Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1994)96BOMLR781; (1995)1GLR344; 1994(1)SCALE329; (1994)3SCC366; [1993]Supp1SCR419; 1994(1)LC371(SC)
R.M. Sahai, J.1. The short question of law that arises for consideration in this appeal, by grant of special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution of India, is if a tenant under the Bombay Tenancy & Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) who surrendered the tenancy can be said to have been dispossessed so as to claim benefit under Section 32(1B) of the Act added, in 1969 in Chapter III, dealing with Special Rights and Privileges of Tenants and Provisions for Distribution of Land for Personal Cultivation'.2. For this purpose it is necessary to narrate facts in brief. A suit was filed by the respondent No. 1 - plaintiff (referred to as plaintiff) against respondent No. 2 - defendant (referred to as the defendant) and the appellant - defendant No. 2 (referred to as the appellant), on the allegation that a conditional mortgage was executed by the plaintiff in favour of defendant in 1952 after getting the land surrendered from the appellant but since the def...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC672; 1994CriLJ626; 1993(2)Crimes1174(SC); 1993(3)SCALE227; 1993Supp(3)SCC678
K. Jayachandra Reddy, J.1. This appeal is filed under Section 379 Cr. P.C. read with Section 2 of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act. There are three appellants. Sardul Singh, A-1 is the father of Satnam Singh, A-2 and Mohan Singh, A-3. They were tried by the Sessions Judge, Patiala for offences punishable under Sections 302/34 and 323/34 I.P.C. but were acquitted. The State of Punjab filed an appeal against the said order of acquittal and the High Court by the impugned judgment accepted the State appeal and set aside the acquittal of the appellants and convicted them under Sections 302/34 I.P.C. and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life. Satnam Singh, A-2 was further convicted under Section 323 I.P.C and the other two accused were also convicted under Section 323/34 I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo six months' R.I. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. Hence the present appeal.2. This is a case of matricide. As already me...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(3)SCC403
Kuldip Singh and; R.M. Sahai, JJ.1. The question before the High Court was whether a notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act served upon one of the several co-heirs of a deceased tenant is valid notice under the law? The Kerala High Court relying on judgment of the Single Judge of that High Court in Valiyaveettil Konnappan v. Mangot Velia Kunniyil Manikkam1 answered the question in the negative.2. This appeal by the landlord is against the judgment of the High Court.3. The High Court following Konnappan case1 reversed the decisions of trial court and the lower appellate court which had come to the conclusion that the notice served on one of the co-heirs of the tenant is a sufficient notice under Section 106 of the Transfer of Property Act. The question is no longer res integra. This Court in H.C. Pandey v. G.C. Paul2 has held that after the death of a tenant, all the tenants step into the shoe of the deceased tenant jointly and they are joint tenants under the law. Thi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1993(2)ALT(Cri)467; JT1993(4)SC379; 1993(3)SCALE229; 1993Supp(3)SCC669
K. Jayachandra Reddy, J. 1. All these three appeals are filed against the judgment of High Court of Patna, wherein convictions of the thirteen accused under Sections 302/149, 436/149 and 435/149 I.P.C. and the sentences awarded thereunder are confirmed. The convictions of some of the accused under Section 302/34 I.P.C. and the sentence of life imprisonment are also confirmed. The convictions of some of the accused under Section 27 of the Arms Act and the sentences awarded by the trial court are also upheld.2. Seven of them namely Ram Janam Pandey, Gopal Sharan Pandey, Sadhu Saran Pandey, Ram Ayodhya Pandey, Nar Narayan Pandey, Ram Gopal Pandey and Ram Deo Pandey have preferred Criminal Appeal Nos. 391-392 of 1989. The remaining six namely Lakshmi Narain Pandey, Kamla Pandey, Jairam Pandey, Bishram Pandey, Rajendra Pandey and Narsingh Pandey have preferred Criminal Appeal No. 522 of 1989. These 13 appellants along with 17 others were tried for the said offences by the First Additional S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(3)SCC434
M.N. Venkatachaliah, C.J. and; S. Mohan, J.1. The petitioner, Miss Chhavi Mehrotra, has moved this writ petition before this Court under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for directions for consideration of her admission to the MBBS course against the 15% all-India quota of 1992. This writ petition along with other similar petitions came for consideration and certain comprehensive directions were issued in matters for admission of students in the waiting list to various colleges in the country. In obedience to the orders of this Court a notification dated 28-5-1993 was issued by the Director General of Health Services calling upon the candidates to signify their willingness to be considered for admission under the scheme evolved by the court. Despite the whole matter being seized of by the court, the petitioner moved — and what is disturbing us is that the learned Judge of the High Court entertained — an independent Writ Petition No. 1508(M/S) of 1993 before the Luckn...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(3)SCC657
