Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC843; 2003(85)ECC496; 2003(152)ELT39(SC); JT2003(1)SC106; 2003(1)SCALE123; (2003)3SCC410; [2003]1SCR98
Shah, J.1. The question which were considered by the Customs, Excise & Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'CEGAT') in Final Order No. 1467/99-B dated 5.1.2000 arising out of Appeal No. E3646/1990(B), were--whether, as the clearances in issue were effected against approved classification lists, the demand was sustainable in view of the law laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Court in Collector of Central Excise, Baroda v. Cotspun Limited and whether there was any ground for invoking first proviso to Sub-Section (1) of Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (hereafter referred to as 'the Act')? 2. In these appeals, first question which requires decision is--what is the effect of following amendments in Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1994 which came into force w.e.f. 17.11.1980 by the Finance Act, 2000 (10 of 2000). 3. The relevant part of unamended Section 11A was as under:--'Section 11A--Recovery of duties not levied or not paid ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2003(10)SCALE480; (2003)9SCC288
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. A complaint was made to the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (for short the Forum) in regard to time share in resorts belonging to the respondents. The Forum took the view that the matter was covered by an earlier decision of the National Commission in respect of time share in the immovable property and therefore would not be a consumer dispute.3. This Court in the case of Lucknow Development Authority v. M.K. Gupta, : AIR1994SC787 took the view that even in respect of matters where immovable property is involved, the question to be examined was whether there was any service to be rendered in relation thereto and whether the complaint made was in respect of the same or not. That aspect seems to have been lost sight of by the Commission. Therefore, we set aside the order made by the Forum and remit the matter to it for fresh consideration in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed accordingly....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC807; 2003(1)AWC667(SC); JT2003(1)SC135; 2003(1)SCALE66; (2003)2SCC1
Arun Kumar, J.Civil Appeal No. 3632 of 1996: 1. In this appeal, the appellant claims possession of a piece of land comprising 5 biswas, that is, 250 square yards. The claim is based on alleged occupation as a tresspaser of 10 biswas of agricultural land in village Sanoth within the revenue estate of Delhi. Briefly the facts are that consolidation scheme in village Sanoth was prepared and confirmed in the year 1975-76 under Sections 19 and 20 of the East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation and Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act'). The respondents admittedly owned and possessed lands in the said village. The appellant claimed that his predecessor had trespassed on a portion of the land belonging to the respondents and had been carrying on cultivation activity thereon. In the scheme, no encumbrance as alleged by the appellant was mentioned. The appellant, however, relied on a list dated 3rd July, 1982 for substantiating his claim. The Scheme of consolid...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2004(1)JCR139(SC)]
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that the Public Interest Litigation filed before the High Court has been disposed of rather cursorily and without taking into consideration all the relevant factors which ought to have entered into the consideration of the High Court before making the directions as contained in the operative part of the order.3. The learned senior counsel for the appellant points out that unless and until the High Court finds that the merghat, kabristan and crematorium are legal and satisfy the requirement for registration under the local law till then a direction for extension of amenities and facilities could not have been given, which would have the effect of legalising the illegalities if there be any. It is also pointed out that the State Government may have its own priorities for incurring expenditure and the administrative and financial handicaps and convenience of the State Government should also h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC791; 2003(1)ALT(Cri)378; 2003CriLJ884; JT2003(1)SC77; 2003(1)SCALE43; (2003)2SCC152; [2003]1SCR38; 2003(1)LC407(SC); 2003(1)WLN722
R.C. Lahoti, J.1. The Rajasthan Sati (Prevention) Ordinance 1987 was promulgated by the Governor of Rajasthan on 01.10.1987. The following Sections of the Ordinance are relevant for our purpose and hence are extracted and reproduced hereunder:-2(b). 'glorification', in relation to Sati, includes, among other things, the observance of any ceremony or the taking out of a possession in connection with the Sati or the creation of a trust or the collection of funds or the construction of a temple with a view to perpetuating the honour of, or to preserve the memory of the person committing Sati.2(c). Sati means the burning or burying alive of any widow alongwith the body of her deceased husband or with any article object or thing associated with the husband, irrespective of whether such burring is voluntary on the part of the widow or otherwise.5. Punishment for glorification of Sati Whoever does any act for the glorification of Sati shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which sha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC992; 2003(2)ALT(Cri)35; 2003(51)BLJR1680; 2003CriLJ1234; I(2003)DMC177SC; JT2003(1)SC60; 2003(1)SCALE101; (2003)2SCC698; [2003]1SCR60; 2003(1)LC394(SC)
