Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC3059; [1998]94CompCas96(SC); JT1997(6)SC381; 1997(5)SCALE1; (1997)7SCC76; [1997]Supp2SCR702
ORDERM. Jagannadha Rao, J.1. Leave grained in both the special Leave Petitions.These two appeals have been preferred against the judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in W.A. No. 946 of 1995 dated 8-5-19%. Civil Appeal arising out of S.L.P. (C)No. 12831/1996 has been preferred by the Andhra Pradesh Slate Financial Corporation (hereinafter called the Corporation). In C.A. No. arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 15260/1996, appellant is M/s. Vasant Organics (P) Ltd.2. The Corporation sanctioned a term loan of Rs. 10.09.080/- to the writ petitioner 1st respondent (M/s. Vajra Chemicals (P) Ltd.) on 28-11-1979 and the said amount remained unpaid by the due dale ----- 13-2-1987. Upon a representation made by the 1st respondent on 3-3-1990, the Corporation rescheduled the loan repayment, waived an amount of Rs. 4.48.803.23 and the due dale was extended. There was default in payment of the instalments. The 1st respondent made a representation on 17-8-1992 and paid Rs. 25.000/- and undertook to p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1997(94)ELT474(SC); JT1998(7)SC546; (1998)9SCC153
ORDER1. The appellants were having a printing press wherein a Marathi daily newspaper called Tarun Bharat was printed. The said newspaper was owned by Rashtriya Vichar Prasarak Mandal, a public trust, namely, Hindustan Jagran, at Pune. The appellants were printing the newspaper under an agreement with the owners of the newspaper whereunder imported paper required for printing was to be supplied by Tarun Bharat to the appellants, all the matter for printing was to be given in manuscript by Tarun Bharat to the appellants, the appellants were to undertake the entire work of printing and the printed matter was to be handed over by the appellants to Tarun Bharat. The editing, distribution, etc. of the newspaper was entirely done by Tarun Bharat. Tarun Bharat were to pay to the appellants the printing charges as per the agreement which came to about Rs 45,000 to 48,000 per month. The appellants were not to print any other daily newspaper but were free to print any periodicals, calendars and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC2978; JT1997(6)SC586; 1997(5)SCALE35; (1997)6SCC360; [1997]Supp2SCR695; 1997(2)LC423(SC); (1997)3UPLBEC1667
ORDERKirpal, J.Civil Appeal No. 8852/96 with C. A. Nos. .../97 (arising out of SLP (c) CC No. 1601/96 and SLP @ No. 24606/96).1. Leave granted.2. The issue which arises in these appeals from the orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur, relates to the stepping up of the pay of the respondents who were promoted as Loco Running Supervisor prior to 1st January, 1986 vis-a-vis the pay of one Sh. P.N. Kareer who was promoted to that post after 1st January, 1986 but was drawing higher pay than the respondents.3. As the questions of facts and law in these appear are the same, therefore, we propose to dispose of these appeals by a common judgment.4. In the Railway Administration there is a category of staff called the running staff which is involved in the running of trains. It includes drivers, guards, firemen, shunters and brakesmen. The running staff are entitled to an allowance called the 'running allowance' in view of the nature of their duties pertaining to the running of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998ACJ467; JT1998(4)SC438; RLW1999(1)SC24; (1997)8SCC349
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. The question involved in this appeal is whether the award of Rs. 2,85,000 as the total compensation to the appellant is adequate, so that no further enhancement is required to be made therein. Admittedly, the appellant suffered serious injuries as a result of the motor accident because of which he was hospitalised for about four months during which, he had to undergo serious surgical operations. Even after the treatment the appellant is not cured and he has been paralysed for life. The extent of permanent disablement is assessed at 95 per cent. The appellant was aged about 23 years at the time of the accident in 1992.3. On the face of it, the amount awarded as total compensation appears to be inadequate. However, learned Counsel for Respondent 2 - the insurer contended that the amount awarded as compensation is adequate and no enhancement therein is called for.4. The adequate compensation in the present case has to be determined taking into account the admitted...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2000(72)ECC471; 2000(121)ELT8(SC); JT1998(4)SC437; (1997)8SCC404
ORDERJ.S. Verma, C.J., K. Ramaswamy and B.N. Kirpal, JJ.1. In spite of our earlier order dated 26-3-1997, the appellant has not produced any material to indicate that the burden of the tax was not passed on to the consumers, so that the appellant could claim refund of the tax which was paid under protest on the basis of the judgment of this Court in Mafatlal Industries Ltd. v. Union of India : 1997(89)ELT247(SC) . In our opinion, this alone is sufficient to disentitle the appellant to claim the refund after the decision in Mafatlal. 2. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC3127; JT1997(6)SC637; 1997(5)SCALE90; (1997)8SCC522; [1997]Supp2SCR507
