Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1983)85BOMLR540
Chandurkar, Ag. C.J.1. This appeal filed by the Municipal corporation of Greater Bombay and the General Manager of the Bombay Electric Supply and Transport Undertaking is directed against the judgment and decree passed by the learned single Judge in suit No. 630 of 1967 : AIR1980Bom154 by which the learned single Judge held that the Municipal corporation and the B. E. S. T. Undertaking were not entitled to demand from the plaintiffs-respondents any security deposit of the amount equal to the value of three months' bills of the electric energy consumed by the plaintiffs as and by way of security deposit for the payment of the electric bills. By the decree a permanent injunction was also granted restraining the appellants-defendants from taking any action under Section 24 of the Indian Electricity Act of 1910 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. Since the power of the Municipal Corporation nof Greater Bombay and the B. E. S. T. Undertaking to demand a security deposit like the one d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 1981(2)DRJ60
Sultan Singh, J. (1) This is an appeal on behalf of the landlord under section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (hereinafter called 'the Act') directed against the judgment and order dated 8th October, 1974 of the Rent Control Tribunal dismissing his application for eviction of the respondents on the grounds mentioned in clauses (b) and (e) of the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 14 of the Act. The Additional Controller by his judgment and order dated 12th April, 1972 had passed an order of eviction under Section 14(l)(e) of the Act in favor of the appellant but had refused eviction of the respondents under section 14(l)(b) of the Act. (2) The eviction application pertains to portions of first floor and second floor of the property at plot No. 43, Darya Ganj, Delhi. The Delhi Improvement Trust (now succeeded by the Delhi Development Authority under Act 61 of 1957) granted on 22nd September, 1940 lease of plots No. 43 and 44, Darya Ganj, Delhi to the appellant and his brother...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : AIR1973Kant299; AIR1973Mys299; (1973)1MysLJ401
Narayana Pai, C.J. 1. This reference is by a Division Bench of this Court which heard RFA 50 of 1965 arising out of a suit for partition of the properties of a Hindu family in the district of South Kanara governed by Aliyasanlhana Law. The facts and circumstances leading to the reference are briefly as follows:The parties to the suit are descendants of one Cheluvamma and are related to each other as indicated by the genealogical tree given below: CHELUVAMMA____________________________|_____________________________| |Marudevi Amrithavathi SarasammaManjamma Ammanni _________________________|___________________d/o Rajamathi | | | |_______|__________________ Namanna Rathi Bohojappa Anantha| | Hegde Devi Hegde NathiPremavathi (Deft. 2) Sumanaji (Pltf. 1) (Deft. 1)| |Marudevi ______|__________________________(Deft. 3) | |Amrithavathi (Pltf. 2) Vinayachandra (Pltf. 3) 2. The three plaintiffs and the three defendants were the only members of the family surviving and alive at the lime of the in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : 39(1989)DLT87; 1989(17)DRJ53; 1989RLR495
Arun B. Saharya, J.(1) In this second appeal, under Section 39 of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, hereinafter referred to as 'the Act', arising out of an order of the Rent Control Tribunal dated 10th April 1986 affirming order of eviction of the appellant-tenant made by the Additional Rent Controller, Delhi, under Section 14(1)(b) of the Act, the main question of law which has arisen is: whether Clause (b) of the proviso to Sub-section (1) of Section 14 of the Act applies to residential premises let out to a company also. (2) The relevant facts lie within a narrow compass. The appellant is a public company having its registered office at Calcutta. The respondent let out his property No. 1 M-11, Greater Kailash No. 11, New Delhi, hereinafter referred to as the demised premises, to the appellant on terms and conditions contained in a deed of lease executed between the parties on 17th January, 1980. Clause (11) (c) of the lease deed contains one of the lessee's covenants in the followin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : 1983(2)BomCR487
Sharad Manohar, J.1. This appeal is filed by the Government against the award given by the Joint Civil Judge (S.D.), Kolhapur under the Land Acquisition Act, enhancing the compensation awarded by the Land Acquisition Officer to the respondent/claimant in respect of the land compulsorily acquired for the extension of the industrial estate at Ichalkaranji. The lands in question were originally Jagirs. After the abolition of the Jagir under the Bombay Merged Territories miscellaneous Alienations Abolition Act, 1955, they were regranted to the respondent on certain conditions. There is no dispute before us that lands Survey Nos. 556 & 589 were regranted to him in his personal capacity whereas lands Survey Nos. 588/A and 588/B were regranted to him in his capacity of the sole Trustee of the Deosthan. After the regrant, the relevant notification under section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued. At the time of the said notification there were two tenants on the lands. But in connection ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Reported in : ILR1985KAR283; 1985(1)KarLJ362
