Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998IVAD(SC)615; AIR1998SC2023; 1998(2)ALD(Cri)4; 1998(2)ALT(Cri)104; 1998CriLJ2908; 1998(2)Crimes325(SC); JT1998(3)SC750; RLW1998(2)SC337; 1998(3)SCALE459; (1998)5SCC419;
ORDERM.K. Mukherjee, J.1. This appeal Under Section 19 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 ('TADA' for short) is directed against the judgment and order dated July 22, 1997 of the Designated Court II, Delhi convicting the appellant for an offence Under Section 5 of TADA and sentencing him to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 5 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000, and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 months more.2. According to the prosecution case, in the afternoon of March 8, 1990, Sub Inspector Gopi Chand (P.W .6) of I.S.B.T. (Inter-State Bus Terminus) police post along with Assistant Sub-Inspector Chander Bhan (P.W. 5) and other police personnel was on patrolling duty at the inner gate of I.S.B.T. When they were checking the luggage of passengers they saw the appellant alighting from a bus with a rexin bag. Seeing them he tried to move away briskly. P.W.6 apprehended him on suspicion and found, on search of his bag, 3...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998IVAD(SC)560; AIR1998SC1952; 1998(3)ALLMR(SC)167; 1998(3)ALT18(SC); [1998]93CompCas120(SC); [1998(79)FLR615]; JT1998(3)SC733; 1998(2)MPLJ101; (1998)119PLR568; RLW1998(2)
G.T. Nanavati, J.1. Leave granted.2. The question which arises for consideration in these appeals is whether the bar to proceed with the trial of subsequently instituted suit, contained in Section 10 of the CPC, 1908(hereinafter referred to as the 'Code') is applicable to summary suit filed under Order 37 of the Code.3. The respondent Federation applied to the appellant Bank on 5.6.1989 to open an Irrevocable Letter of Credit for a sum of Rs. 3,78,90,000 in favour of M/s. Shankar Rice Mills. Pursuant to that request the Bank opened an Irrevocable Letter of Credit on 6.6.1989. The agreed arrangement was that the documents drawn under the said Letter of Credit when tendered to the appellant Bank were to be forwarded to the Federation for their acceptance and thereafter the Bank had to make payments to M/s. Shankar Rice Mills on behalf of the Federation. On 6.2.1992 the Bank filed Summary Suit No. 500 of 1992 in the Bombay High Court under Order 37 of the Code against the Federation for o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998(3)ALT23(SC); [1998(79)FLR643]; JT1998(3)SC731; 1998(3)SCALE445; (1998)5SCC74; 1999(1)SLJ28(SC)
ORDER1. Respondents 1 to 3 herein moved a learned Single Judge of the Calcutta High Court for the issue of a writ of mandamus directing the appellants to forthwith absorb the members of the first respondent-union as employees of the appellant-bank with effect from their respective dates of joining or within such time as the Court may deem fit and proper and for other consequential directions. 2. The learned Single Judge passed the following order :- 'The Court : having heard the Learned Counsel for the petitioner and the respondent-State Bank of India it is directed that the matter will come as application 3 months hence. A/o by 6 weeks and Reply by 3 weeks thereafter. Pendency of the petition will not prevent the parties to proceed before the Tribunal in the manner mentioned in the petition. Any step to be taken by the respondent pursuant to the impugned settlement will abide by the result of the writ petition. Liberty to mention for early hearing after filing of affidavit. All partie...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998VAD(SC)121; AIR1998SC2064; [1998]93CompCas26(SC); 1998(3)CTC112; [1998(79)FLR675]; JT1998(3)SC715; (1998)119PLR553; 1998(3)SCALE427; (1998)5SCC554; [1998]3SCR170
M. Jagannadha Rao, J.1. Special leave granted in all the Special leave petitions.2. Civil Appeal arising out of SLP (C) No. 14327/1997 is filed by 'Real Value Appliances Ltd' against the order of the High Court of Bombay dated 28.7.1997 passed by a Division Bench in an interlocutory appeal, appointing a Receiver to take formal possession of the mortgaged properties which are subject matter of suit No. 82 of 1997 pending before a learned Single Judge of the said High Court on the Original Side. The respondent Canara Bank, which is the plaintiff in the suit is claiming in consortium with Union Bank of India a sum of Rs. 23.67 crores (approximately) as due to it as on 24.12.1996. Earlier the Single Judge of the Bombay High Court in his order dated 10.1.1997 had disallowed the application for appointment of Receiver in view of the stay of appointment of provisional Liquidator granted by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in winding up proceedings on 20.12.1996.3. Civil Appeal (arisi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1998)5SCC611
ORDER1. This is a petition by M/s. Pusa Service Station seeking review of that portion of the order of this Court, dated 8-10-1996 in IA No. 18 of 1995 in Writ Petition (C) No. 4677 of 1985, which pertains to the applicant-review petitioner. The applicant has been ordered to be shifted from a certain locale in Karol Bagh, New Delhi and it is believed that it has been allotted a site in Janak Puri for shifting. It transpires that the applicant has started functioning at the new site at Janak Puri but at the same time, under the interim orders of this Court, has stuck on to the old site at Karol Bagh and is still functioning there.2. The case of the applicant is squarely covered by the decision dated 7-4-1998 made by this Court in M.C. Mehta v. Union of India, : (1998)5SCC610 (Reg. M/s. Link Road Filling Station) for it is the admitted position that the site of the applicant at Karol Bagh is not a part of the Ridge Area but is adjacent thereto and is an adjunct to the road passing nearby...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998VAD(SC)41; AIR1998SC1891; [1998]231ITR745(SC); JT1998(3)SC690; RLW1998(2)SC328; 1998(3)SCALE406; (1998)5SCC77; [1998]3SCR139
