Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1995SC720; 1994(2)Crimes272(SC); JT1994(3)SC551; 1994(2)SCALE795; 1994(2)LC88(SC)
ORDER1. These appeals arise out of the judgment of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana and they are filed by original accused nos. 1 to 5. All of them were convicted by the trial court under Sections 148, 449, 302, 302/149, 326 and 326/149 I.P.C. The appeals preferred by them were dismissed by the High Court.2. The prosecution case is as follows:3. A-1, Shamsher Singh is the father of A-2, Narinder Singh and A-3 Palvinder Singh and they are residents of Village Balia Manjpur. A-4, Balkar Singh and his brother A- 5, Avtar Singh are residents of Village Bhangwan and their father was the brother-in-law of A-1. One Piara Singh, P.W. 4 and A-1 were living in the adjoining houses. The marriages of two daughters of Piara Singh, P.W. 4 were performed in his house on 9.12.1979. The brides were sent off with the marriage parties at about 4 P.M. Thereafter the ladies in the house of P.W. 4 started singing and dancing as customary at about 9 P.M. At that time P.W. 4, his brothers Pritam Kaur, his w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : II(1994)DMC150SC; JT1994(3)SC529; 1994(2)SCALE832; (1994)4SCC363; 1994(1)LC715(SC)
1. Leave granted.2. The appellant instituted Matrimonial Suit (No. 51 of 1987 on the file of the Tenth Court of the Additional District Judge, Alipore) for declaring her marriage with the respondent as a nullity on the ground that her consent in the marriage was obtained by fraud within the meaning of Section 25(iii) of the Special Marriage Act, 1954. Her case was accepted by the learned District Judge who declared the marriage void. On appeal, a Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court took the view that the appellant has failed to establish the fraud alleged by her. The respondent's appeal was accordingly allowed and the appellant's suit dismissed.3. At the time of marriage, the appellant was 19 years' old. She was a student of B.A. Respondent is far older in age. According to the appellant, he was more than 40 years of age at the time of marriage though the respondent himself contends that he was only 32 years' old at that time. He was teaching music to the appellant's elder sister...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994ACJ902; (1995)1GLR818; JT1994(3)SC492; (1995)109PLR1; 1994(2)SCALE797; (1994)4SCC1; [1994]3SCR866
R.M. Sahai, J.1. This appeal by grant of certificate under Article 133(1)(a) of the Constitution of India by the High Court of Gujarat raises substantial question of law about applicability of the period of limitation as provided in Article 36 of the Limitation Act, 1908 (referred to as 'the Act') as it stood prior to 1963 to claim of damages founded on negligence.' The High Court was of opinion that the controversy whether Article 36 could apply to rule laid down in John Rylands & Jehu Horrocks v. Thomas Fletcher 1868 LR (3) 330 raises a question of general importance which required to be authoritatively decided by this Court.2. 'The certificate granted by the High Court under Article 133(1)(a) of the Constitution was in following terms:The main question involved is that of limitation and whether the rule in RYLANDS v. FLETCHER, would result in invoking the provisions of Art. 36 of the old Limitation Act or whether Art.39 of the Act would be the appropriate Article or whether the resi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1994(4)SC162; (1995)ILLJ1162SC; 1999(2)SCALE839; (1994)4SCC445; 1994(2)SLJ151(SC); 1994(1)LC744(SC)
1. Leave granted. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.2. This Court- had been approached by filing the connected SLP by one Shiv Kumar, DP Singh and DH. Wood head Ltd., Employees' Union through Shiv Kumar, its Joint Secretary. An application has, however, been filed, registered as LA. 3/94, in which it has been averred that Shiv Kumar has settled the matter with the management and the workmen who are challenging the order of the High Court may be taken as those whose names have been indicated in the amended cause title-their number being 21. We allow this I.A.3. These appellants have felt aggrieved at their retrenchment pursuant to the permission given by the Specified Authority under Section 25N of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, hereinafter the Act. The permission granted by the Authority came to be challenged before the High Court. It, however, dismissed the petition. Hence this appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution.4. What is required to be noted is that respondent No. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994(2)SCALE996; (1994)4SCC180; [1994]3SCR902; 1994(2)LC351(SC)
ORDER1. By a Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 published in the Tamil Nadu Gazette on March 7, 1973 a large extent of lands including Survey No. 11/4 and 49/7 in Thathanai Village, near Madurai were proposed to be acquired for a Housing Scheme. The Land Acquisition Officer determined the market value of that land @ Rs. 92/- per cent. On reference under Section 18, the Civil Court, by its award, enhanced the market value of that land to Rs. 800/- per cent as against the claim of the appellant at the rate of Rs. 1500/- per cent The High Court, by its judgment and decree dated October 25, 1989 confirmed the award of the Civil Court and dismissed the appeal in Civil Appeal No. 763 of 1987 of the State. It also dismissed the cross-objections of the of the appellant. Hence, this claimant's appeal by special leave. .2. It is not disputed that the market value of lands acquired pursuant to the said Notification has been determined by different benches of the Hig...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994(2)Crimes953(SC); 1994(2)SCALE1024; (1994)4SCC365; [1994]3SCR862; 1994(2)LC491(SC)
