Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC620; 1989(37)BLJR529; JT1988(4)SC728; 1988(2)SCALE1326; (1989)1SCC229; [1988]Supp3SCR867; 1989(1)LC6(SC)
Sabyasachl Mukharji, J.1. Special leave granted.2. The order dated 25th March, 1988 of the Collector is under challenge in this appeal. The same reads as follows:Shri Raghu Nath Thakur S/o Late Gorakh Thakur, Village Repura, P.S. Puksha, District Samastipur had bid for Rs. 11,900 (Rupees eleven thousands only) per month Dak in an auction of Beni Country liquor shop held on 27.3.88 and he as given the shop of Beni Country liquor but after signing in Bandobasti Register he did not deposit dak amount.The name of Shri Raghu Nath Thakur S/o Late Gorakh Nath Village Repura, P.S. Pusa, Distt. Samastipur is therefore placed in the black list for future under the orders passed by the Collector, Samastipur.3. This order was passed pursuant to the order of the Collector. The letter dated 25th March, 1988, states as follows:The Collector of the district after perusal of the said office note passed order on 25.3.88 which is produced in verbatim below:Ist bidder chunki defaulter hai atah security pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC436; (1989)1GLR418; JT1988(4)SC307; 1988(2)SCALE1287; (1989)1SCC458; [1988]Supp3SCR826
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. These appeals and the special leave petition are directed against the decision of the High Court of Gujarat, upholding the right of the mortgagors to redeem the properties before the period stipulated in the deeds, as well as the right of the mortgagors to recover possession of the properties from the tenants and/or the mortgages without resort to the relevant Rent Restriction Act. All these matters were separately canvassed before us as these involved varying facts, yet the fundamental common question is, whether long term mortgages in the present inflationary market in fast moving conditions are clogs on equity of redemption and as such the mortgages are redeemable at the mortgagors' instance before the stipulated period and whether the tenants who have been inducted by the mortgagees can be evicted on the termination of the mortgage or do these tenants enjoy protection under the relevant Rent Restriction Acts. One basic fact that was emphasised in all these...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC218; [1989(58)FLR368]; JT1988(4)SC449; 1988(2)SCALE1215; 1989Supp(1)SCC615; 1990(3)SLJ42(SC); 1989(1)LC258(SC)
Ranganath Misra, J.1. Writ Petition Nos. 711, 1100, 1272-73 of 1986 are applications under Article 32 of the Constitution by a set of direct recruits to the U.P. Police Service Class I while Writ Petition No. 13409 of 1983 is by a set of promotees to the said service. A writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution and bearing No. 1449 of 1985 before the Allahabad High Court by a set of promotees challenging the order of the U.P. Public Services Tribunal (Lucknow Bench) has been transferred to this Court and has been registered as Transferred Case No. 23 of 1987. Writ Petition No- 4475 of 1984 filed before the Allahabad High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution at the instance of the State of Uttar Pradesh and its Inspector General of Police against the same decision of the U.P. Public Services Tribunal has also been transferred to this Court and registered as Transferred Case No. 25 of 1987. Writ Petition No. 10751 of 1984 filed before the Allahabad High Court by di...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC214; JT1988(4)SC286; 1989LabIC1324; 1988(2)SCALE1220; (1989)3SCC458; 1989(1)LC283(SC)
Murari Mohan Dutt, J.1. In this writ petition, the petitioners have prayed for several reliefs. This Court, however, while issuing notice limited the scope of the writ petition only to the question of grant of Selection Grades and Super-Time Scales to the petitoners.2. Of the two petitioners, the petitioner No. 1 is the Special Judge, Meerut, and the petitioner No. 2 is the Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffarnagar, State of Uttar Pradesh.3. Initially, the petitioners and 8 others were appointed Judicial Magistrates in the Cadre of Judicial Officers sometime in June, 1957 on the basis of the Combined Civil Services Competitive Examination held for the recruitment of 10 Judicial Officers and 35 Munsifs who were appointed in July, 1957.4. The Judicial Officers including the petitioners recruited along with 35 Munsifs on the basis of the said Combined Civil Services Competitive Examination, did not belong to the Judicial Service. While the Munsifs had a definite channel of promotion up to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC232; 1989(1)BLJR4; 1989CriLJ794; 1989(1)Crimes1(SC); JT1988(4)SC412; 1989MPLJ1(SC); 1988(2)SCALE1329; (1989)1SCC405; [1988]Supp3SCR762
M.P. Thakkar, J.1. We have yet to come across a case of a wife wronged by her husband and a child wronged by his father who had to suffer also at the hands of the Court. For, while the Trial Magistrate has disposed of the matter in a very cursory manner taking a thoroughly untenable and unjust view, the High Court has rejected the Revisional Application summarily. Both the Courts have done so notwithstanding the fact that the point involved (whether detaining the husband in jail for failing to pay the arrears of maintenance would be tantamount to satisfaction of the order of maintenance passed in her favour even though the arrears of maintenance allowance remain unrecovered in fact) is not capable of being answered against the petitioner.2. The Metropolitan Magistrate (Shri L.D. Malik) in his order dated July 4, 1981 recorded a clear finding that the husband was guilty of cruelty in the context of the demand for dowry. He observed:I have heard the attorney for the petitioner and carefu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC426; JT1988(4)SC436; 1988(2)SCALE1550; (1989)1SCC257; 1989(1)LC252(SC)