K. RAMASWAMY, J. (dissenting) 1. Application/s for impleadment allowed. 2. These appeals and transfer cases are wrapped up of complex facts interwoven with diverse principles in service jurisprudence, compounded by legislative intervention impinging upon judicial review by enacting Act 20 of 1995 to regulate the conditions of service of persons appointed to the Haryana Service of Engineers, Class I, Public Works Department Buildings and Roads Branch, Public Health Branch and Irrigation Branch respectively. The said Act 20 of 1995 (for short the Act) came into force with effect from 13-11-1995. It amended and repealed the Haryana Service of Engineers, Class I, PWD (Buildings and Roads Branch), (Public Health Branch) and (Irrigation Branch) Rules, Irrigation Branch by Ordinance 6 of 1995. The latter repealed the Punjab Service of Engineers, Class I, PWD (Buildings and Roads Branch), (Public Health Branch) Rules, 1960 and (Irrigation Branch) Rules, 1961 (sic 1964) issued under proviso to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC3572; 1997(4)ALLMR(SC)671; JT1997(7)SC56; 1997(5)SCALE222a; (1997)6SCC507; [1997]Supp2SCR693; 1997(2)LC545(SC)
1. Leave granted.2. We have heard learned Counsel for the parties. The grievance of the appellants before us is that in an appeal filed by them before the learned Additional District Judge, Ferozepur, in an application under Order XLI, Rule 27(b), CPC (CPC) the learned Additional District Judge at the final hearing of the appeal wrongly felt that additional evidence was required to produce as requested by the appellants by way of examination of a handwriting expert. The High Court in the impugned order exercising jurisdiction under Section 115, C.P.C. took the view that the order of the Appellate Court could not be sustained. In our view the approach of the High Court in revision at that interim stage when the appeal was pending for final hearing before the learned Additional District Judge was not justified and the High Court should not have interfered with the order which was within the jurisdiction of the Appellate Court. The reason is obvious. The Appellate Court hearing the matter...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [1997]90CompCas113(SC); JT1997(6)SC607; 1997(5)SCALE16; (1997)6SCC312; [1997]Supp2SCR267
K. Ramaswamy, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal by special leave arises from the Judgment and Order of the High Court of Delhi, made on September 12, 19% in Civil Writ No. 676 of 1994.3. The Export-Import Bank of India (for short, the 'EXIM Bank') commissioned the services of the respondent firm to assist it in the preparation of a book entitled 'India - Your Software Opportunity'. The need for such booklet was explained by the EXIM Bank at the inside cover of the booklet which reads as under:The information set out in this publication, meant for general guidance, has been complied by Price Waterhouse (India) at the instance of the Export-Import Bank of India (EXIM BANK). While the booklet is not intended to be an exhaustive treatment of the subject, the information contained is based on sources and interpretations of applicable legal provisions believed to be reliable for which, however, both Exim Bank and Price Waterhouse (India) are unable to assume any liability. For further inform...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC3297; JT1997(6)SC449; 1997(4)SCALE746; (1997)8SCC191; [1997]Supp2SCR305
K. RAMASWAMY, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals are directed to resolve mutually inconsistent law adumbrated by two Division Benches of Andhra Pradesh High Court. The appeals arising from SLP (C) No.17080-81/95 are filed against the judgement passed on April 28, 1995 in Writ Petition Nos.9513/93 and 7725/94 in which the Division Bench has held that the Andhra Pradesh Scheduled Area Land Transfer Regulation (1 of 1959), as amended by Regulation II of 1970 (for short, the 'Regulation') and the Mining Act (67 of 1957) do not prohibit grant of mining leases of Government land in the scheduled area to the non-tribals. The Forest Conservation Act, 1980 (for short, the 'FC Act') does not apply to the renewals. The Andhra Pradesh Forest Act, 1967 also does not apply to the renewal of the leases. It, accordingly, dismissed the writ petitions filed by the appellant challenging the power of the Government to transfer the Government land si...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1997SC3740; JT1997(6)SC390; 1997(4)SCALE646; (1997)6SCC228; [1997]Supp2SCR260; 1997(2)LC396(SC)
ORDERV.N. Khare, J.1. The appellant before us, started his service career as a Sub-Auditor in the erstwhile Holkar Estate, Indore with effect from 5th February, 1943. Subsequently on reorganisation of States in the year 1956 the appellant continued to serve in the office of Accountant General, Madhya Pradesh, Gwalior. The appellant while working as Auditor was accorded selection grade. However, subsequently the appellant was compulsorily retired from service by notice dated 23rd of August, 1974 issued under Rule 48(b) of C.C.S. Pension Rules, 1972 hereinafter referred to as the Rules.2. The appellant challenged the impugned notice compulsorily retiring him from service by filing a Civil Suit in the Court of Sub-Judge, Gwalior for a declaration that the order compulsorily retiring him from service is illegal and inoperative, being arbitrary and mala fide. The trial Court decreed the suit and the aforesaid decree was affirmed by the First Lower Appellate Court. The High Court in the Seco...
Tag this Judgment!