J.S. Verma and; S.P. Bharucha, JJ.1. Leave granted.2. Heard on merits.3. Having heard learned counsel for the parties we are satisfied that no interference with the Tribunal's order is called for insofar as it relates to the question of fixation of seniority of S.S. Khanapure who was an ex-Emergency Commissioned Officer and had entered the State Service after ceasing to be a member of the Armed Forces. The construction made by the Tribunal of Rule 6-A of Mysore Government Servants Seniority Rules inserted by amendment of the Rules in November 1969 as not conferring any benefit of seniority on a person who is appointed to a State Service after he had ceased to belong to the Defence Service or an All India Service mentioned in Rule 6-A does not suffer from any infirmity. In the present case it is not necessary to examine the impact of that rule on the question of fixation of seniority of any person who while in the Defence Service or an All India Service named in the rule came to be appo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC1612; 1994CriLJ2193; 1993(2)Crimes1167(SC); JT1993(4)SC290; 1993(3)SCALE215; 1993Supp(3)SCC379
ORDERK. Jayachandra Reddy, J. 1. These two appeals, one filed by P.W. 1 Miran Bux and the other filed by the State respectively, are against the judgment of the High Court of Rajasthan setting aside the convictions and sentences awarded against the respondents accused.2. Seven respondents-accused were tried for the offences punishable under Sections 302/149, 147 and 148 I.P.C. The trial court convicted all of them and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life and various other terms of imprisonment for other offences. The convicted accused preferred an appeal to the High Court. The High Court after a detailed discussion and consideration of the evidence of the alleged eye-witnesses held that the same is not trustworthy and accordingly allowed the appeal setting aside the convictions and sentences. As against the said judgment, the complainant as well as the State have preferred these two appeals.3. The prosecution case is that one Manzoor Ahmed gave a report to the police...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC1712; 1994CriLJ2249; 1993(2)Crimes1168(SC); JT1993(4)SC288; 1993(3)SCALE216; 1993Supp(3)SCC411
ORDERK. Jayachandra Reddy, J. 1. These two appeals arise out of the same judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh wherein a Division Bench confirmed the conviction of the three appellants herein for the offence of murder. In all five accused were tried under Sections 302/149 I.P.C. and the trial court convicted all the five accused and sentenced each of them to undergo imprisonment for life. In appeal, the High Court set aside the conviction of the accused Durjan and Pooran and altered the conviction of the remaining three accused namely the appellants herein to one under Sections 302/34 I.P.C. The sentence of imprisonment for life was, however, confirmed. Accused Mulayam Singh has preferred Criminal Appeal No. 223/83 and accused Baboo and Rajju have preferred Criminal Appeal No. 635/84.2. The prosecution case is that Durjan, one of the accused and Chauda, the deceased were on inimical terms because of some land dispute. On 26.12.78 the deceased and his wife Ram Toriya, P.W. 2 went...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(3)SCC655
M.N. Venkatachaliah, C.J. and; A.S. Anand, J.1. Upon motion the matter is taken on board.2. The prayers in this writ petition are somewhat extraordinary. The petitioner, who is a serving District Judge in the State of Himachal Pradesh, has brought this writ petition seeking these, amongst other reliefs:“(a) issue an appropriate ... direction, directing the respondent to consider the case of the petitioner for being elevated as a Judge of the High Court on the basis of the merit and seniority and also as per the recommendation made in this regard;“(b) pass an appropriate writ or direction, calling upon the respondents to assign reasons for the supersession of the petitioner so that it can be tested fairly and reasonably;”“The interim prayer in the writ petition is to:“restraining the respondent-authorities from elevating Respondent 4 as a High Court Judge pending final disposal of the writ petition before this Hon'ble Court;”3. The petitioner who argu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC949; 1993(2)ALT(Cri)526; 1994CriLJ1223; 1993(2)Crimes1173(SC); JT1993(4)SC358; 1993(3)SCALE241; (1993)4SCC75
ORDERKuldip Singh, J. 1. Vishwa Dev Sharma and Anand Dev Sharma were convicted under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (for short the Act) by the Rajasthan High Court. They were sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of two months. This appeal under Section 19 of the Act has been filed by Vishwa Dev Sharma against the judgment of the High Court dated September 8, 1992.2. The appellant is the editor of a Hindi daily newspaper called 'Nyaya' which is published in three editions from Ajmcr, Jaipur and Alwar. An article titled 'From the Court precincts' was published on October 6, 1987 in the Jaipur edition of the paper. The article was written by a freelance journalist Anand Sharma. The English -version of the article is reproduced in the impugned judgment of the High Court. We have been taken through the judgment of the High Court including the contents of the article. We arc, of the view that the contents of the article are on the face of it contemptuous and, as such, the ...
Tag this Judgment!