ORDER1. This appeal under Section 19 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (for short 'the TADA Act') directed against the judgment and order of the learned Addition Judge, Designated Court, Kaithal (Haryana), raises three questions of law, one, whether a person can be prosecuted under Section 5 of the TADA Act for recovery of aims on his showing, two, whether the arms and ammunition which are recovered from the possession should be serviceable and live in order to attract Section 5 and last, on whom the burden lies to prove that the arms and ammunition were such as was contemplated by Section 5 of the Act.2. The appellant was prosecuted under Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act read with Section 5 of the TADA Act. According to the prosecution when interrogation of the appellant was going on in a dacoity case in connection with FIR No. 370 on 24.11.1990, the accused made a disclosure statement telling the Inspector that he had kept buried one pistol and two ca...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT1994(3)SC637; 1994(2)SCALE779; (1994)4SCC152; [1994]Supp1SCR91; 1994(2)LC138(SC); (1994)2UPLBEC1362
ORDER1. These appeals and the special leave petition are directed against the judgment of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh dated July 29, 1993 whereby the High Court has quashed the appointment of Shri R.P. Kapur (appellant in C.A. No. 5061/93) as.... Vice-Chairman of the Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal') and S/Shri Sarwan Singh Lamba, Girija Shanker Patel, P.M. Rajwade and Dr. Narinder Nath Veermani (appellants in C.A.No. 5061/93) as members of the Tribunal. The Tribunal was constituted under the provisions of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') on July 29, 1988. It consists of the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman and the Judicial as well as Administrative Members. The seat of the Tribunal is at Jabalpur and it has benches at Gwalior, Indore and Bhopal. Shri R.P. Kapur was appointed as Vice-Chairman of the Tribunal by order dated August 28, 1991 and the four Members aforementioned were appointed...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994(2)ALT36(SC); JT1994(4)SC197; (1995)109PLR331; 1994(2)SCALE785; (1994)4SCC675; [1994]3SCR848
K. Ramaswamy, J.1. Admittedly the appellant was registered under the Andhra Pradesh Coop. Societies Act. Its object appears to be to develop the land and allot plots thereof to its members for construction of houses. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act 1 of 1894 for short the Act was published in the State Gazette on February 8, 1979, acquiring an extent of 71 acres 56 cents of land situated in Moolasagaram near Nandyal in Kurnool Dist. for the aforesaid purpose. A report under Section 5A, of the enquiry, was submitted to the Govt. The appellant entered into an agreement under Section 41 of the Act dated December 12, 1981 with the Govt. treating the appellant as a company and it was published in the gazette dated February 4, 1982. But it was given up. The state thereafter contributed Rs. 100 for each acquisition and got declarations under Section 6, published in the State Gazette on February 4, 1982 to an extent of 54 acres 66 cents and on January 19, 1984 for a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1995)IILLJ628SC; 1995Supp(1)SCC291
ORDERKuldip Singh, J.1. Village Papers Private Limited (the Company) Respondent No. 4 in the appeal herein, questioned the legality of the reference dated February 2,1987 made by the State of Himachal Pradesh under Section 12(5) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (the Act). The said reference was as under:Whether the termination of 30 workers (list attached by the Management of M/s. V.P.L. Mehatpur, District Una, (H.P.) is justified and in order. If not, to what relief and order? If not, to what relief and amount of compensation these workers are entitled?The precise argument raised before the High Court was that no demand was raised by the workmen upon the employer, either orally or in writing, and as such no dispute within the meaning of Section 2(k) of the Act existed and as such no reference under the Act could be made by the State Government.2. A Three-Judge Bench of the High Court by majority accepted the contention of the company and came to the conclusion that there was no di...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1994Supp(3)SCC100
A.M. Ahmadi and; Yogeshwar Dayal, JJ.1. The learned counsel for the State of Bihar states that all the persons, allegedly involved in the commission of crime in question in regard to which Case Nos. 144 and 162 of 1992 came to be registered have since been arrested and are in jail. Therefore, so far as that part is concerned nothing further remains to be done.2. However, because of the atrocities committed by the police, three young lives were lost. One of them was a bachelor while the other two were married and left behind their young widows. We think that in order to ensure that they do not have difficulty on account of this loss some ex-gratia payment must be made to them. We direct that an ex-gratia payment of Rs 25,000 each be paid to the widows of the married persons and the parents of the bachelor. In order to ensure that this money is not frittered away, we direct the District Judge concerned of Jagannathpur to ensure that proper arrangements are made so far as the utilisation ...
Tag this Judgment!