Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC2329; 2004CriLJ2490; JT2004(Suppl1)SC211; 2004(4)SCALE611; (2004)10SCC598
Arijit Pasayat, J.1. A Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court by the impugned judgment upheld the conviction recorded by learned Special Judge, Hamirpur holding appellant guilty of offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code 1860 (in short 'IPC). Accused-appellant was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life. However, co-accused Rajendra Singh was acquitted.2. Background facts which led to trial are as follows:Complainant-Ram Singh (PW-1) at the time of occurrence was living at village Swasa. On 20.7.82 at about 6.00 p.m. when he was returning to his village Pyare Singh (PW-2), a co-villager was also with him. On the way his brother Prem Singh (hereinafter referred to as the 'deceased') who was living at village Chhani met him. They came to the bus stop and sat at the Chabutra in front of the Dak Bungalow and waited for the bus. At that time a bus came from Hamirpur. Appellant-Rambali Singh (A-1) and Rajendra Singh (A-2) residents of village Chhani Bujurg got do...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC2432; 2004(4)ALD22(SC); 2004(5)ALLMR(SC)534; 2004(2)AWC2133(SC); 2004(2)BLJR1091; (SCSuppl)2004(4)CHN11; 2004(3)CTC220; 2005(1)CTLJ118(SC); 111(2004)DLT39(SC); JT2
G.P. Mathur, J. 1. Leave granted.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.12.2001 of the High Court of Delhi by which the appeal preferred by the appellant against the order of rejection of the appellant's application under Order VII Rule 10 CPC passed by the Additional District Judge, Delhi on 28.3.1998 was dismissed.3. The appellant Hanil Era Textiles Limited, New Era House, Mogul Lane, Matunga (West), Bombay placed a purchase order bearing No.CA/32/95 dated 31.5.1995 with M/s Puromatic Filters Pvt. Ltd. 25/100, Yashwant Nagar, Goregaon (W), Bombay for supply of 136 numbers Coarse Filters and 136 numbers Fine Filters. The purchase order was in following terms :'Dear Sir, We are pleased to order the Material parts listed below subject to terms, conditions and instructions, on the reverse hereof and the attachments, if any hereto. Please acknowledge your acceptance by returning the duplicate copy duly signed within one week.'Thirty per cent of the amount was p...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2005)ILLJ10SC; (2004)10SCC606
ORDER1. Leave granted.2. The appellants were selected and appointed as employees of Nawanshahar Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. in 1996. In the year 1997, one Pramod Kumar and Budh Dass filed writ petition C.W.P. No. 12920 of 1997 before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana alleging that the selection and appointment of these appellants were illegal as the selection process was vitiated by so many irregularities and malpractices and the appellants herein were liable to be removed from service. When the writ petition came up for hearing, the counsel who represented Nawanshahar Central Co-op. Bank Ltd. made a statement before the High Court that certain irregularities were noticed by the Bank in conducting the selection and the Bank would take steps to remove Respondents 6 to 44 (appellants herein) from service. Though the appellants herein contended that the writ petition itself was not maintainable, that plea was not accepted and in view of the statement of the counsel for the Bank, the Divis...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC3504; 2004(5)ALLMR(SC)932; 2004(3)AWC2214(SC); 2004(3)CTC308; JT2004(5)SC329; (2004)3MLJ183(SC); 2004(4)SCALE688; (2004)7SCC251
G.P. Mathur, J.1. This appeal by special leave has been preferred by the defendants against the judgment and order dated 17.3.1997 of High Court of Karnataka by which the Regular First Appeal preferred by the plaintiff was allowed and case was remanded to the trial court with certain directions.2. In order to understand the controversy involved it is necessary to set out the facts which are little involved.(i) The appellant no.6 to 10 are sons and daughters of Shri M.G. Dayal and they were owners of the suit property (residential building at Jayanagar, Bangalore). They executed an agreement to sell the suit property in favour of Dr. G. Gopalakrishna (plaintiff/respondent no.1) on 5.12.1974 for a consideration of Rs.1,42,500/- and received Rs.42,500/- by way of advance. The respondent no.1 was also put in possession of the ground floor of the property.(ii) The respondent no.1 issued a legal notice rescinding the contract and claimed refund of the advance amount paid by him. On 7.11.1977...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2004(9)SCALE43; (2004)6SCC85