Kulkarni, J.1.This second appeal by judgment-debtor-2. Gundappa Achari is directed against the order dated 19-2-1977 passed by the Civil Judge, Udupi , in Execution Appeal No. 9 of 1976 affirming the order dated 18-10-1976 passed by the Munsiff, Coondapur, in R. E.P. No. 158 of 1966 over-ruling the objections of judgment debtor-2 and ordering the execution to proceed.The material facts leading to the case are as under :-S.No. 83/13 of Pandeswar village measuring 24 cents originally belonged to one Kasi Holla. The said owner Kasi Holla granted on mulgeni the said 24 cents of land to one Subraya Aksali, the father-in-law of judgment debtor-2, under a deed dated 9-12-1912, with a condition that the mulgeni tenant Subraya Aksali should not transfer his rights to any one. The mulgani tenant Subraya Aksali executed a registered deed of settlement on 28-3-1939 in favour or his wife Sarasamma and his only son Krishnaya Achari and retained for himself the right to enjoy the saidproperty-during ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2004(2)ALD1; 2004(1)ALT659
P.S. Narayana, J.1. Ranga Reddy District Sarpanches Association, represented by its President and Convenor Sri Girish Sanghi and others had invoked the jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India questioning certain provisions of A.P. Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and certain Government Orders and Rules by filing W.P. No. 12348/2002. Federation for Empowerment of Local Government by its Presidum Member, Lok Satta by its General Secretary and Dr. Jayaprakash Narayana filed W.P.MP. No. 22300/2003 in W.P. No. 12348/2002 to implead them as Respondents 3 to 5 and in view of the averments made in the affidavit filed in support of the application the said W.P.M.P. No. 22300/2003 is allowed and proposed parties are impleaded as Respondents 3 to 5. The contesting parties had put in lengthy pleadings and also placed ample material before the Court in support of their respective contentions. Likewise, Prasanna, Chairperson, District Level Committee, Zilla Parishad, Nalgond...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : 2003(6)ALD522
G. Bikshapathy, J. 1. Assailing the validity of G.O. Ms. No. 505 Education Department dated 11.11.1998 and G.O. Ms. No. 538 Education Department dated 26.11.1998, several O.As, were filed by the teachers working in Government Schools and also the Mandal Educational Officers Association. The challenge is made to the alleged Integration of the Services of the teaching staff working in the Government schools with that of the schools under the control of the Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samithies.2. Few facts are necessary to appreciate the matter in a more detailed manner.In the erstwhile Andhra State, all the schools in the State were established by the Government under the control of the Education Department. However, consequent on the formation of Zilla Parishads and Panchayat Samithies, the schools which were hitherto maintained by the District Boards in the Andhra area were taken over by the Zilla Parishads along with the staff in 1959. As far as Telangana Area is concerned, prior t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Reported in : AIR1982All402
K.N. Seth, J.1. The petitioner M/s. Shervani Sugar Syndicate Limited manufactures crystal sugar at its sugar factory situate at Neoli, district Etah. It has challenged the legality of the imposition and realisation of toll tax (Vahan Kar) by the Municipal Boards of Ujhanai and Budaun on trucks and other vehicles carrying sugarcane transported from sugarcane purchasing centres to the petitioner's factory at Neoli, district Etah. The prayer made in these writ petitions is for a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondent Municipal Boards to refrain and forbear from realising any toll tax on trucks or any other vehicles carrying sugarcane from sugarcane purchasing centres to the petitioner's factory while passing through the limits of the Municipal Boards.2. The case set up by the petitioner is that all sugarcane purchasing centres as well as the sugar factory are situate outside the limits of the Municipal Boards. The vehicles carrying sugarcane from the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
1 In this batch of writ petitions preferred under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the constitutional validity of Section 65(105)(zzzz) of the Finance Act, 1995 (for short „the 1995 Act) and Section 66 as amended by the Finance Act, 2010 (for brevity „the 2010 Act) is called in question. The matters were initially placed before a Division Bench wherein the learned counsel for the parties raised many a submission and regard being had to the nature of the cases, the Division Bench thought it appropriate that the controversy should be dwelled upon by a larger Bench. Thereafter, the matters have been placed before us. 2 For the sake of clarity and convenience, we shall advert to the facts adumbrated in W.P.(C) No.3398/2010 and deal with the contentions canvassed by the learned counsel for the parties in all the writ petitions as the issue is common to all. The petitioner, a registered company under the Companies Act, 1956, has taken commercial property / shops on rent ...
Tag this Judgment!