Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2001)9SCC252
M.M. Punchhi, C.J.,; K.T. Thomas and; S. Rajendra Babu, JJ.1. This appeal by special leave at the instance of the complainant would merit dismissal. We have gone through the judgment and order of the High Court and have appreciated the manner in which the three dying declarations attributed to the deceased have been rejected. Particular reference need be made to the one allegedly recorded by a Judicial Magistrate. That dying declaration is written in Hindi and apparently not in the handwriting of the Judicial Magistrate, but bears his endorsement made in English certifying that he had recorded it while the deceased was in full senses. The signature of the deceased purported to be at the end of the page over which there is an overwriting in Hindi bearing description of his name and parentage. We see no reason why another sheet could not have been employed so as to put in clarity by carrying over the name of the deceased and his signatures thereon. We equally see no reason why the Magist...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1997)7SCC492; [2000]117STC314(SC)
ORDER1. The question raised for consideration in this appeal is whether the amount realised by way of sales tax can be included in the turnover for the purpose of levy of sales tax under the provisions of the Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act and Rules, 1957 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. The appeal arises out of a writ petition which was filed by the appellant in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh wherein the appellant sought a writ or direction declaring that respondent No. 1 has no authority to include the sales tax collections in the turnover of the appellant from July 1, 1985. The appellant has based its case on the provisions contained in Sections 30-B and 30-C which were inserted in the Act by Act 18 of 1985 which came into force on July 1, 1985. It has been pointed out that subsequently by Act 4 of 1989, the said provisions have been omitted with effect from March 30, 1989. The question raised in the appeal is confined to the period from July 1, 1985 to March 30, 19...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998(4)SCALE18
ORDER1. The question raised for consideration in this appeal is whether the amount realised by way of sales tax can be included in the turnover for the purpose of levy of sales tax under provisions of The Andhra Pradesh General Sales Tax Act & Rules, 1957 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'].2. The appeal arises out of a writ petition which was filed by the appellant in the High Court of Andhra Pradesh wherein the appellant sought a writ or direction declaring that respondent No. 1 has no authority to include the sales tax collections in the turnover of the appellant from July 1, 1985. The appellant has based its case on the provisions contained in Sections 30.B and 30.C which were inserted in the Act by Act 18 of 1985 which came into force on July 1, 1985. It has been pointed out that subsequently by Act 4 of 1989, the said provisions have been omitted with effect from March 30, 1989. The question raised in the appeal is confined to the period from July 1, 1985 to March 30, 1989. It...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1998SC1639; JT1998(2)SC674; 1998(2)SCALE497; (1998)4SCC49; [1998]2SCR470; 1998(1)LC581(SC)
S. Saghir Ahmad, J.1. Leave granted.2. Ground floor of premises G-47, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi was let out in November, 1963 by Daulat Rai Tandon, father of the present respondent, to the appellant for the residence of its employee, Shri K.K. Chaudhry, who, subsequently, vacated the premises and shifted to his own flat at C-II/29-C, DDA Flats, Janak Puri, Pankha Road, New Delhi and since than, the premises are in occupation of Shri Raj Chaudhry, another employee of the appellant, against whom eviction proceedings, on the ground of sub-letting, are pending.3. The respondent was employed as Deputy Chief Engineer in Northern Railway and retired from service, while posted at Delhi, on 23.7.87. He filed a petition under Section 14C of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 (for short, 'the Act') for eviction of the appellant, but the petition was dismissed by the Rent Controller on 4.5.93. The Revision filed against that order was dismissed by the High Court. The respondent, then, approached this C...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2001)10SCC515
ORDER1. This is an appeal filed by original Respondent 5 before the High Court in Civil Writ Petition No. 186 of 1977.2. On 7-5-1971, the appellant was appointed as Hostel Superintendent in the Social Welfare Department, State of Rajasthan. The post of Hostel Superintendent is a non-gazetted post under the Rajasthan Social Welfare Subordinate Services Rules, 1963. It falls in Group 'B' of posts under those Rules. He was transferred as Research Assistant (Beggary Survey Project) in 1973. He was subsequently transferred on ad hoc basis as Acting Probation and Prison Welfare Officer with effect from 23-7-1975. Probation and Prison Welfare Officer is also a non-gazetted post falling in Group 'B' of the Rajasthan Social Welfare Subordinate Services Rules, 1963.3. While the appellant was working as Acting Probation and Prison Welfare Officer, an advertisement was issued inviting applications for combined competitive examination for Rajasthan Administrative Service, Rajasthan Accounts Service...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1998SC1976; 1998(2)BLJR889; JT1998(3)SC70; (1998)IIMLJ129(SC); (1998)119PLR526; 1998(2)SCALE645; (1998)9SCC634; [1998]2SCR489
