Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC2148; [1994(68)FLR791]; JT1994(2)SC183; (1994)IILLJ173SC; 1994(1)SCALE748; (1994)2SCC718; [1994]2SCR163; 1994(1)LC592(SC)
ORDERS. Mohan, J.1. Leave granted.2. The short facts leading to this civil appeal are as under :Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as the Corporation') is the appellant in the civil appeal. It was established under the Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Section 49 of the said Act empowers the Corporation to make regulations with prior approval of the Central Government. In exercise of these powers, the Corporation has framed the Life Insurance Corporation of India (Staff) Regulations, 1960 providing for terms and conditions of service of the staff of the Corporation. Regulation 4 of the said Regulations empowers the Chairman of the Coporation to issue such instructions or directions as may be necessary to give effect and carry out instructions of the Corporation in order to secure effective control over the staff employed by the Corporation. The Chairman of the Corporation with the approval of the Board on 27.11.1979 i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC2311; JT1994(2)SC569; (1995)IILLJ72SC; 1994(1)SCALE744; (1994)2SCC729; [1994]2SCR171; 1994(2)SLJ52(SC); 1994(1)LC596(SC); (1994)2UPLBEC1067
ORDERB.L. Hansaria, J.1. Leave granted.2. The State of Uttar Pradesh formulated a new scheme of pension and provident fund for the employee of Aided Degree Colleges of the State Service. This was made effective by Government Order (G.O.) dated 24.8.80. This G.O. came to be issued on the demand of the teachers of various aided educational institutions including Degree Colleges for better terminal benefits like pension and death-cum-retirement gratuity. One of the points urged in support of the claim was that similarly situated teachers in Government Colleges were better of in this regard and there was no reason to treat the other teachers differently. It was urged that the two categories of teachers being similarly situated the difference was discriminatory as well. It however deserves notice at the threshold itself that the retirement age of aided colleges teachers was (and is) 60 years, whereas in Government colleges the retirement age is 58 years which is at par with the retirement a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1994SC1216; JT1994(1)SC277; (1994)107PLR333; 1994(1)SCALE242; (1994)2SCC289; [1994]1SCR377; 1994(2)LC231(SC)
ORDERS. Mohan, J.1. All these appeals can be dealt with under a common judgment since they they arise out of one and the same order in all the Courts. The 1st respondent landlady, Smt. Kanta Bai Asawa and her mother Smt. Godavari Bai Rathi are the owners of mulgies bearing Municipal Nos. 3.2.840/6 and 3.2.840/7, situated at Veer Sawarkar Road, Kacheguda, Hyderabad. These two mulgies were let out to appellants tenants under separate lease-deeds marked as P1 and P2 respectively in the trial court executed on 23.9.1978. Ex. P1 is in respect of mulgi bearing No. 3.2.840/6 and Ex. P2 is in respect of mulgi bearing No. 3.2.840/7. Alleging that the tenants had committed wilful default in payment of rent as well as the taxes due to the Municipal Corporation in respect of the demise premises, the landladies filed four eviction petitions bearing R.C. Nos. 291/84, 292/84, 1972/86 and 1973/86 on the file of the First Additional Rent Controller at Hyderabad. The tenants contended that they did not ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(3)SCC214
J.S. Verma and; S.P. Bharucha, JJ.1. Delay condoned.2. Special leave granted.3. The respondent was posted at FOD Jodhpur from which he was transferred to the FOD Udhampur. He challenged his transfer on the ground of mala fides without indicating any particular individual against whom the mala fides were alleged, or impleading that person by name. The respondent also alleged that his superiors were annoyed on account of his trade union activities and the complaints made by him in that capacity about the functioning of the Depot. The Tribunal did not accept the respondent's contention that the transfer was made on account of the complaints made by the respondent about the functioning of the Depot. However, the Tribunal appears to have been influenced by the respondent's assertion that his trade union activities had influenced the transfer. Accordingly, the Tribunal held that the transfer order had been made in colourable exercise of power. The transfer was accordingly quashed.4. In our o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994(1)ARBLR507(SC); 1995Supp(3)SCC181
ORDER1. The interim order of the High Court purports to injunct the petitioner who is Defendant No. 1 in the two suits from taking any steps in arbitration for the purpose of adjudication of the dispute which is the subject matter of the suit.2. In a matter of this nature where questions of amenability of a dispute to international arbitration arise it is not proper to let loose and keep at large orders of injunction of this kind for unduly long periods. It is inconsistent with the principles governing international arbitration, it is of utmost importance for the domestic courts to be circumspect in granting such interlocutory interdictions. At any rate, the court must ensure that the matters are dealt with and disposed of with utmost despatch.3. We, therefore, request the High Court to dispose of the question whether the injunction should be vacated or not most expeditiously. With our expressing any opinion on the merits of the matter, we request the High Court to dispose of this ques...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1994(68)FLR1175]; JT1994(2)SC619; (1995)IILLJ718SC; 1994(1)SCALE848; (1994)4SCC422; [1994]2SCR149; 1994(2)SLJ64(SC); 1994(1)LC573(SC)
