Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC2390; (1993)113CTR(SC)436; [1993]203ITR456(SC); JT1993(4)SC291; 1993(3)SCALE180; (1993)4SCC77; [1993]Supp1SCR28
ORDERA.S. Anand, J.1. This appeal, on a certificate of fitness granted by the High Court under Article 133 of the Constitution of India is directed against the judgment in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 1541 of 1974 decided by the Allahabad High Court on 24.11.1976 and arises in the following circumstances:2. The appellant is a firm which was assessed to income-tax at Azamgarh (U.P.). In the Income Tax Returns for the assessment year 1963-64, the assessee claimed that it had borrowed a sum of Rs. 50,000 from M/s. Jain Finance Distributor (India) Private Limited, Calcutta (hereinafter called the Calcutta company) on 19.5 1962, An entry dated 25.5.1962 in that behalf was made by the assessee in its books of account as well as in the balance sheet as liability. The loan was stated to have been raised in cash and it was also claimed to have been returned in cash in 1968, though the interest on loan was slated to be paid by cheque/bank drafts till repayment in 1968. During the assessment pro...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC2636; 1993CriLJ3680
1. Delay condoned.2. This is an appeal under Section 379 of the CrPC read with Section 2 of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act. The sole applicant was tried for an offence punishable under Section 302, I.P.C. for causing the death of one Karuthammal, the deceased, by cutting her with a knife on her abdomen and left knee on 22-6-78 at about 9.30 p.m. as a result of which the deceased died in the Erskine Hospital, Madurai on 30-6-78. The case rested mainly on the evidence of P. Ws. 1 and 2, the eye-witnesses and other circumstantial evidence. The trial Court rejected the evidence of the eye-witnesses on the ground that they could not have been residing in the house in which the occurrence has taken place. In an appeal against the said acquittal the Division Bench of the High Court in an elaborate judgment considered the entire evidence on record and the reasons given by the trial Court in rejecting the same and reached the conclusion that the view take...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC612; JT1993(4)SC264; 1993LabIC2268; (1994)ILLJ281SC; 1993(3)SCALE112; 1993Supp(3)SCC697; [1993]Supp1SCR1
ORDERS.C. Agrawal, J.1. There is some delay in filing of the special leave petitions directed against the orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') dated July 24, 1991 (in O.A. 636 of 1989) and October 31, 1991 (in R.A. 72 of 1991). The said delay is condoned. Leave is granted in all the special leave petitions.2. The appeals relate to the fixation of seniority in the Indian Administrative Service (hereinafter referred to as 'the Service' of three officers, namely, S/Shri G.K. Sangameshwar, K.A. Belliappa and C. Chikkanna, who were non-State Civil Service Officers in the State of Karnataka and were appointed in the Service by selection. The writ petition is by Raja Subramanian a non-State Service Officer in the State of Tamilnadu who also has been appointed to the Service by selection and has a grievance about the fixation of his seniority in the Service.3. The recruitment to the Service is governed by the Indian Administrative Service (R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC1474; 1993(3)SCALE315
1. Special leave granted. Substitution application allowed.2. These are four batches of appeals, Special Leave Petitions and Writ Petitions under Article 32 of the Constitution arising out of certain Governmental orders passed from time to time in regard to the age of retirement and consequential payment of grant to certain institutions, etc. The first Governmental order was issued on 7th February, 1976, bearing G.O.Ms. No. 105-Education by which the age of retirement of school teachers working in private (aided) management schools was reduced from 60 years to 55 years as in the case of teachers working in schools under the Government and Local Bodies to bring them at par in regard to conditions of service, including pension, etc. By GOMs No. 584-Education dated 25th May, 1976, the age of retirement of college teachers was reduced and the Government having undertaken the responsibility of paying pensions to the aided institutions, it was decided that no grant-in-aid will be admissible ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC2323; 1993CriLJ2833; 1993(2)Crimes944(SC); JT1993(4)SC95; 1993(3)SCALE53; 1993Supp(3)SCC1