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the Allahabad High Court on April 17, 1980 in Second Appeal No. 2269/1968 being connected with Second Appeal No. 2270/1968. By the impugned judgement, the High Court disposed of the Second Appeal and the cross objection filed by the parties, inter alia, holding that the judgment-debtors respondents were entitled for the restitution of possession of the property purchased by the appellant in auction in execution proceeding and also for a sum of Rs. 20,309 from the auction purchaser-appellant by way of damages and mesne profits subject to payment of Rs. 8,000 by the said judgment-debtors to the auction purchaser.2. It may be stated here that the appellant purchased the property belonging to the predecessor-in-interest of the judgment-debtors in auction in execution of money decree passed against the judgment-debtors. After such auction purchase, the property was again put to auction in execution of the another money decree obtai...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2001)9SCC353
Sujata V. Manohar,; S.P. Kurdukar and; D.P. Wadhwa, JJ.1. The present appeal is from a judgment and order of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh dated 14-10-1982 setting aside the order of compulsory retirement of the respondent.2. The first respondent, at the material time, was holding the post of temporary District Munsif in the Andhra Pradesh Judicial Service. He held a substantive post in the High Court Service. He had been working as temporary District Munsif since December 1967. By an order dated 4-10-1975, he was compulsorily retired in public interest on the recommendation of the High Court by an order of the Governor under Article 310(1) of the Constitution of India. The High Court has set aside this order by applying a decision of this Court in Union of India v. K.R. Tahiliani1. The High Court also held that payment of three months' salary in lieu of notice was a condition precedent to valid compulsory retirement and since the payment which was made inadvertently fell short of R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998IIIAD(SC)121; AIR1998SC2117; 1998(1)ALD(Cri)725; 1998(2)ALT(Cri)214; 1998CriLJ2928; 1998(2)Crimes56(SC); JT1998(2)SC687; 1998(2)SCALE548b; (1998)4SCC112
ORDERJudgment pronounced by Nanavati, J.1. Respondent No. 1 - Manoharrao Ganpatrao Kapsikar filed a complaint in the court of CJM, Nanded, alleging that by publishing a news item in its newspaper 'Daily Lokmath', on 4.2.84, Mr. J.L. Darda, who was then the Chief Editor of that Daily, Mr. Rajinder Darda, who was the Editor of the Daily, Mr. Madhukar, who was the Executive Editor of the Daily, Mr. Deshmukh, who was connected with publication of the Daily and M/s. Darda Printo Crafts Pvt. Ltd., who were owners and proprietors of the Daily, have committed offences punishable under Sections 499, 500, 501 and 502 read with Section 34 IPC, The complaint was filed on 2.2.87.2. Learned CJM issued process against all the five accused. This order passed by the learned CJM was challenged by the five accused before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded. The learned Judge quashed that order as he was of the opinion that by publishing that news item, none of the accused had committed any offe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998IIIAD(SC)603; AIR1998SC2861; 1998(2)BLJR1301; JT1998(3)SC37; (1998)IIMLJ128(SC); (1998)119PLR524; RLW1998(2)SC255; 1998(2)SCALE649; (1998)4SCC384; [1998]2SCR486; 1998(2)MLJ(SC)128
ORDER1. This appeal is directed against the judgement dated November 26, 1984 passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court in Appeal No. 2995 of 1984. By the impugned judgement, the High Court dismissed the said appeal by which the Will stated to have been executed by one Harnam Singh in favour of the appellants was not accepted to be a valid one by the learned District Judge in setting aside the order passed by the Trial Court. There is no dispute in this case that the Will in question was a registered Will and there is an endorsement by the Sub-Registrar that the executant of the Will was introduced to him by one Puran Singh, the Lambardar of a village and the executant had admitted the execution of the Will in his presence and also signed in his presence.2. The Court of Appeal below has indicated several factors which according to the learned Judge, had raised reasonable suspicion about the genuineness and valid execution of the said Will. It has been indicated that some of the natur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1998SC1808; JT1998(2)SC637; 1998(2)SCALE476; (1998)3SCC751; [1998]2SCR444
S.B. Majmudar, J.1. Leave granted.2. LA. No. 4, Application for substitution of the heirs of deceased original petitioner, is granted. We have heard learned senior counsel for the appellants, heirs of the original petitioner in the S.L.P. as well as learned senior counsel for the respondents finally.3. A Bench of two Judges of this Court has referred the Special Leave Petition from which this appeal arises for decision of a larger Bench of three Judges by order dated 25th October 1996 and that is how these proceedings have been placed before us for final disposal. The reference as aforesaid has been made presumably on the ground that there is an apparent conflict between two decisions rendered by two Judge Benches of this Court in the case of Mathevan Padmanabhan alias Ponnan (Dead) through L.Rs. v. Parmeshwaran Thampi and others : 1994(5)SCALE325 and in the case of Chettiam Veettil Ammad and another etc. v. Taluk Land Board and others etc. etc., : [1979]3SCR839 .4. In order to highlig...
Tag this Judgment!