Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1990Supp(1)SCC61
A.M. Ahmadi; S. Natarajan, JJ.1. Both these appeals arise out of a common judgment rendered by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Criminal Appeal Nos. 411 and 478 of 1978. It is beyond dispute that an occurrence which took place at about 6.00 p.m. on March 13, 1977 resulted in PW 1, Netraprakash Sharma and his father, PW 4 Goverdhan Lal Sharma sustaining injuries on their person. According to the prosecution, the appellant Ram Raj Singh used a dharia and the appellants Sarat Singh, Tej Bahadur and Mulchand used lathis to cause injuries to the victims and the appellant Diwan Singh threatened the witnesses with a pistol when the assailants withdrew from the scene after the incident was over. The prosecution rested its case upon the testimony of the injured witnesses PW 1, Netraprakash Sharma and PW 4, Goverdhan Lal Sharma, besides that of PW 6 Pawan Kumar, PW 5 Deoraj and PW 10 Baldeo Singh. As a result of the attack, PW 1 Netraprakash Sharma sustained a simple injury and PW...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC829; [1989(58)FLR503]; JT1989(1)SC364; 1989LabIC993; 1989(1)SCALE432; 1989Supp(1)SCC273; [1989]1SCR736; 1989(1)LC562(SC)
A.M. Ahmadi, J.1. This is an appeal by Special Leave under Article 136 of the Constitution of India from the Judgment of Bombay High Court dated 6th March, 1987 in Writ Petition No. 1866 of 1981.2. The appellant, C.D. Tase, joined the college run by Vidya Prasarak Mandal, Thane, on June 15, 1971 as a lecturer in the pay-scale of Rs. 300-25-600 prescribed by the University Grants Commission pursuant to the recommendations made by the Second Pay Commission. By Government Resolution No. USG 1167-U dated November 6, 1967, the Government of Maharashtra had accepted in principle the Government of India scheme based on the recommendations of the University Grants Commission for improvement of salary scales of university teachers and teachers in affiliated Arts, Science, Commerce and Secondary Training Colleges. Accordingly, the Government of Maharashtra directed all the Universities in the State to implement the pay scales recommended by the Commission. The scales recommended were to take eff...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1989(1)SC295
Oza, J.1. In the light of the judgment in Civil Appeal No. 1866/77 we see no reason to entertain the petitions. They are therefore dismissed. No order as to costs....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC885; 1989(2)Crimes483(SC); JT1989(1)SC308; 1989(1)SCALE370; (1989)2SCC132; [1989]1SCR718; 1989(1)LC616(SC)
S. Natarajan, J.1. Special Leave granted.2. This appeal by special leave is directed against an order of the High Court of Karnataka under Section 482 Criminal Procedure Code (for short the Code) setting aside the order of the Second Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bangalore directing the registration of a calendar case against the second respondent under Sections 408 and 420 of the India Penal Code and the issue of summons to him under Section 204 of the Code.3. So far as the facts are concerned, they are as follows. The appellant gave a report to the Commissioner of Police, Bangalore on 20-2-1980 against the second respondent alleging that he had committed the offences of cheating and criminal breach of trust. It was averred that the second respondent, was its Divisional Manager (Export-Import) and had negotiated on its behalf with an Italian firm in July 1979 for supply of quality granite stones and had obtained a letter of credit Availing the credit facility, he had drawn...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1996)5SCC418
G.L. Oza and; K.N. Saikia, JJ..1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment of the High Court dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant. The appeal before the High Court was filed against an order passed by the Sub-Judge, Garhshankar refusing to stay the suit on an application made under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act by the present appellant who was the defendant in the suit before the trial court2. The learned trial court refused to stay the suit and exercised discretion under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act against the appellant on the ground that in respect of the same dispute regarding recovery of arrears of electrical dues outstanding against the appellant for so many years. The appellant himself filed a suit for temporary injunction and in that suit the present respondents submitted an application under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act on the basis of conditions of supply clause 29 raising the plea that the dispute is referable to the arbitration of Chief Electric...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC1042a; JT1989(1)SC292; 1989(1)SCALE376; 1989Supp(1)SCC246; 1989(1)LC697(SC)
