Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2003)179CTR(SC)14; [2002]258ITR437(SC)
ORDER1. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we see no reason to interfere with the findings recorded by the High Court. The civil appeal is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2002(10)SC53
ORDER1. This appeal by Kirloskar Oil Engines Ltd. is directed against the order of the M.R.T.P. Commission holding that the appellant has indulged in the restrictive trade practice as alleged in the notice of inquiry and imposing penalty by way of compensation and cost of the claim-jant. The impugned order indicates that the commission came to the ultimate conclusion that the appellant has indulged in restrictive trade practice on the basis of three allegations made in the complaint in question. In course ofinquiry before the commission the appellant filed an objection appending some documents, but ultimately did not lead any evidence to prove those documents. On 20th January, 1993 an application had been filed by the appellant before the commission for permission to lead evidence, but that application stood rejected on a finding that sufficient opportunity had been given but the appellant had not availed of that opportunity. One of the contentions raised in this Court by the appellant...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
ORDER1. A written complaint was lodged for offences arising under Section 135 of the Customs Act, 1962 alleging that the accused was in possession of our gold biscuits with foreign markings valued at Rs. 22,994/-. The search and seizure had taken place as early as on 30th/31st August, 1974 whereas the complaint was a written complaint was lodged in the year 1979 and that complaint was a written complaint, however, not signed by a public servant. On receipt of the summons the accused raised an objection that the summons could not have been issued in this case inasmuch as the complaint did not contain the signatures of the public servant who had lodged the complaint.2. Before issue of the summons to the appellant the complainant in question had not been examined and first proviso of Section 200 of the code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 makes it clear that when the complaint is made in writing the Magistrate need not examine the complainant and the witnesses if a public servant acting or pu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
ORDER1. The first additional sessions judge, Shahjahanpur convicted appellants herein and five others for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC and imposed a sentence of life imprisonment. He also convicted the appellants under Section 148 IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for one year. 2. On appeal, the High Court of judicature at Allahabad while convicting one of the accused, namely, A - 7 before the trial court guilty of offence punishable under Section 302, acquitted these accused of the said offence but found them guilty of offence punishable under Section 326 read with Section 149 IPC and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for six years and confirmed the sentence imposed on these appellants under Section 148 IPC by the sessions court. 3. During 'the pendency of the appeal before the High Court, three appellants therein, namely, A -1, A - 5 and A - 8 died, hence, their appeal stood abated. 4. The appeal filed by A - 7 before this Court came to be dismiss...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC355; 2003(51)BLJR158; JT2002(9)SC1; 2003(1)KarLJ1; (2002)8SCC481; (2002)3UPLBEC2817
ORDER TO DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OF A RELIGIOUS OR LINGUISTIC MINORITY IN RELATION TO ARTICLE 30, WHAT IS TO BE THE UNIT - THE STATE OR THE COUNTRY AS A WHOLE?74. We now consider the question of the unit for the purpose of determining the definition of 'minority' within the meaning of Article 30(1).75. Article 30(1) deals with religious minorities and linguistic minorities. The opening words of Article 30(1) make it clear that religious and linguistic minorities have been put at par, insofar as that Article is concerned. Therefore, whatever the unit - whether a state or the whole of India - for determining a linguistic minority, it would be the same in relation to a religious minority. India is divided into different linguistic states. The states have been carved out on the basis of the language of the majority of persons of that region. For example, Andhra Pradesh was established on the basis of the language of that region. viz., Telugu. 'Linguistic minority' can, therefore, logically...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2003(1)ALT57(SC); JT2002(9)SC189; (2003)1SCC59; 2002(2)LC1515(SC)
