Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996VAD(SC)185; AIR1996SC2257; [1996(73)FLR1793]; JT1996(5)SC613; 1996(4)SCALE650; (1996)9SCC186; [1996]Supp2SCR116; 1996(2)SLJ61(SC)
1. We have heard learned Counsel on both sides.2. Leave granted.3. This appeal by special leave arises from the order dated September 27, 1994 made in W.A. No. 90/94. As regards the validity of Section 4(3) of the Assam Secondary Education (Provincialisation) Act, 1977 (Assam Act No. XIX of 1977) (for short, the 'Act') which deals with teachers working in the aided institutions taken over by the Government under the State Act with effect from the appointed day who were recognised to be the existing employees with reference to the appointed day. Sub-section (3) of Section 4 envisages that notwithstanding anything in the preceding section, all employees other then Grade IV employees of a Secondary School coming within the purview of the Act, shall retire on superannuation of 58 years. Grade V employees on attaining the age of 60 years, shall get superannuated. But such of those teachers who intend to continue on service beyond 58 years, are required to exercise their option either to the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996IVAD(SC)626; JT1996(5)SC632; 1996(4)SCALE547; (1996)8SCC740; [1996]Supp2SCR114
ORDERK. Ramaswamy and G.B. Pattanaik, JJ.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the High Court dated April 2, 1991 made in Criminal Application No. 334/91. It is not necessary to narrate in elaboration all the proceedings that have taken place between the parties. Suffice it to state that in respect of the lands bearing Survey No. 202 situated in Lallaguda in Secunderabad of Andhra Pradesh which is now part of the city of Hyderabad, an extent of 4922 sq. yds. is in dispute. Several proceedings have taken place between the parties narration of which is not material. The High Court in quashed proceedings of the initiation of the action under Sections 145 and 146 of the Cr. PC gave the following directions:Since there are some allegations that the police were not giving aid to the petitioners even though there are injunction orders in their favour. I feel it is desirable that some high official of the Survey Department like the Assistant Director of Surv...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996VAD(SC)125; JT1996(5)SC451; 1996(II)OLR(SC)46; 1996(4)SCALE663; (1996)4SCC590; [1996]Supp2SCR108
ORDERK. Ramaswamy and G.B. Pattanaik, JJ.1. Leave granted.2. We have heard learned Counsel on both sides.3. This appeal by special leave arises from the order of the Division Bench of the High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Bench made in OJC No. 108779/89, Admittedly, the appellant-Corporation was constituted under the Orissa Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation Act, 1980 (for short, the 'Act'). The Board has been constituted for the management of the affairs of the business of the Corporation. Section 49 of the Act empowers the State Government to place any industrial area or industrial estate under the management and control of the Corporation. In furtherance thereof, certain plots have been offered for allotment in the industrial areas. The respondent is one on the offices to accept the plot. By letter dated August 1, 1987, the appellant had offered the shed for 90 years lease for the consideration mentioned there under. The respondent, by letter dated September 3, 1987, acce...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996VAD(SC)67; AIR1996SC2095; 1996(2)CTC158; JT1996(5)SC460; 1996(4)SCALE476; (1996)4SCC526; [1996]Supp2SCR111
ORDER1. This is an illustrious case of dilatory tactics by the petitioner who entered into contract to purchase the land of 500 sq. yds. in the heart of the city of Delhi by agreement dated February 27, 1975. The hard fact is that the defendant was in dire need of money to celebrate his daughter's marriage on May 16, 1975. The agreement was that the draft sale deed should be finalised within seven days and sale deed registered. Time is, therefore, the essence of the contract in this case. The defendant insisted upon payment of consideration in cash. The respondent sent the approved draft sale deed immediately but the petitioner did not give final draft as contemplated by the agreement since he had to obtain the income tax clearance certification which he did not obtain. Ext. 5 and 9, the letters written by the respondent do clearly indicate that respondent was always willing to have the sale deed executed but the petitioner delayed the execution of the sale deed on one pretext or the o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC313; JT1996(5)SC450; 1996(4)SCALE592; (1996)4SCC535; [1996]Supp2SCR106
1. Leave granted.2. Heard learned Counsel for both sides.3. This appeal by special leave arises against the judgment and order of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in Civil Revision No. 3319 of 1992 dated January 21, 1993.4. A notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (Act 1 of 1894) (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act') was published on November 4, 1977. The Land Acquisition Collector in his award made under Section 11 of the Act on October 28, 1981 awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 30,000 per acre. Dissatisfied therewith, the respondents filed application under Section 18 of the Act. The Additional District Judge by his award and decree dated April 6, 1985 awarded compensation at the rate of Rs. 18 per square yard. The respondents levied execution regarding recovery of the amount on October 12, 1992. The District Judge by his order dated July, 18, 1992 awarded additional amount under Section 23(1-A) of the Act and also enhanced the interest under Secti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC1947; 1996LC5(SC); JT1996(5)SC48
