Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC712; [1979(38)FLR440]; (1979)3SCC577; 1979(11)LC33(SC)
V.R. Krishna Iyer, J.1. These two appeals by special leave are filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh against the judgments of the Division Bench of Allahabad High Court quashing two orders of pre-mature retirement under C.S.R. Article 465 The two officers belong to the Prisons Department and have had entries at some stage of their career, which are appreciative of their efficiency. However, the retirement was ordered on the assumption that there were adverse entries. Notwithstanding the adverse entries they also had the benefit of promotion Shri Dikshit, learned Counsel for the appellant, drew our attention to the various facts in the case including the entries in the confidential records of the respondents. He further drew out attention to a legal flaw committed by the High Court in one of the judgments in misunderstanding the scope of U.P. Act 33 of 1976 which has a retrospective provision enabling adverse entries prior to a promotion being taken cognizance of for purpose of pre-mature...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC697; 1979CriLJ640; (1980)1SCC131
P.S. Kailasam, J.1. This appeal under the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970, is directed against the conviction and sentence imposed by the Bombay High Court reversing the order of acquittal by the Trial Court. The deceased Pandurang was the resident of village Khadiki. P.W. 15 Kerappa is his elder brother. P.W. 7 Gajaram who is the only witness in this case, was a friend of deceased Pandurang. Gajaram had two brothers Sandipan and Shrimant, P.W. 10. They had three sisters Anjubai, wife of the accused and Yamunabai (P.W. 6) and another.2. The case of the prosecution is that after the death of the Yamunabai's husband, intimacy developed between Yamunabai and the deceased Pandurang. Yamunabai was also friendly with accused. It is stated that the accused told Yamunabai to cut off her relations with the deceased Pandurang and to remain in his exclusive keeping. But Yamunabai turned down this proposal. Hence the accused developed enmity against the dec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC824; (1979)3SCC779; 1979(11)LC62(SC)
V.R. Krishna Iyer, J.1. The short point raised in this appeal by special leave is as to whether payment of rent within one month of the receipt of the notice by the landlady demanding payment of arrears of rent, which had fallen due for three months or more, has been made. If no such payment has been made, the decree for eviction which the High Court has approved in appeal must stand. If such payment has been made, the appeal deserves to be allowed. 2. So the question is whether payment has been made. There is no dispute that deposit of the rent for the period of four months, which is the period in arrears, has been made into court under Section 7C of the U. P. (Temporary Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1947 within three days of the issuance of the notice by the landlady. Then the question to be considered is whether the deposit into court is equal to payment to the landlady in terms of Section 7-C. This depends in turn on the expression of willingness by the land lady to receive pa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1978SC397; 1979CENCUS56D; 1978(2)ELT667(SC); (1979)4SCC155; [1979]2SCR469; 1979(11)LC68(SC)
R.S. Sarkaria, J.1. This is an appeal by special leave against an order of the Government of India, Ministry of Finance (Department of Revenue and Insurance). The order was passed by Shri B. Sen, Commissioner (Revision applications), Government of India. Indian Hard Metal (P) Ltd., the appellant, had imported 15 metric tonnes of wolfram ore from London. The Customs authorities classified the said ore under item 87 of the Indian Customs Tariff and charged duty at the rate of 60 per cent ad valorem amounting to Rs. 62,871.03P., instead of classifying the imported ore either under item 26 of item 70(7) which are free from duty. These relevant items, as entered in the Imported Tariff, may be set out as under:____________________________________________________________________________________ Item Name of Article Nature of Standard No. duty rate of ____________________________________________________________________________________ 26 Metallic ores all sorts except ores and x Free x other p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC429; [1979(38)FLR337]; 1979LabIC146; (1979)ILLJ156SC; (1979)1SCC477; [1979]2SCR458
R.S. Sarkaria, J.1. The respondent, Belliappa, was appointed temporary Junior Compositor in the Grade of Rs. 65-1-72-2-90 in the Government Branch Press, Mercara. The post was non-gazetted Class IV as defined in Clause (IV) of Sub-Rule 3 of Rule 5 of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957. The employment was temporary and was to continue until further orders.2. The Branch Manager, Mercara, Respondent 1 (herein), served a notice on the respondent on December 29, 1966, stating that the respondent had taken outside the Press some copies of the ballot papers relating to the Director's election of Coorg Cardamom Co-operative Societies, Mercara. The respondent was required to show cause before 2.00 P.M. of December 30, 1966, why disciplinary action be not taken against him as per Rules. It was further stated in the notice that failure to comply with the notice will result in the respondent's suspension and further disciplinary action against him.3. Thereaft...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC1177; (1979)3SCC797