S. Natarajan, J.1. This appeal by special leave arises out of a judgment of the High Court of Calcutta in a Letters Patent Appeal confirming the decree for ejectment passed against the appellant by the Civil Courts and upheld by a Learned Single Judge of the High Court in the second appeal preferred by the appellant.2. The respondent had granted a lease of premises bearing No 149 Mohalla Bara Bazar, Midnapore to the appellant on a monthly rent of Rs. 70/-. After terminating the tenancy by means of a valid notice the respondent filed a suit for the eviction of the appellant on two grounds viz. (1) default in payment of rent from January 1966 onwards and (2) reasonable requirement of the leased premises for the residential needs of the landlord and also for starting a business in a portion of the building. The Trial Court granted a decree for the eviction of the appellant on the first ground and rejected the prayer for eviction on the second ground. The Appellate Court, while confirming ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC733; 1989CriLJ923; 1989(2)Crimes724(SC); JT1988(4)SC387; 1988(2)SCALE1341; 1989Supp(1)SCC91
M.P. Thakkar, J.1. 'Suicide' is excluded concludes the trial court. 'Suicide' is not excluded says the High Court. This is in the context of the tragic, unnatural death of a wife (Veena : A First Class First M.Sc. in Botony from Patna) by burning on the night between 11-12th September, 1984, within barely nine months of her marriage with a doctor husband. The husband and his sister viz. Dr. Narendra and Meera respectively were convicted by the trial court for the murder of the wife under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. The husband was sentenced to death. The sister-in-law was sentenced to imprisonment for life. They appealed. The High Court has set aside the order of conviction and sentence as against both holding that 'suicide cannot be excluded'. These companion appeals, by the father of the wife and by the State, arise from the said order of acquittal. The death of Veena occurred in the kitchen of the two bed room flat of the husband of which he with his wife ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC402a; 1989(1)ARBLR345(SC); (1989)1CALLT62(SC); [1989(58)FLR12]; JT1988(4)SC416; 1989LabIC1035; (1989)ILLJ153SC; 1988(2)SCALE1187; 1989Supp(1)SCC68; [1988]Supp3SCR7
Murali Mohan Dutt, J.1. This appeal by special leave preferred by the Union of India and Others is directed against the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, Calcutta, whereby the Tribunal set aside the Award of the Board of Arbitrators and directed the appellants to accord the benefit of the scale of pay of Rs. 550-900 to the Scientific Assistants working in the Botanical Survey of India with effect from January 1, 1973 with all consequential reliefs.2. Before January 1, 1973, the scale of pay of the Scientific Assistants in the Botanical Survey of India was Rs. 210-425. The Third Central Pay Commission, hereinafter referred to as the 'Pay Commission', made certain recommendations with respect to the Scientific Assistants. Clause (i) of paragraph 41 of the Report of the Pay Commission reads as follows:41(i). In our view, below the gazetted staff there are at least two distinguishable levels of scientific work which require graduates or post-graduates. The hi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC464; 67(1989)CLT360(SC); JT1988(4)SC296; 1988(2)SCALE1191; 1989Supp(1)SCC553; [1988]Supp3SCR732
Lalit Mohan Sharma, J.The question which arises in this appeal by special leave from the decision of the Orissa High Court in a writ case is whether the 'estate' of Lord Jagannath has vested in the State of Orissa as a result of the notification dated 18.3.1974 issued under Section 3-A of the Orissa Estates Abolition Act, 1951 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) or the said notification is ultra vires and fit to be quashed.2. The writ petition in the High Court was filed by a number of persons claiming to be Sevaks and worshippers of Lord Jagannath, the presiding deity of the famous Jagannath temple. The management of the temple and the properties including the intermediary interest is in the hands of a trust which was impleaded as a respondent in the case. Besides, the State of Orissa and Collector, Puri, the Administrator, Jagannath temple, the Jagannath Committee were also made parties. They, however, do not support the writ petitioners and agree with the State that the 'estate' ha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC421; 1989CriLJ968; JT1988(4)SC261; 1988(2)SCALE1109; 1989Supp(1)SCC74; 1989(1)LC190(SC)
B.C. Ray, J.1. This appeal by special leave is against the judgment and order passed on 9-12-1977 in Criminal Appeal No. 360 of 1976 by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh dismissing the appeal2. The prosecution case, in short, is that the deceased Yasodama who had been divorced by her husband soon after marriage due to some misunderstanding, was living with her mother Rathnamma at Tadikonda in Guntur District. She inherited 50 acres of land in Ibrahimpatnam of Krishna District from her father and she also inherited 40 acres of land at Tadikonda from her maternal grandfather. Her mother started a High School in the name of her father and donated a sum of Rs. 60, 000/- to the said School. The deceased also started an Oriental College and donated money to the said College. She also established an elementary school in the name of her father Mallela Venkata Subbaiah and nominated P.W. 18 as its Correspondent and Secretary. The deceased was a wealthy lady3. In 1972, appellant No. 1(A-1) who wa...
Tag this Judgment!