B.P. Singh, J.1. Deceased Geetu was married to Parvin Kumar on 28.04.1990 at Yamunagar. Her father Ved Prakash, PW--1 is a lawyer of standing at Yamunagar. After the marriage she started residing with her husband and his parents at Sriganganagar. Only 2-1/2 months later, on 13th July, 1990 Geetu committed suicide by hanging. Her parents were informed and they came to Sriganganagar. The post mortem examination of the dead body of Geetu was conducted on the 14th July, 1990, whereafter her body was cremated in the presence of her parents who had come to Sriganganagar along with other relatives. After the cremation at about 4 p.m., Ved Prakash, PW--1, father of Geetu drafted an F.I.R., Ex. P-5 and loged the same at police station. Sadar, Sriganganagar at 8.30 p.m. After investigation the appellants herein who are the parents of Parvin Kumar, the husband of the deceased, along with Parvin Kumar were put up for trial before the Additional District & Sessions Judge No.2, Sriganganagar in Sess...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC942; 2003(2)ALLMR(SC)319; 2003(1)AWC642(SC); 2003(2)BLJR841; [2003(1)JCR288(SC)]; JT2003(1)SC18; 2003(1)SCALE85; (2003)3SCC128; [2003]1SCR73
R.C. Lahoti, J.1. The land, which is the subject matter of controversy in these proceedings, is 36.86 acres area out of the total area of 45.92 acres of land of plot Nos. 4, 5 and 10 appertaining to khata No. 151 of Village Phulsari, District Lohardaga. Notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter 'the Act' for short) was issued on 16.02.1982 for acquiring the said land for the project called Phulsari Sapathi nala. Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was issued on 25.05.1982. Objections under Section 9 of the Act were filed by the appellant herein. The State through Circle Officer, Kuru filed reply to the objections. On 19.02.1986 the Collector made an award under Section 11 of the Act directing the compensation, as appointed by him, to be paid to Smt. Sharda Devi, the appellant.2. The relevant facts, which are beyond the pale of controversy at this stage and as would set out briefly the history of litigation, may be noticed. According to the appell...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1108; 2003(1)ALD(Cri)311; 2003CriLJ1274; I(2003)DMC280SC; [2003(1)JCR286(SC)]; JT2003(1)SC72; 2003(1)SCALE62; (2003)2SCC566
Santosh Hegde, J.1. Original complainant in Sessions Case No. 127 of 1989 before the Sessions Judge, West Dinajpur, at Balurghat is in appeal before us in the above Criminal Appeal, against the judgment of acquittal made by the High Court Calcutta in Criminal Death Reference No. 4/1990 and Criminal Appeal No. 327 of 1990. The State has not preferred any appeal against the judgment of the High Court, but is a party respondent before us.2. Prosecution case briefly stated is that one Suchitra, the daughter of the appellant herein was married to Nakul Chandra son of Sarat Chandra Mandal, accused No. 1 before the Sessions Court. At the time of the marriage, there was an agreement to pay dowry in cash of Rs. 5001/- out of which, Rs. 3001 was paid to the accused A-1 by the appellant but he could not pay the balance amount of dowry due to poverty. A-1 was living with his wife A-4 and five of his children of which A-3 Sachindra Nath Mandal is one of them who was living with his wife Gauri Manda...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC818; 2003(1)ALD(Cri)314; 2003CriLJ910; JT2003(1)SC122; 2003(1)SCALE69; (2003)3SCC175; 2003(1)LC571(SC)
B.P. Singh, J.1. This appeal by special leave has been preferred by the complainant/informant against the judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal No. 720 of 1992 whereby the High Court allowed the appeal preferred by respondent No. 1 herein and acquitted him of the charges under Sections 342 and 376 of the Indian Penal Code. The State has not preferred an appeal against the impugned judgment.2. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant was working as a domestic help in five flats in Vasant Vihar Society Building, Thane, Mumbai including the flat of respondent No. 1 herein which was located on the second floor. She used to clean utensils and clothes in his flat for which she was paid Rs. 80/- per month. Respondent No. 1 resided in that flat with his wife and two children. On 17th April, 1992 his wife and children had left for the village. While going to the village his wife had given to the appellant duplicate keys of the flat and had requ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1104; 2003CriLJ1270; [2003(2)JCR152(SC)]; JT2003(1)SC85; 2003(1)SCALE50; (2003)1SCC761
The appellants along with accused Surendra Pratap Chand and Kaushalendra Shahi were charged and tried for offences punishable under Section 148/302/307/324/394 of the Penal Code but were acquitted of all the charges by trial court. On appeal being preferred by the State of Uttar Pradesh, the High Court reversed the order of acquittal in relation to both the appellants and convicted them under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. They have been further convicted under Section 307 read with Section 34 and Section 324 read with Section 34 of the Penal Code and each one of them was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of five years and one year respectively. Appellant No. 1 has been also convicted under Section 394 of the Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for five years. The sentences, however, have been ordered to run concurrently. So far the other two accused persons are concerned, th...
Tag this Judgment!