P.S. Kailasam, J.1. This appeal is preferred by special leave against the judgment of a Division Bench of the Madras High Court in Criminal Appeal 373 of 1973 finding the appellant guilty on two counts under Section 302, Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to death on each count. The case for the prosecution is as follows:Petha Gounden who will be referred to as the first deceased, is the father of the appellant Guruswamy and the second deceased Doraiyan alias Kalianna. There were two other accused before the sessions court, the second accused being the brother-in-law of the appellant having married his sister. The third accused is a cousin and the friend of the second accused. Second and third accused were acquitted by the High Court of the offence under Section 302, Indian Penal Code but were convicted of minor offences. There is no appeal against their conviction by the second and third accused.2. Deceased Petha Gounden owned about 10 acres of land and about 13 years before the occ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC663; 1979CriLJ594; (1979)1SCC328; [1979]2SCR442
Jaswant Singh, J.1. By his judgment and order dated November 30, 1965, the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Bhubaneswar convicted Gopinath Patra, respondent in Appeal No. 26 of 1972 under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced him to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. By the same judgment, the Sub Divisional Magistrate also convicted Nakula Sahu, respondent in Appeal No. 25 of 1972, Brahmananda Misra, respondent in Appeal No. 27 of 1972 and Niranjan Naik, respondent in Appeal No. 28. of 1972 under Section 409 read with Section 109 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced each one of them to two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 2,000/-. By the same judgment, the Sub Divisional Magistrate also found all the four respondent guilty of the offence under Sections 120B of the Indian Penal Cods but in view of the fact that they were found guilty of the offence of criminal breach of trust for which they had entered into Conspiracy, no separate sentence w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1979SC1210; [1979(38)FLR100]
V.R. Krishna Iyer, J.1. ln the light of the decision of this Court in : (1978)ILLJ349SC , counsel on both sides agree that the appellant comes within the definition of 'industry'. The appeals, on this point, therefore fail. The consequence is that the Industrial Tribunal has to take up the proceedings and continue to adjudicate on the dispute and give its award. No costs....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1980SC366; 1980CriLJ323; 1980Supp(1)SCC179
P.S. Kailasam, J.1. This appeal is by special leave against the judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Criminal Appeal No. 332 of 1971 convicting the appellant under Section 420. I.P.C. and Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act sentencing him to one year's Rule. I. and a fine of Rs. 200/- and six months' Rule. I. respectively. The appellant is the Principal of Basic Institute, Raisen. Sahariya, P.W. 12, was Divisional Forest Officer, Raisen. He wanted to purchase a Binocular for his department. He had a talk with the appellant about the Binocular. The appellant told P.W. 12 that he had purchased a Binocular for his Institute and he will get the quotations for Sahariya also. Several quotations Exhs. P-2, P-3 and P-4 were received on March 28, from the Surender Brothers. Another quotation was received from another firm Kumar Bros. An order Exh. 5 was placed for the purchase of Binoculars to Surinder Brothers. On the 31st March, 1964 the appellant met Sahariya and g...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1979)4SCC321; 1979(11)LC159(SC)
V.R. Krishna Iyer, J.1. This appeal which has come up by special leave is of such a small dimension that after a preliminary explanation of the case and a consideration of the relevant celender of events, we thought that a just order would be as we propose to make below.2. We put the suggestions to counsel on both sides and they agreed that it was fair in the circumstances of the case. But, instead of resting it on consent of parties, we pass the following order because we consider that it comports with law and justice in this case.3. The appellant was a Police Sub Inspector in the State of Junagadh long years ago where he was later confirmed. However, when he was absorbed into the regular service in the State of Seurashtra, he was admittedly treated as a temporary and officiating Police Sub-Inspector. While so functioning, he was reverted to the post of Head Constable Ist Grade by the Inspector General of Police. The appellant filed a suit after 18 years of his reversion, got a decree...
Tag this Judgment!