court in Mahesh Chandra v. Tara Chand, AIR 1958 All 374 (FB) required reconsideration. The Full Bench was of the opinion that in this case a question of gravity and general importance was involved with regard to the principles on which this Court, while exercising its jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution, can in its discretion, refuse relief to the petitioner, even though it may be established that there was non-compliance of a provision of law mandatory or directory in nature. In view of the observations made by the Full Bench this writ petition has been referred to a larger Bench for decision. 2. Briefly, the facts giving rise to the petition are that Sardar Gyan Singh petitioner was President of the Municipal Board, Dhampur, District Bijnor, which is constituted of si...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1984SC1099; 1984(2)Crimes511(SC); 1984LabIC851; 1984(1)SCALE874; (1984)3SCC243
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. This is yet another case which illustrates forcibly what we have said on many an occasion that it is not enough merely to identify and release bonded labourers but it is equally, perhaps more, important that after identification and release, they must be rehabilitated, because without rehabilitation, they would be driven by poverty, helplessness and despair into serfdom once again. Poverty and destitution are almost perennial features of Indian rural life for large numbers of unfortunate ill-starred humans in this country and it would be nothing short of cruelty and heartlessness to identify and release bonded labourers merely to throw them at the mercy of the existing social and economic system which denies to them even the basic necessities of life such as food, shelter and clothing. It is obvious that poverty is a curse inflicted on large masses of people by our malfunctioning socio-economic structure and it has the disastrous effect of corroding the soul arid sa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2006(2)ALD1; 2006(1)ALT785
ORDERJ. Chelameswar and Goda Raghuram, JJ.1. We have had the benefit of perusing the painstaking and meticulously crafted judgment of our learned brother Hon'ble Mr. Justice V.V.S. Rao. We agree with the OPERATIVE conclusion that the appointments of over 200 candidates (party respondents) ought not to be invalidated as these persons having been appointed as lecturers/Readers have continued as such for over a decade, have settled down, got married, begot children and are now of an age disabling them from securing alternative employment. Some of these persons had already resigned, some have retired, some have died and the dependents of those who have died are also being given pension. If at this stage their initial appointments are declared invalid the social costs in terms of human misery and individual privations would be incalculable. Besides, for the resultant vacancies the petitioners may either be not interested in applying at this distant point of time, may not be able to compete ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1976Bom129; 1976MhLJ267
Dharmadhikari, J. 1. In special Civil Application No. 1766 of 1975 as also in the other petitions which were heard along with this Special Civil Application, so far as the common questions of law are concerned, the state Government is acquiring lands belonging to the petitioners as the same are needed or are likely to be needed for the public purposes namely, providing house sites to landless labourers. It further appears from the notifications issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. 1894, referred to herein after as the Act, that as the Additional Commissioner , Nagpur was of the opinion that the acquisition of the lands is urgently necessary, he directed under sub-section (4) of Section 17 that the provisions of Section 5-A of the Act shall not apply in respect of the said lands. A schedule is attached to each of the notification issued under Section 4 of the Act giving details about the landed property. Thereafter is some cases notifications under Section 6 of the Act ar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1988AP99
ORDERJagannadha Rao, J.1. Several important questions relating to the computation of the present value of future earnings or losses arise in this appeal. The principles of law that I propose to discuss will be useful not only for computing damages in claims by the injured but also in claims by dependants of deceased persons. The object to evolve a simple and easy method which, at the same time, is scientifically valid. 2. The Tribunal under the Motor Vehicles Act was dealing, in this case, with the claim of a person injured in an accident on July 30th 1978 consequent to which the claimant's right leg below the knee was amputated. At that time, the claimant-respondent was aged 35 years and was working as a technician in the Merchant Navy. In a claim for Rs. two lakhs, the Tribunal awarded Rs. one lakh. The owner of the motor vehicle which was responsible for the injury to the respondent, the appellant before me. Sri C. Sadasiva Reddi, the learned counsel for the appellant has mainly con...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (2001)168CTR(Bom)99; [2001]249ITR612(Bom)