S.N. Variava, J.1. This Appeal is against a Judgment dated 14th March, 2000.2. Briefly stated the facts are as follows:The Appellant, who is a landlord of the concerned premises, filed Eviction Petition on two grounds, namely, arrears of rent and secondly that there was material alteration in the shop without the written consent of the landlord. The Appellant claimed that the shop had thus been materially impaired in value and utility. The Respondent immediately deposited the rent in Court and, therefore, the fist ground did not survive. The petition was contested only on the ground of material alteration. 3. On 9th November, 1987 the Rent Controller rejected the ejectment Petition holding that the Appellant had not been able to prove that the Respondent had made any additions/alterations. The Rent Controller also held that the alterations were not of such a nature that they had impaired the value and utility of the shop.4. The Appellant filed an Appeal which was allowed by an Order da...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2002(10)SC139
ORDER1. The above appeal has been filed against the judgment of a learned single judge of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh dated 2.6.1982 in RSA No. 627 of 1992 dismissing the appeal as of no merit, thereby, affirming the judgment of the learned additional district judge, Narnol dated 5.2.1992 in Civil Appeal No. 58/1991, which, in-turn, has set aside the judgment and decree of the learned trial judge dated 15.2.1991, resulting in the dismissal of the suit filed by the appellant. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned senior counsel for the respondent. 3. The appellant filed civil suit No. 909 of 1987 for a declaration to the effect that heis the owner of 1/6th share belonging to Mukha, son of Dilbar, in addition to his own share on the basis of a civil court decree passed in civil suit No. 338 of 1973 decided on 11.9.1974. The learned trial judge decreed the suit on the basis of the judgment dated 11.9.1974 in civil suit No. 338 of 1973. Aggri...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC229; JT2002(8)SC607; (2003)1SCC42; 2003(1)LC204(SC)
S.N. Variava, J.1. This Appeal is against a Judgment dated 30th July, 1998.2. Briefly stated the facts are as follows:The Appellants are the wife, son and daughter of one A.K. Gaur. Thesaid A.K. Gaur was the tenant of the Respondents 1 and 2 (hereinaftercalled landlords). The premises had been given on rent to the said A.K.Gaur at a monthly rent of Rs. 100/-. On 29th September, 1966 thelandlords sent a notice terminating the tenancy of A.K. Gaur with effectfrom the 31st day of the receipt of the notice. The tenancy wasterminated on the ground that the rent had not been regularly paid. Byhis letter in reply dated 6th October, 1966 A.K. Gaur claimed that therent up to September, 1966 had already been paid. The said A.K. Gaurclaimed that the rent was only Rs. 80/- per month as certain facilitieshad been withdrawn.3. The landlords then filed Suit No. 2385 of 1966 for eviction, forrecovery of rent and for damages and mense profits. A.K. Gaur filed anapplication seeking permission to deposit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC153; (2003)2CALLT12(SC); JT2002(9)SC328; (2003)1SCC123; 2003(1)LC57(SC)
Arun Kumar, J.1. These appeals are directed against a common judgment dated 24.12.1999 of the High Court disposing of two Revision Petitions. Briefly the facts giving rise to the present appeals are that the appellant was a tenant in the suit premises since before its purchase by the respondent- landlords. In May 1990, by mutual consent of the parties rent of the suit premises was enhanced to Rs. 500/- per month. Admittedly, rent up to October, 1990 was received by the landlords, thereafter as per the case of the respondents, tenant defaulted in payment of rent. The appellant filed suit for injunction in the Civil Court praying that the landlords be restrained from threatening to dispossess the appellant from sit premises. In the said suit, an interim injunction was granted in favour of the appellant. On 1st November, 1993, the landlords issued a default notice alleging that the tenant had committed default in payment of rent and was, therefore, liable to eviction. The tenant replied t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC156; 2003(51)BLJR356; JT2002(8)SC601; (2002)8SCC765; 2002(2)LC1531(SC)
S.N. Variava, J.1. This Appeal is against a Judgment dated 24th September, 1998.2. Briefly stated the facts are as follows:The Appellant is the owner of premises bearing No. 29A, Police LineRoad, Ward No. 10, Bhagalpur Kutchery Road, Bhagalpur, U.P. TheRespondent is a tenant in one of the flats in the said building. TheAppellant filed Title Eviction Suit No. 15 of 1991 against theRespondent on the ground that the said flat was required by her forher own occupation. The Appellant claimed that she was staying inpremises belonging to her son and that her son had asked her tovacate the premises. The Appellant claimed that she wanted the flatoccupied by the Respondent as it was on the ground floor and on thenorthern side of the building and contiguous to the ancestral buildingwhere she was presently residing, i.e. Shiva Bhawan. The Appellantalso claimed that the said flat faced an open piece of land whichbelonged to her husband. The Appellant claimed that she being oldcould not climb to the...
Tag this Judgment!