Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996VIIIAD(SC)81; 1997(1)ALD(Cri)194; 1996(4)Crimes167(SC); 1996(8)SCALE241; (1996)11SCC251; [1996]Supp8SCR304
ORDERA.S. Anand and K.T. Thomas, JJ.1. On 2.11.1990 at about 4.15 p.m., the respondent gave blows to the deceased Kunhuvareed on his head with a bamboo stick. Those blows resulted in fracture of the skull and multiple lacerated wounds on the head with resultant damage to the brain. The deceased died in the hospital on 13.11.1990 at about 3.25 a.m. Case was registered and investigation taken in hand. After completion of the investigation, the respondent was committed to stand trial to the Court of Sessions for an offence under Section 302 IPC. The prosecution examined 20 witnesses including PWs 15, 16 & 17--the three medical witnesses, and Pws. 1, 2 and 3 as the eye witnesses. At the trial, however, PW1 and PW2 turned hostile, after admitting the occurrence to have taken place on the date and at the time alleged by the prosecution. The learned Trial Court, after appreciation of evidence and considering the defence documents and the statement of the respondent, found the respondent guilt...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996VIIIAD(SC)653; AIR1997SC293; [1997(75)FLR116]; JT1996(10)SC246; 1996(8)SCALE200; (1996)11SCC664; [1996]Supp8SCR280
ORDER1. These appeals are directed against the judgment of the Patna High Court dated January 16, 1995 in C.W.J.C. Nos. 4504 and 4180 of 1994 relating to the 38th Combined Competitive (Main) Examination conducted by the Bihar Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission') for making selection for appointment to the civil services in the State of Bihar.2. The Combined Competitive Examination is conducted by the Commission in two parts. There is a Preliminary Examination for all the applicants and those who qualify in the preliminary examination are required to take the Main Written Examination which is followed by viva voce test. Prior to the 37th examination, the Commission was adopting the system of evaluation of the answer books by outside examiners and for that purpose answer books were sent to the examiners outside the State. Before the commencement of the 37th examination, the Chairman of the Commission decided to introduce the system of centralised evalua...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC322; 1997(1)BLJR894; 1997CriLJ362; JT1996(10)SC79; 1996(7)SCALE910; (1997)1SCC283; [1996]Supp8SCR225
ORDER1 A veritable holocaust took place in a Bihar village (Paras Bigha, in Gaya District) on a moonlit night in early February, 1980. In that massacre lives of 13 human beings were snuffed out and 17 others were badly mauled, a large number of mute cattle were burnt alive and many dwelling houses were gutted. The venue of that macabre was the area where houses of Harijans and people belonging to Backward Classes were clustered together in Paras Bigha village. After investigation the police charge-sheeted 56 persons for various offences committed in connection with the aforesaid incident, but due to different reasons only 44 of them were put on trial. Sessions Court convicted 37 among them of various offences ranging from Section 302 IPC (read with Section 149) to minor offences such as Section 429 IPC and sentenced them to rigorous imprisonment for 10 years for the principal offence and to lesser terms of imprisonment for the lesser offences. The Patna High Court confirmed the convict...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1997)11SCC118
S.C. Agrawal and; G.T. Nanavati, JJ.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) dated 6-9-1993 in OA No. 815 of 1989 whereby the Tribunal has dismissed the said application which was submitted by the appellants, who are licensed porters at Bankura Railway Station, to seek regularisation as Group D employees in the Railways.2. We have heard Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, the learned counsel for the appellants and Shri P.P. Malhotra, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondents. By the impugned judgment, the Tribunal has held that the appellants work sometimes as independent persons for the Railway administration for which they are paid remuneration at a rate mutually agreed upon as per the terms of the contract and that they could not be regarded as casual employees engaged by the Railway administration. Since there was no relationship of master and servant between them and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1997(94)ELT469(SC); (1997)11SCC603