S.H. Kapadia, J.1. The following questions of law arise for determination in the aforesaid two writ petitions :'(A) Whether the interest-tax under the Interest-tax Act, 1974. is a tax on income and, if so, whether interest accruing to the UTI from loans advanced by it stands exempted in view of Section 32 of the UTI Act, 1963 ? (B) If the answer to question No. (A) is in the negative then whether communication dated January 29, 2001, withdrawing the letter/circular dated October 11, 1991, issued by the CBDT was retrospective and whether Interest-tax Act, 1974, was applicable for the accounting years 1991-92 to 1998-99 ? (C) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Department was right in invoking Section 10(a) of the Interest-tax Act, 1974, for failure on the part of the UTI to file returns under the Interest-tax Act, 1974 ?' Facts :2. On September 23, 1974, Parliament enacted the Interest-tax Act, 1974. At that time, it applied to scheduled banks, the IDBI, the IFCI, t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2001(3)BomCR673; 2002(1)MhLj301
S.H. Kapadia, J. 1. The following questions of law arise for determination in the aforesaid two Writ Petitions. A. Whether the interest tax under the Interest Tax Act, 1974 is a tax on income and, if so, whether interest accruing to UTI from loans advanced by it stands exempted in view of Section 22 of the UTI Act, 1963? B. If the answer to question No. A is in the negative then whether Communication dated 29-1-2001 withdrawing the letter/ Circular dated 11th October, 1991 issued by CBDT was retrospective and whether Interest Tax Act, 1974 was applicable for the Accounting Years 1991-92 to 1998-99. C. Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Department was right in invoking Section 10(a) of the Interest Tax Act, 1974 for failure on the part of UTI to file returns under the Interest Tax Act, 1974? FACTS: 2.On 23rd September 1974, the Parliament enacted Interest Tax Act, 1974. At that time, it applied to Scheduled Banks, IDBI, IFCI, ICICI and Industrial Reconstruction. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1981SC2101; 1981(1)SCALE229; (1981)2SCC141; [1981]2SCR727; [1981]47STC298(SC); 1981(13)LC227(SC)
V.D. Tulzapurkar, J.1. This appeal by special leave raises the question whether cm true construction of Entry No. 15 of the Notification No. ST-II-4949/X-10(2)-74 dated May 30, 1975 issued under Section 3-A of U. P. Sales Tax Act, 1948, the negotiated sale of a Thermal Power Plant by appellant No. 1 to appellant No. 2 is exigible to sales tax thereunder?2. The short facts giving rise to the question may be stated: A Thermal Power Plant at Rampur comprising seven boilers, five turbines together with its associate auxiliaries, components and accessories originally belonged to the U. P. State Electricity Board. The Board after selling it in working condition to appellant No. 1 on May 29, 1974 for Rs. 41.31 lakhs called upon the latter to pay sales tax thereon which was paid under protest. Appellant No. 1 used it for generating electricity from May 29, 1974 to Sept. 30, 1975. As the power position improved in the State of U. P. appellant No. 1 discontinued the generation of electricity thr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 2005ACJ699; [2009(104)FLR380]; 2004(4)MhLj869
Anoop V. Mohta, J. 1. The present appeal has been preferred under Section 30 of the Workman's Compensation Act, 1923 (for short 'the Act') by the original applicant/appellant herein, against the original non-applicant-employer/respondent herein, and thereby challenged the judgment and bill of cost dated 22-9-1986, passed by the Commissioner. Workmen's Compensation, Chandrapur, in W.C. Case No. 14(11)/81, whereby, the application was dismissed. The Commissioner, after considering the material, as well as, evidence on record, came to the conclusion that at the relevant time Mr. Bindadin, the husband of appellant No. 1 and father of original applicant No. 2, was not workman of the employer, one Mr. Sohanlal Amriksingh Arora, respondent herein. It was also declared that the original applicant No. 3 was not dependent of said Bindadin. As he was not in the employment and, in the accident, which took place on 15-4-1979, by the use of truck No. CPC 8260 owned by the respondent, 4 persons inclu...
Tag this Judgment!