Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2003(3)ALLMR(SC)297; 2003(2)AWC1425(SC); (2003)3CALLT1(SC); RLW2003(3)SC407; 2003(3)SCALE21; (2003)5SCC83; 2003(2)LC982(SC)
ORDER1. Heard learned counsel for the parties2. Leave granted.3. The appellants are the owners of the land situated in Akola district, Maharashtra. The State Government issued a notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act (the Act) proposing to acquire the lands belonging to the appellants. A notice was also issued to the appellants under Section 9 of the Act for submitting their claim to compensation in respect of the area under acquisition. The appellants submitted their claim contending that the land under acquisition was converted to non-agricultural use by the order of the Sub-Divisional Officer, Akola, dated 3.3.1983. The appellants also pointed out that by the said order, residential lay outs were sanctioned in the lands sought to be acquired and plots were also demarcated. The appellants also pointed out that the lands in question were surrounded by developed colonies with residential quarters, industries, marketyards and other commercial complexes in the near vici...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC4126; JT2003(3)SC365; 2003(3)SCALE361; (2003)5SCC239; [2003]2SCR668; [2003]131STC111(SC)
Syed Shah Mohammed Quadri, J.Civil Appeal Nos. 5863-64/1997 5863-64/1997 , 5865-66/1997 5865-66/1997 and 5534/1997:1. These appeals from various orders of the West Bengal Taxation Tribunal (for short, 'the Tribunal') raise a common question as to the constitutional validity of provisions, mentioned hereunder, of the West Bengal Sales Tax Act, 1994 [West Bengal Act XVIX of 1994] (for short, 'the Act') and the Rules made thereunder. The Act came into force on March 23, 1995. It repealed the Bengal Finance (Sales Tax) Act, 1941 which was then in force. 2. The respondents challenged the constitutional validity of the following provisions of the Act: (i) Section 2(6); (ii) Explanation to Sub-section (1), Sub-section (5), (7), (8), (10), (11) and (12) of Section 11; (iii) Sub-section (4) of Section 14; and (iv) Rules 172, 173, 174, 188 and 189 of the West Bengal Sales Tax Rules, 1994 (for short, 'the Rules'). The Tribunal held:'that Section 2(6) of the 1994 Act is valid and constitutional wi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : [2003(97)FLR390]; JT2003(2)SC423; 2003(1)KLT949(SC); 2003(2)SCALE706; (2003)3SCC541; [2003]2SCR653; 2003(2)SLJ375(SC); (2003)1UPLBEC835
Dharmadhikari, J.1. These appeals have been preferred by the candidates seeking recruitment to the post of lower primary/upper primary teachers in the Government Schools of the State of Kerala. They questioned their non-selection to the post due to inclusion of B.Ed. candidates in the select list prepared by the Public Service Commission of the State of Kerala. Their contention before the High Court was that in the advertisement issued for recruitment to the post of teachers in Government Primary Schools, B.Ed. is not the prescribed qualification and only candidates with prescribed educational qualifications of Teachers Training (Certificate) (shortly referred to as TTC) were entitled to compete for the selection and seek appointment.2. Learned Single Judge of the High Court of Kerala by judgment dated 25.1.1999 allowed the petition of the present appellants holding that B.Ed. candidates could not have been included in the select or rank list as they were not eligible under the terms o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1900; 2003CriLJ1698; 2003(155)ELT216(SC); JT2003(2)SC370; 2003(2)SCALE636; (2003)4SCC139; [2003]2SCR621; 2003(2)LC1029(SC)
G.P. Mathur, J.1. The Deputy Chief Controller of Imports and Exports filed eightcomplaints against several persons including the respondents herein for theirprosecution under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC and Section 5 ofImports and Exports (Control) Act, 1947. The respondents (accused Nos. 3,4 and 5) filed applications under Section 245 Cr.P.C. in all the cases prayingfor their discharge. These applications were rejected by the Special Court(Economic Offences) on February 24, 1986 and the revisions preferredagainst the said order were also dismissed by 6th Additional Sessions Judgeon July 20, 1989. Thereafter, the Respondents filed petitions under Section482 Cr.P.C. which were allowed by the High Court of Karnataka by thejudgment and order dated August 7, 1995 and the orders passed by theSpecial Court (Economic Offences) and the Sessions Judge were set asideand the applications filed under Section 245 Cr.P.C. were allowed and therespondents were discharged. Feeling aggrieved b...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC2012; [2003]114CompCas614(SC); (2003)2CompLJ166(SC); JT2003(2)SC395; 2003(2)SCALE677; (2003)10SCC482; [2003]2SCR631; (2003)2UPLBEC1022
Srikrishna, J.1. These appeals arising under different factual backgrounds raise the same question of law and can, therefore, conveniently be disposed of by a common judgment.Facts Civil Appeal Nos. 4702 and 4703 of 1994 2. On 23rd May, 1988 a winding up petition was filed under Section 433 of the Companies Act, 1956 seeking to wind up the company known as International Coach Builders Ltd. Another petition by another creditor was also filed on 2.11.88. On 10.11.89, during the pendency of the above petitions before the High Court of Karnataka, the respondent, a Corporation established under the State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 (SFC Act), which was the second charge holder on the assets of the said company, took possession of the mortgaged assets of the said company in purported exercise of its power under Section 29 of the SFC Act. On 30.11.1990 the High Court of Karnataka in Company Petition No. 131 of 1988 made an order of winding up of International Coach Builders Ltd and appoin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1243; 2003CriLJ2011; JT2003(5)SC50; RLW2003(4)SC493; 2003(2)SCALE719; (2003)9SCC449