ORDERK. Jayachandra Reddy, J.1. There are seven appellants. They alongwith three others were tried for offences punishable under Sections 302 read with 34 and also under Section 147 I.P.C. The trial court convicted all of them. On appeal, the High Court acquitted three of them but convicted the seven appellants under Section 304 Part I read with Section 34 I.P.C and sentenced each of them to undergo three years R.I. The conviction under Section 147 I.P.C. however, was set aside. The High Court held that these appellants exceeded the right of private defence.2. The accused, two deceased persons in the case and the material witnesses belong to Mahjiladih Village in Hazaribagh District. A piece of land - Plot No. 866 was the subject matter of dispute between appellant No. 1 and the prosecution party. On 29.8.69 P.W. 3 and his men were engaged in agricultural operation in that land. While so the accused persons came and started beating up P.W. 3 and his men. Three of the appellants were ar...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC2063; [1994]79CompCas298(SC); (1994)2CompLJ430(SC); JT1993(4)SC399; 1993(3)SCALE125; 1993Supp(4)SCC226; [1993]Supp1SCR54
ORDERYogeswar Dayal, J.1. This order will dispose of Civil Appeal No.448 of 1989 and the batch coupled with Writ Petition No.1092 of 1991 and the batch. Civil Appeal No.448 of 1989 arises from the judgment of the Karnataka High Court at Bangalore dated 29th April, 1989 passed in Writ Petition Nos.19321/86, 17110/84, etc.2. The above appeals and writ petitions involve challenge to constitutional validity of the Chit Funds Act, 1982 (Central Act No.40 of 1982) (hereinafter called as 'the Act' or 'the impugned Act').3. The various appellants/petitioners are either Public/Private Limited Companies incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956 or proprietary or partnership concerns or individual organisers. According to Section 1(3) of the Act is will come into force on such date as the Central Government may by Notification in the Official Gazette, appoint and different dates may be appointed for different States. In all these matters, apart from challenge to the vires of various provisions o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1993SC2486
1. Special leave granted.2. Joginder Singh Dhatt, the respondent, is working as Superintendent Grade-II in the service of the Punjab Government. He was transferred from Hoshiarpur to Sangrur purely on administrative grounds. He challenged the order of transfer by way of a writ petition before the High Court on the ground that it was a mid-term transfer and apart from that he was due to superannuate on June 30, 1994 and as such under Government instructions he should not have been transferred. The State of Punjab pleaded before the High Court that the transfer was in the ordinary course. It was further stated that Joginder Singh Dhatt was charge-sheeted and to ensure that he did not interfere with the inquiry proceedings he was transferred to Sangrur. The High Court allowed the writ petition and quashed the transfer order on the following reasoning:Despite all this, the learned Counsel for the petitioner insisted that this Court may cancel the impugned transfer order as the same is cont...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1993)4SCC23
N.P. Singh, J. (Vacation Judge)1. Issue notice on the special leave petitions. Mr U.R. Lalit and Mr S.S. Khanduja accept notice.2. Heard learned counsel for the parties, on the question of granting stay of the operation of the impugned order of the Tribunal. The relevant part of Section 3 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, is as follows:“3. (1) If the Central Government is of opinion that any association is, or has become, an unlawful association, it may, by notification in the Official Gazette, declare such association to be unlawful.(2) Every such notification shall specify the grounds on which it is issued and such other particulars as the Central Government may consider necessary:Provided that nothing in this sub-section shall require the Central Government to disclose any fact which it considers to be against the public interest to disclose.(3) No such notification shall have effect until the Tribunal has, by an order made under Section 4, confirmed the decla...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1994)ILLJ677SC; (1993)4SCC48
ORDERN.P. Singh, J.1. Delay condoned.2. Appearing on behalf of Union of India, the learned Additional Solicitor General took a stand that the Central Administrative Tribunal, has committed an error when it said in the impugned order that ad hoc promotion to the post of Personnel Inspector on August 22, 1985, was given to the respondent on the basis of seniority-cum-suitability. According to the petitioners promotion given to the respondent, was just ad hoc and without consideration of seniority- cum-suitability. This was refuted on behalf of the respondent.3. It is well known that when any objection is taken before this Court in respect of any error in the order of the High Court or the Tribunal, it is only proper to bring that error to the notice of the High Court or the Tribunal by filing a review application.4. It will be open to the petitioners to file a fresh application before the Tribunal within a period of two weeks from today and bring to the notice of the Tribunal all relevan...
Tag this Judgment!