ORDERB.N. Kirpal, J.1. This judgment will dispose of appeals arising from the judgment of the High Court of Delhi which had permitted Oswal Agro Furane Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'Oswal Agro') to export non-basmati rice and T.C. (C) No. 15 of 1996 which was a writ petition filed by the Oswal Agro in the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking permission to sell in the domestic market the edible rice bran oil manufactured by it.2. The Government of India Ministry of Commerce, on 31st December, 1980 issued a notification whereby a scheme was formulated to facilitate setting up of 100% export oriented units. It was decided to give such units certain concessions so as to enable them to meet figures of foreign demand in terms of pricing, quality 'precision etc. Such an export oriented unit was to belong to an industry in respect of which the export potent ional and export targets had been considered by the relevant Export Promotion Council. The units which were intending to set up such ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1997(57)ECC102; 1996(85)ELT3(SC); 1996(4)SCALE109; (1996)4SCC297; [1996]Supp2SCR73
B.N. Kirpal, J.1. This judgment will dispose of appeals arising from the judgment of the High Court of Delhi which had permitted Oswal Agro Furane Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as 'Oswal Agro') to export non-bas-mate rice and T.C. (C) No. 15 of 1996 which was a writ petition filed by the Oswal Agro in the Punjab and Haryana High Court seeking permission to sell in the domestic market the edible rice bran oil manufactured by it.2. The Government of India Ministry of Commerce, on 31st December, 1980 issued a notification whereby a scheme was formulated to facilitate setting up of 100% export oriented units. It was decided to give such units certain concessions so as to enable them to meet figures of foreign demand in terms of pricing, quality precision etc. Such an export oriented unit was to belong to an industry in respect of which the export potent ional and export targets had been considered by the relevant Export Promotion Council. The units which were intending to set up such indus...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996IVAD(SC)256; 1996(2)CTC95; (1997)137CTR(SC)103; (1996)2GLR361; [1996]222ITR391(SC); JT1996(4)SC725; (1996)2MLJ76(SC); 1996(II)OLR(SC)225; (1996)113PLR334; 1996(4)SCALE5
K.T. Thomas, J.1. Legal heirs of a plaintiff (Vrajlal J. Ganatra) who suffered defeat both at the original side as well as at the appellate stage (High Court of Gujarat) have filed this appeal by special leave. Defendant in the suit (Parshottam S. Shah) is now being substituted by his legal heirs. The suit relates to a property covered by Ext. 66 sale-deed dated December 16, 1963. It was claimed to be the property of the plaintiff even though the defendant was shown in the document as the vendee. Suit was filed in 1981 for declaration of plaintiff's title to the suit property and also for an injunction for restraining the defendant from disturbing the possession of the plaintiff. Trial court while dismissing the suit held that plaintiff failed to prove his title that he was the real owner of the property and that plaintiff failed to establish that he was in possession of it on the date of suit. High Court concurred with the finding of the trial court regarding title but did not proceed...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1996IVAD(SC)333; AIR1996SC1963; 1996(2)BLJR971; II(1996)DMC82SC; JT1996(4)SC656; (1996)2MLJ82(SC); 1996(I)OLR(SC)598; 1996(4)SCALE131; (1996)4SCC76; [1996]Supp2SCR1
ORDERS. Saghir Ahmad, J.1. A million million spermatozoa All of them alive :Out of their cataclysm but one poorNoahDare hope to survive.And among that billion minus oneMight have chanced to beShakespeare, another Newton, a new Donne.But the one was me.So said Aldous Huxley, perhaps, in desperation and despondency. And, that is how a person would feel on being bastardized by a court verdict, disentitling him from inheriting the properties left by his father. This is the theme of the present judgment which we are required to write in view of the following facts :2. Parayankandiyil Kanhirakunnath Kurungodan Raman Nair was the proud father of 14 children from two wives, the first being Ammu Amma, who is the mother of the respondents 1 to 9, and the second being a lady of equally long name, namely, Smt. Parayankandiyal Eravath Kanapravan Kalliani Amma (appellant No. 1), who is the mother of appellants 2 to 6. He had a flair for two; two wives, two sets of children, two sets of properties, i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC3292; (1996)133CTR(SC)500; [1996]220ITR185(SC); JT1997(10)SC394; 1996(4)SCALE323; (1996)9SCC25; [1996]Supp2SCR60
1. Leave granted.2. We are concerned with the following questions, which were answered, in the judgment and order of the High Court at Madras which is under appeal, in the negative and in favour of the Revenue.1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and having regard to the provisions of Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the interest attributable to the loans borrowed by the assessee firm for the purpose of construction of Satire Theatre should be allowed under the head 'business' especially when the theatre complex was sold as a going concern on 31.7.1965 and the business of exhibition of cinematographic films stopped on and from 31.7.1965 ?2. Whether the conclusion of the Appellate Tribunal that the business carried on by the assessee as jewellers and in the running of the cinema theatre, restaurant, etc., are composite is based on valid materials and is a reasonable view to take on the facts and in...
Tag this Judgment!