Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2003(8)SC62; (2004)136PLR601; 2003(8)SCALE122; (2003)8SCC60; [2004]134STC303(SC)
ORDER1. Leave granted in special leave petitions.2. In this batch of appeals, the constitutional validity of the Haryana Local Area Development Tax Act, 2000 has been challenged primarily on two grounds, first: that the Act is violative of Article 301 of the Constitution and is not saved by Article 304 and second: that the Act in fact seeks to levy sales tax on inter-state sales, which is outside the competence of the State Legislature.3. After we had been addressed at length on the first of these issues by both sides, we were of the view, and the counsel for the appearing parties also submitted, that the question needed to be referred to a larger Bench under Article 145(3) of the Constitution. Arguments on the second issue were, therefore, not concluded and will be necessary only if the first issue is decided against the appellants.4. The factual background in which the issues are raised is briefly stated. The appellants are all industries or associations of industries manufacturing t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2004(2)ALT38(SC); 2004(1)AWC79(SC); II(2003)DMC741SC; [2003(4)JCR230(SC)]; JT2003(Suppl2)SC554; 2003(8)SCALE189; (2004)10SCC505; 2004(1)LC1(SC)
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. All these appeals arise out of matrimonial dispute between Harpit Singh- the husband and Gur Preet Anand Kaur - the wife, who were married on 7th January, 2001. They have no issue from the said marriage and from the record it is seen that the disputes that have arisen between the two have reached such a position that the marriage has broken down irretrievably inspite of efforts of all well wishers. Parties have taken recourse to criminal proceedings against each other, details of which will he referred to hereinafter. It is because of the criminal complaint filed by the parties against each other. The above S.L.Ps., seeking various reliefs including the relief of anticipatory bail, have been preferred before this court. Fortunately, good sense has since prevailed and parties have now come to an amicable settlement and filed a Compromise Deed signed by both the husband and the wife witnessed by other well wishers before this Court. The Deed is dated on 22nd Sept...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC4325; 97(2004)CLT363(SC); [2004]120CompCas63(SC); 2003(4)CTC418; JT2003(Suppl1)SC470; 2003(3)KLT876(SC); (2004)ILLJ161SC; 2003(8)SCALE143; (2003)10SCC733; 2004(1)S
Brijesh Kumar, J. 1. The respondent No. 1 Sagar Thomas was working as a Branch Manager in Karunagappally branch of the appellant Bank, namely, the Federal Bank, having its registered office at Alwaye, Kerala. He was, however, suspended on 29.5.1982, since a disciplinary enquiry was ordered into some charges against him for having exceeded his authority in grant of loans and advances to different parties. The inquiry officer found him guilty of the charges and ultimately punishment of dismissal was awarded to the respondent.2. The respondent No. 1 challenged the order of his dismissal by filing a writ petition in the High Court. A preliminary objection about maintainability of writ petition seems to have been taken, in defence by the Federal Bank, saying that it is a private bank and not a State or its agency or instrumentality, within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India, hence a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is not maintainable against it. The l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2003(6)ALD99(SC); 2004(1)ALT29(SC); JT2003(Suppl2)SC170; 2003(8)SCALE229; (2003)8SCC100
Raju, J. 1. Special leave Granted. 2. The appellant, who was arrayed as second respondent in Writ Petition No. 22227 of 1994 before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh, filed by the first respondent in this Court, though succeeded before the learned Single Judge, lost before the Division Bench in Writ Appeal No. 712 of 1995, resulting in this appeal. The Writ Petition before the High Court was filed seeking for a writ of certiorari to call for the records of the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad relating to the permission granted by the Corporation to the appellant to erect or display any advertisement/street signs/direction boards/arches on the public roads/colonies etc., within the twin cities of Hyderabad and Secunderabad and the permission granted for display thereon to the second respondent or to any other person and declare the same to be ultra-vires the provisions of the Hyderabad Municipal Corporation Act and Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The learned Single judge dismi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC4596; 2004(5)ALLMR(SC)7; 2004(1)ALT24(SC); 2003(4)AWC3388(SC); 2003(3)BLJR2425; (SCSuppl)2004(1)CHN18; [2003(4)JCR233(SC)]; JT2003(Suppl2)SC158; 2003(4)MPHT521; (2
D. Raju, J.1. Special leave granted.2. The appellant before this Court was the appellant in Second Appeal No. 693 of 1996 on the file of the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur. The original plaintiff Jineshwardas, whose legal representatives are the appellants in this Court, filed the Civil Suit No. 102-A of 1980 before the Court of IV Civil Judge Class-I, Jabalpur, seeking for a decree for specific performance and recovery of the possession of the suit land or in the alternative, damages at market value as may be proved for non-performance of the contract and for recovery of Rs. 2500/-paid by the plaintiff as deposit. The defendants disputed the suit claim by attributing fraud and undue influence as vitiating the agreement stating that it was opposed to public policy as well and really constituted no agreement of sale of Immovable property. After trial and on consideration of the materials on record, the suit filed was dismissed. The matter was pursued on appeal before the VIth Add...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC3397; 97(2004)CLT284(SC); 2003(4)CTC98; 107(2003)DLT137(SC); JT2003(Suppl1)SC428; 2003(8)SCALE190; (2003)8SCC413