Oza, J.1. This appeal is filed by the original plaintiff whose suit for partition and possession was decreed by the trial Court but on appeal before the Bombay High Court, the judgment was reversed and the suit was dismissed. After grant of leave by this Court the present appeal is filed.2. The property in suit was Inam land held by the ancestors of the appellant under Vat Hukums of Kolhapur State. The ancestors of the appellants respondents have been holding this Watan (Inam) land in lieu of service and as they were holding in the capacity of Watan or Inam they were impartible. After contesting on various grounds the suit was decreed so far as the Watan lands were concerned. As regards Survey No. 397/1-2 the trial Judge found that they were converted into Rayatwari lands in 1904 and allotted in an earlier partition to defendant No. 3 and therefore in the present suit they could not be claimed as properties liable to partition. About the lands held as Watan lands the suit was decreed.3...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1989SC1058; 1989(2)Crimes305(SC); 1989(2)KLT243(SC); 1989(1)SCALE425; (1989)2SCC208
Natarajan, J.1. The four Special Leave Petitions have been filed against a common order passed by the High Court of Kerala in Criminal M.C. Nos. 49/88 25 and 63/88 filed respectively by the petitioners in the two sets of special leave petitions. Counter affidavits have been filed by respondents 3 and 4.2. For the sake of convenience, we will refer to the petitioner in S.L.P. Nos. 1127-28/88 as Sajan K. Varghese and the petitioner in 30 S.L.P. Nos. 1148-49/88 as M/s. Super Film,3. Sajan K. Varghese is the Managing Partner of a film producing concern M/s. Saj Productions and also a Finance Company known as the Oriental Exchange and Finance Company, Kottayam (for short the Finance Company). It would appear that the Finance Company 35 offered very high rates of interest to investors and depositors and this led to a large number of people investing crores of rupees with the Finance Company and in the case of many, their entire savings. Taking advantage of his position as the Managing Partne...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1989(40)ELT276(SC); [1990]184ITR224(SC); JT1989(1)SC417; 1989(1)SCALE436; (1989)2SCC127; [1989]1SCR711; 1989(1)LC539(SC)
Sabyasachi Mukharji, J.1. This appeal is under Section 35(L)(b) of the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 (hereinafter called 'the Act') against the order dated 8th January, 1988 passed by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal. The issue involved in this appeal was whether in the facts and the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was legally justified in restricting the demand of duty to six months prior to the date of issue of show-cause notice, particularly in a case where longer period was invoked on the ground of suppression of information in the declaration furnished by the respondent.2. The respondent manufactured patent and proprietary (P&P;) medicines falling under T.I. 14E and also pharmacopoeial preparations falling under T.I. 68 of the Central Excise Tariff of an aggregate value of Rs. 20,59,338.60 and cleared during the period of 1.4.1979 to 31.3.1980, the same without payment of duty, availing the benefit of exemption notification No. 80/80.3. Under th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1989Supp(2)SCC512
A.M. Ahmadi and; S. Natarajan, JJ.1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we see no grounds to differ from the view taken by the Financial Commissioner as affirmed by the High Court that the appellant has rendered himself liable for eviction as he had failed to pay the rent regularly without sufficient cause. In Raj Kanta v. Financial Commissioner, Punjab1 this Court has held that even a single default in payment of rent without sufficient cause would render a tenant liable for eviction. In this case, the default in payment of rent is for the period from Kharif 1978 to Rabi 1980. The appeal is therefore dismissed. There will however be no order as to costs....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1990SC273; JT1989(1)SC296; 1989(2)SCALE768; (1989)1SCC674; [1989]1SCR730; 1989(1)LC589(SC)
ORDER1. Having given our careful consideration for these several days to the facts and circumstances of the case placed before us by the parties in these proceedings, including the pleadings of the parties, the mass of data placed before us, the material relating to the proceedings in the Courts in the United States of America, the offers and counter-offers made between the parties at different stages during the various proceedings, as well as the complex issues of law and fact raised before us and the submissions made thereon, and in particular the enormity of human suffering occasioned by the Bhopal Gas disaster and the pressing urgency to provide immediate and substantial relief to victims of the disaster, we are of opinion that the case is pre-eminently fit for an overall settlement between the parties covering all litigations, claims, rights and liabilities related to and arising out of the disaster and we hold it just, equitable and reasonable to pass the following order :We orde...
Tag this Judgment!