ORDER1. The appellants imported a precision jig boring machine with numerical control. They claimed the benefit of an Exemption Notification dated 1st March, 1978, where under the following was exempted from Customs duty in excess of 25% ad valorem, 'Tool room precision optical coordinate jig boring machine, including numerical control'. The claim was rejected. The appeal filed there against was dismissed. The revision petition filed before the Central Government was transferred to the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal upon its establishment. The Tribunal rejected the same. Hence this appeal. 2. The aforesaid exemption is available to a tool room precision boring machine which is fitted with an optical coordinate. It is available to such a machine even if it has a numerical control. The appellants imported a machine which included a numerical control but did not contain the optical coordinate. It was upon this basis that the exemption claimed by the appellant was ref...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1997]227ITR464(SC); (2008)2SCC477
1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. Dismissed.3. No costs....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1997)11SCC661
S.C. Agrawal and; G.T. Nanavati, JJ.1. These appeals raise common questions for consideration. They are, therefore, disposed of by a common order.2. The respondents are licensed porters at Railway Station, Muri on South-Eastern Railway. They were discharging the work of loading and unloading of parcels from trains at the parcel office at Railway Station, Muri. For that work, they were being paid at the rate of Rs 15 for 8 hours. The respondents in Civil Appeals Nos. 9378-79 of 1995 filed applications (OAs Nos. 1024 and 1209 of 1989 and OA No. 425 of 1990) before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) seeking regularisation as railway employees. The said applications were contested by the Railway Administration. By judgment dated 18-2-1994, in OAs Nos. 1024 and 1209 of 1989, the Tribunal has held that the said respondents were being utilised on the strength of an agreement as per the terms of the licences issued to the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2001)9SCC248
Kuldip Singh and; S. Saghir Ahmad, JJ.1. Uma Kant Misra, respondent in the appeal herein was selected by the Union Public Service Commission as Senior Scientific Officer Grade I in the year 1985 as a direct recruit. Because of the ban on recruitment during the period from 1985 to 1987, the offer of appointment was not issued to the respondent. It was only on 25-7-1988 that the respondent was appointed to the post he was selected for. It is not disputed that for promotion to the post of Principal Scientific Officer, a person must have 5 years' service as Senior Scientific Officer Grade I. The DPC sat in the year 1989 to consider promotions to the cadre of Principal Scientific Officer. Since the respondent had not completed 5 years' service in the cadre to which he was recruited, he was not eligible under the Rules to be considered by the DPC. The respondent challenged the action of the Government before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench. Relying on Rule 8(2) of the Def...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998(100)ELT17(SC); (1999)9SCC102; [1999]114STC7(SC)
S.P. Bharucha and; S.B. Majmudar, JJ.1. The judgment and order under appeal was delivered by the High Court at Kerala. It held that imported sugar was not exigible to tax under the provisions of the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963.2. The assessment year with which we are concerned is Assessment Year 1984-85. The assessee was assessed to sales tax under the said Act on its turnover of imported sugar. It challenged the assessment by a writ petition in the Kerala High Court, upon which the order under appeal was passed.3. Schedule III of the said Act enumerates goods that are exempt from the levy of tax thereunder. Entry 5 therein reads thus:“5. Sugar as defined in Item No. 1 of the First Schedule to the Central Excises & Salt Act, 1944.”Sugar is defined in the First Schedule to the Central Excises and Salt Act, 1944 under Entry 1 thus:“1. Sugar produced in a factory ordinarily using power in the course of production of sugar—‘Sugar’ means any fo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996VIIIAD(SC)361; AIR1997SC234; 1996(2)ALD(Cri)924; 1997(2)ALD(Cri)391; 1996(2)ALT(Cri)404; 1997CriLJ81; 1996(4)Crimes139(SC); JT1996(9)SC654; 1996(7)SCALE882; (1997)1SCC4
G.N. Ray and; G.T. Nanavati, JJ.1. Special leave granted. Counsel heard.2. We are of the view that this is not a matter in which leave to defend should have been refused. It is true that in a civil court a decree has been passed on the basis of the will which has been questioned by the tenant in the proceedings before us. But he was not a party in those proceedings. No probate of the will has been granted. In these circumstances, we set aside the impugned judgment and grant leave to the appellant to defend the eviction proceedings. Written statement to be filed by the appellant within four weeks from today. The eviction proceedings may be disposed of by the Rent Controller as early as convenient.3. The appeal is accordingly disposed of. No order as to costs....
Tag this Judgment!