V.N. Khare, C.J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 17th August, 2001 of the High Court of Delhi, which raises a question, whether a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 is entitled to obtain Letter of Administration under Section 236 of the Indian Succession Act (in short 'the Act')?3. The facts giving rise to this appeal are these: 4. One Ratan Lal executed a Will on 15.10.1977 bequeathing a part of his estate to Jain Bal Ashram which is run by the Jain Society (hereinafter referred to as 'the Society') formed for protection of orphans in India. The Society is registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. On 4th March, 1978, Ratan Lal, the testator died. On his demise, the Society submitted an application before the Court for grant of Letter of Administration in pursuance of Will executed by late Ratan Lal, under Section 276 of the Act. The said petition was contested by the appellant and on her death by h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC4603; JT2003(Suppl2)SC613; 2003(3)KLT1081(SC); 2003(8)SCALE165; (2003)8SCC498
S.B. Sinha, J. 1. Whether non-publication of a final electoral roll would render a general election invalid in law is the core question involved in this appeal filed by the Appellant herein under Section 116A of the Representation of the People-Act. 1951 (hereinafter referred to as 'the 1951 Act') which arises out of a judgment and order of the High Court of Kerala dated 7.3.2002 passed in E.P. No. 8 of 2001 whereby and whereunder his election petition was dismissed.BACKGROUND FACT.:2. The election in question was held for Kozhikode II Legislative Assembly Constituency on 10.05.2001. The first, second, third and fourth respondents herein contested the said election. The appellant herein was the election agent of the second respondent. The said election petition came to be filed in the following circumstances:3. A preliminary electoral roll (mother roll) was published in 1999 which was revised on 1.1.2000 and 1.1.2001 purported to be in terms of continuous and special revision scheme. O...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2003(3)BLJR2004; JT2003(Suppl2)SC261; 2003(8)SCALE135; (2003)12SCC587
K.G. Balakrishnan, J.1. Appellants challenge their conviction and sentence for the offences punishable under Sections 148 and 307 of Indian Penal Code. Appellant Karan Singh was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 148 and 307 (PC without the aid of Section 149 whereas the other appellants were convicted for the offences punishable under Section 148 and Section 307 read with Section 149. The prosecution case was that these appellants were on inimical terms with PW-1 Hari Singh, and that on 29.11.1981 at about 10 A.M., when Hari Singh was returning from his well to his house, the appellants attacked him and caused injuries. Appellant Karan Singh was armed with a 'Pharsa' whereas the other appellants were armed with 'Lathis'. PW-1 Hari Singh suffered serious injuries and his left hand was cut off from the body just above the wrist joint. He suffered three other incised injuries and three lacerated wounds. Altogether, Hari Singh had 12 injuries on his body when he was exami...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC4295; 2003(4)AWC3435(SC); (SCSuppl)2004(2)CHN128; JT2003(Suppl1)SC606; (2003)10SCC578
Dharmadhikari, J. 1. By Judgment dated 11.7.1996 passed in Second Appeal No. 649 of 1987, the High Court of Madras has reversed the concurrent findings recorded in the Judgments of the courts below and dismissed the suit preferred by deceased - plaintiff, K. Ethirajan [now represented in this appeal by the appellants as his legal representatives] for partition of the suit property consisting of a house and land appurtenant to it described as T.S.No. 71/2 area 3.0536 grounds in village - Ayanava ram , Taluk - Madras extended area, District - Madras [Tamil Nadu].2. It is not in dispute between the parties that the suit properties were owned by widow - Gangammal. Deceased K. Ethirajan (the original plaintiff) was Gangammal's sister's son and was allowed to occupy a portion of the suit properties since before coming into force of The (Tamil Nadu) Estates (Abolition and Conversion into Ryotwari) Act, 1948 [hereinafter referred to as an Act of 1948]. 3. The widow - Gangammal died in the year...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2003SC4599; 97(2004)CLT244(SC); [2004(102)FLR149]; JT2003(Suppl1)SC497; (2004)IILLJ1053SC; 2003(8)SCALE129; (2003)10SCC297; 2004(1)SLJ259(SC); (2003)3UPLBEC2699
Shivaraj V. Patil, J.Civil Appeal Nos. 5525/2000, 5527-5528/2000, 5530-5531/2000, 5529/2000 and 5526/20001. Aggrieved by the impugned orders passed by the High Court accepting the plea of the respondents as regards higher scales of pay and pension, Grid Corporation of Orissa Limited and others are in appeal in these appeals. Necessary facts required for the disposal of these appeals, briefly stated, are the following:2. Hirakud Dam Project was initially entrusted to the Central Waterways, Irrigation and Navigation Commission. The workmen employed therein were getting the pay scales applicable to the employees in the work-charged establishment of the Central Public Works Department (CPWD). The State Government took over the said project w.e.f. 1.4.1960 with understanding that the work-charged employees recruited prior to 1.4.1960 should be allowed to continue on the same scales of pay and on conditions of service as were applicable to them on 31.3.1960, which is evident from the order o...
Tag this Judgment!