B.L. Hansaria, J.2. The above is the keynote thought which would pervade in the present cases, one of which is an appeal by special leave against the judgment of Jammu & Kashmir High Court in CSA No. 1 of 1989 rendered on 19.4.90 by which the High Court allowed the appeal of the respondent-State and set aside the judgment of District Munsiff, Poonch by which a suit of the appellant challenging the order of dismissal passed on 31.1.78 had been decreed, which order had come to be upheld by District Judge, feeling aggrieved at which the High Court had been approached by way of second appeal. Another is a writ petition filed directly in this Court making a grievance about illegal termination of service and seeking a declaration that dismissal was void and non est.3. The High Court dismissed the suit of the appellant on two grounds: (1) the civil court had no jurisdiction to entertain the suit; and (2) the suit was barred by resjudicata.4. Shri Mehta appearing for the appellant contends tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1994(68)FLR931]; JT1994(2)SC84; 1994(1)SCALE738; (1994)5SCC180; [1994]2SCR137; 1994(2)SLJ137(SC)
G.N. Ray, J.1. Leave granted. This appeal is directed against dismissal of the Writ Petition No. 5803 of 1984 passed on May 9, 1991 made by the appellant before the Allahabad High Court challenging the order of dismissal dated September 11, 1984 passed by the U.P. Public Services Tribunal in Claim No. 3 of 1988/f/IV/81. The aforesaid claim petition was moved by the appellant before the U.P. Public Services Tribunal against the order of termination of service of the appellant dated April 15, 1981. The service of the appellant was sought to be terminated on payment of one month's salary in lieu of notice by giving effect to the termination of service from the date of service of the said order of termination. It may be stated here that such notice was served on the appellant on April 1, 1981.2. The relevant facts concerning the above appeal may be stated as hereunder : -The appellant was recommended for the post of Overseer in the Local Self Government Engineering Department of Uttar Prad...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(4)SCC30
The Text below is only a summarized version of the order pronouncedThe issue to be resolved in this case was whether a vacant land held by a bank under a private trust is entitled to exemption under Section 19 of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976. The Apex Court held that as no banks holds trust properties as owner envisaged under Section 19 of the Act or possess vacant land as envisaged under Section 19 of the Act. Thus, a bank even though regarded under Trusts Act as the owner of trust property-vacant land for the purpose of executing or administering a trust, it cannot hold a trust property-vacant land as its owner or possessed as owner as could make that land eligible for the benefit of exemption envisaged under Section 19 of the Act. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(3)SCC179
Order 1. We have heard both the learned counsel at length. The respondent-landlord sought to evict the appellant under Section 41 of the Presidency Small Causes Court Act, stating that the leave and licence granted in favour of the appellant came to be terminated by notice dated 14-5-1974. Thereafter he had no right to remain in possession and he was liable to be evicted. In defence, what the appellant urged that he was a joint tenant along with others. That plea of joint tenancy has been negatived by the courts below. In this appeal, it is urged before us that the courts below have gone wrong on two counts — (i) that by amending a written statement, an alternative plea opposed to the original stand of the defendant was not permissible; (ii) the courts below have overlooked the beneficial provision of Section 15-A available to the appellant under Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947. Should this Court accept these submission, the appellant is entitl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1995Supp(4)SCC118
A.S. Anand and; Faizan Uddin, JJ.1.These two appeals by special leave are directed against the common judgment of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh dated 29-6-1992 and are being disposed of together.2. K. Rajamma died of burn injuries on 24-6-1988 at about 10 a.m. in M.G.M. Hospital. According to the prosecution case, appellant Kanchy Komuramma, the mother-in-law of the deceased and appellant Kanchy Ramchander, the father-in-law of the deceased, on 22-6-1988 at about 7 or 8 a.m. poured kerosene on her and set her ablaze in her house in Village Ellenda, Police Station Wardhanapet. The deceased was removed to the hospital by her mother PW 1, Elata Agamma and her husband PW 3 Kanchy Kumara Swamy and some others. At the hospital she was initially treated by the Casualty Medical Officer, Dr T. Linga Kurthy, PW 8 who found 64% superficial burns on her body on various parts. After giving initial primary treatment, the deceased was referred to Duty Surgical Officer and was admitted in Unit III ...
Tag this Judgment!