S. Rajendra Babu, J.1. The appellants before us preferred a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Delhi seeking for a direction to extend the benefit of waiver of penalty arising under Section 271 (4A) of the Income Tax Act, 1960 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Pursuant to a scheme, the second appellant, Firm made an application on February 12, 1965 stating that they would place before the Income Tax Officer a true statement of their financial assets, transactions and they were prepared to file a statement of the affairs as on March 31, 1965. The statement of affairs filed on 20th May, 1965 disclosed an income of about Rs. 28,000,00 as the total accretion to its wealth over the eight years upto March 31, 1965, ultimately after some negotiations between the Department officials and the appellants, the appellants agreed to be assessed at Rs. 66,56,000 subject to the usual allowance for depreciation etc. spread over eight assessment ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1999SC538; (1999)1SCC251
ORDER 1. Leave granted. 2. The Union of India is in appeal against the direction of the High Court to pay salary to the employee concerned who is still under suspension and is facing a departmental enquiry. Though the employee had moved the High Court with the prayer to quash the departmental proceeding, the High Court did not accede to that prayer and having allowed the departmental proceeding to continue and having held that the employee should continue to be under suspension, yet directed that the salary of the employee should be paid. This order of the High Court, on the face of it, is contrary to the provisions of Fundamental Rule 53. An employee under suspension would be entitled to the subsistence allowance and not to the salary. The High Court obviously committed error in directing that the salary of the employee should be paid. 3. Learned counsel for the respondent, however, brought to our notice that the order of the High Court has been complied with inasmuc...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1998)147CTR(SC)110
S. RAJENDRA BABU, J. :The appellants before us preferred a writ petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Delhi seeking for a direction to extend the benefit of waiver of penalty arising under s. 271(4A) of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). Pursuant to a scheme, the second appellant-firm, made an application on 12th February, 1965 stating that they would place before the ITO a true statement of their financial assets, transactions and they were prepared to file a statement of the affairs as on 31st March, 1965. The statement of affairs filed on 20th May, 1965, disclosed an income of about 28,00,000 as the total accretion to its wealth over the eight years upto 31st March, 1965. Ultimately after some negotiations between the Department officials and the appellants, the appellants agreed to be assessed at Rs. 66,56,000 subject to the usual allowance for depreciation, etc., spread over eight asst. yrs. 1958-59 to 1965-66. Assessme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1998SC2012; (1999)ILLJ527SC; 1998(3)SCALE392; (1998)5SCC269; [1998]3SCR147; 1998(1)LC747(SC)
G.B. Pattanaik, J.1. Leave granted in all the SLPs.2. These 12 appeals are directed against the judgment dated 9th April, 1997 of the Division Bench of Kerala High Court in Writ Appeal No. 37 of 1997. The appeals titled as Benny T.D. and Ors. Etc. vs. The Registrar of Cooperative Societies & Anr and State of Kerala and Ors. v. K.O. Sherly and Ors.; relate to recruitment to the post of Clerk in Thrissur Bank, Kerala. Appeals titled as P.J. Jose and Ors. vs. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies and Ors. and Binu I and Ors. etc. vs. The Registrar of Co-operative Societies and Ors. etc. relate to recruitment to the post of Clerk in the District Co-operative Bank Kottayam. Apart from these appeals Trichur District Co-operative Bank also had preferred special leave petition against the same judgment of the Kerala High Court but withdrew the same at the time of hearing.3. In case of Thrissur Bank an advertisement was issued on 9.11.1995 indicating the probable vacancies in the grade of Cle...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 1998(II)OLR(SC)529; (1998)6SCC380
ORDERLearned amicus curiae, Dr Singhvi, Senior Advocate, has filed a chart detailing 'comparative compliance reports' from various States and Union Territories on the basis of the affidavits submitted by them. According to the chart, it is seen that the affidavits furnished by various States/Union Territories are still deficient and do not furnish full and complete information up-to-date. By way of an example, we have seen the affidavit filed on behalf of the State of Assam as also the NCT of Delhi. Learned counsel appearing for the States are directed to furnish a meaningful response with all details in respect of the 11 directions given in D.K. Basu v. State of W.B., : 1997CriLJ743 as well as the information which has been found to be deficient in the chart filed by Dr Singhvi. In some of the States/Union Territories, it appears that in respect of the custodial deaths, inquiries have been initiated under Section 176 CrPC but the reports of inquiries are not available. All those State...
Tag this Judgment!