Santosh Hedge, J.1. The respondents herein and two others were charged for offences punishable under Sections 148, 452, 302 read with 149 and 307 IPC for having committed the murder of one Nasir Ahmad son of Mohd. Siddiq, his wife Chheddan and his two years old son Ishtiyaq in the house of Mohd. Siddiq (PW-2) and for causing grievous and other injuries to PW-2 Mohd. Siddiq, PW-3 Mukhtar Ahmad, Nasir Ahmad PW-11 and another by name Masroor. Learned Sessions Judge, Sitapur, Uttar Pradesh in Sessions Trial No. 371/1982 acquitted accused No.6 Sadaqat and A-7 Liyaqat giving them the benefit of doubt and convicted other 15 persons for various offences punishable under Sections 302 read with Sections 149, 452, 307 read with 149 IPC. He sentenced the said accused for the principal offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 IPC to imprisonment for life and awarded varying sentences in regard to other offences. In appeal, the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Crl. Appeal N...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1981; 2003CriLJ1717; 2003(2)JKJ16[SC]; JT2003(3)SC239; 2003(2)SCALE648; (2003)4SCC128
Santosh Hegde, J.1. The two appellants in these appeals along with two other accused persons were charged for committing offences punishable under Section 302 IPC and Section 27 of the Arms Act for having committed triple murder of Shivnandan Mahto, Chamru Chaudhary and Rajendra Chaudhary on the night intervening between 10th and 11th October, 1992 within the jurisdiction of Islampur Police Station. In the said case, one of the accused persons by name Saryug Paswan was absconding. The trial of the said accused person was separated from the other accused persons. Learned Sessions Judge, Nalanda, after trial found the 3 accused persons including the two appellants herein guilty of the offences charged and sentenced them to undergo imprisonment for life for an offence punishable under Section 302 IPC. He also imposed a sentence of 7 years' RI for offence punishable under Section 27 of the Arms Act, and directed the sentences to run concurrently. Against the said judgment and conviction, t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2003(51)BLJR934; 2003CriLJ1710; JT2003(2)SC413; 2003(2)SCALE658; (2003)11SCC508; 2003(1)LC640(SC)
Santosh Hegde, J.1. These appeals are filed against the judgment and order dated14th of September, 1988 made by the High Court of Punjab andHaryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Revision No. 805 of 1998 andCriminal Misc. No. 21520-M of 1997. In those proceedings, theappellant had challenged the order dated 8.7.1998 made by thelearned Special Judge, C.B.I., Patiala by which charges wereframed against the appellant under Sections 7 and 13(2) read withSection 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Theappellant sought for quashing of the said charges framed by thelearned Special Judge, C.B.I., Patiala. But the High Court by theimpugned order had dismissed the said petitions.2. The facts necessary for the disposal of these appeals are asfollows:3. The appellant belongs to the Indian Police Service fromMadhya Pradesh Cadre. While so serving, the appellant wasdeployed on deputation in the Border Security Force (BSF) in theyear 1992. While he was in the BSF, one Assa Singh made acompl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC1374; 2003(86)ECC284; 2003(153)ELT3(SC); JT2003(5)SC45; 2003(3)SCALE1; (2003)4SCC699; [2003]2SCR608
ORDER1. This appeal, by the assessee, arises from the judgment of the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal at New Delhi (for short, the Tribunal) in Final Order No. E/195/95-81, dated March 31, 1995.2. The appellant-assessee is a manufacturer of car air-conditioning kits. It classified the said goods under item No. 5 of Heading 8415 of the Schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (for short, the Act) for the purpose of availing the benefit of exemption of Notification No. 166/86-CE, dated March, 1, 1986 (as amended from time to time). Though the appellant sought to contend that it was only manufacturing parts of the air-conditioning kit and, therefore, the kit cannot be treated as an air-conditioner, the Assistant Collector did treat the same as air-conditioning system falling under item No. 3 of Heading 8415 of the Notification. That order is said to be the subject matter of an appeal. Be that as it may, on March 20, 1990, a new Entry, item No. 8, was added to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC2029; 2003(3)AWC2396(SC); (2003)2CompLJ161(SC); JT2003(5)SC41; 2003(2)SCALE609; (2003)4SCC477; [2003]2SCR547
Rajendra Babu, J.1. Pursuant to a tender notice issued on 16.1.1995, the appellants granted licences to various cellular operators on terms and conditions mentioned therein. The License Agreement provided that the licencee has to pay the prescribed fee in advance in terms of Schedule B thereof and the period of licence was initially for 10 years. The licencee was obliged to install and run the system within 12 months of the effective date which is defined in the licence. The Agreement also provided that in case of failure to pay the licence fee within the prescribed time interest shall be charged on the amount due at certain rate.2. The New Telecom Policy 1999 [NTP-99] was thereafter introduced which was known as 'migrant on package' and was offered to various licencees as set out in their letter dated 22.7.1999 which was accepted unconditionally by the members of respondent No.1 and other licencees on 26.7.1999. In the NTP. under the migration package it was stated that the effective ...
Tag this Judgment!