ORDER1. The Tamil Nadu Housing Board (for short 'the Board') is established and constituted under an Act known as Madras State Housing Board Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act').2. For carrying out the purposes of the Act, the Board employs a number of employees. Under Sections 17 and 19 of the Act, the Board has framed regulations known as Madras State Housing Board Service Regulations, 1969 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Regulations'). Under the Regulations, the posts of Assistant Executive Engineer are to be filled up from two sources - 75 per cent of posts are to be filled up through direct recruitment amongst those who hold Engineering Degree and 25 per cent of the posts are to be filled up from amongst the Junior Engineers and Diploma- holders and Chief Head Draftsman/Head Draftsman and Senior Drafts Officer. Under the Regulations, a Junior Engineer is eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer only on completion of 10 years of service as a J...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC3693; 2004CriLJ3121; 111(2004)DLT61(SC); 2004(77)DRJ243; JT2004(Suppl1)SC205; 2004(4)SCALE523; (2004)4SCC615
Arijit Pasayat, J.1. Leave granted.2. By the impugned judgment a Division Bench of the Delhi High Court held that the sanction granted by the Governing Body, of All India Institute of Medical Sciences (in short the 'AIIMS') to proceed against respondent No. 1-employee was legally not sustainable. Accordingly the proceedings pursuant to the said sanction were quashed. The High Court was of the view that when the President who is the Chairman of the Governing Body had suggested that sanction was not to be granted, it was not open to the Governing Body to pass an order directing grant of sanction. The President had directed the matter to be placed before the Governing Body, it was incumbent upon the latter to examine that question alone and if a contrary view was to be taken, that was subject to passing of a reasoned order showing application of mind. Since that was not done, the order of the Governing Body was vulnerable and deserved to be nullified. Further the order of suspension, whic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC3757; (2004)4CompLJ108(SC); 2004(3)CTC63; (2004)188CTR(SC)297; 2004(93)ECC353; 2004(167)ELT3(SC); [2004]267ITR9(SC); [2004(4)JCR66(SC)]; JT2004(4)SC568; (2004)3MLJ
AR. Lakshmanan, J.1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 30.04.2001 in Writ Petition No. 1617 of 1998 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras whereby the Division Bench of the Madras High Court dismissed the writ petition of the appellant-Association and held Sections 66, 67(o) of the Finance Act, 1994 and Rule 2(1)(d)(ix) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 and other provisions related to Kalyana Mandapmam ams and Mandapmam -Keepers to be intra vires of the Constitution of India.2. The appellant is an Association of various Kalyana Mandapmam ams bearing Registration No. 513 of 1992. The appellant-Association has been formed to protect the interest of the owners of Kalyana Mandapmam ams in the city of Madras and elsewhere in the State of Tamil Nadu. The owners of Kalyana Mandapmam ams/Mandapmam -Keepers let out Mandapmam as/premises to the clients. In addition to letting out the Kalyana Mandapmam s, the Mandapmam Keepers also provide other facilities...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2004(93)ECC241; 2004(167)ELT131(SC); JT2004(Suppl1)SC7; 2004(4)SCALE431; (2004)4SCC367
N. Santosh Hegde, J.1. These appeals are preferred by the Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, against an order made by the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal, South Zonal Bench at Madras (the Tribunal). The short question that arises for our consideration in these cases are whether the Tribunal was justified in allowing duty credit, at a rate claimed by the respondent under the Passbook Scheme in regard to the import of Vitamin Mixes in favour of the respondent by reversing the order of the Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Chennai, dated 5.2.1998 and accepting the order of the Commissioner of Appeals ?2. The Assistant Commissioner of Customs by his order dated 5.2.1998 held that the value accepted by the Department at US $ 8.2 per kg. for Vitamin Mix imported for the purpose of passbook credit against the exports made of prawns and fish products is correct, hence, he rejected the claim of the respondent for fixing the said value at US $ 36 per kg. In an appeal filed ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2004SC2438; JT2004(5)SC334; RLW2004(2)SC290; 2004(4)SCALE596; (2004)6SCC207
Ashok Bhan, J.1. These appeals have been filed against a common judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, wherein the High Court has set aside the order of the revisional authority (Commissioner, Ferozpur) and cancelled the sale made by Tehsildar(Sales) in favour of the appellants.2. The facts of all the cases are similar and presently the facts are taken from the appeal of Gurcharan Singh son of Mohan Singh (hereinafter referred to as the 'appellant'). Appellant applied for transfer of land measuring 24 kanals 13 marlas being 1/4th share of land measuring 98 kanals 12 marlas comprising Khasra No. 136M/7(8-0), 8(8-0), 9(8-0), 6/2(4- 4), 14(7-9), 15/1(2-3), 15/2(2-18), 17/1(4-2), 17/2(1-10), 24/2(2-12), 19(8- 0), 21/2(5-7), 22/1(6-6), 139M/1/1(5-11), 2/1(0-710/1(0-2), 136M/12(8-0), 13(8-0), 18/1(0-1), 18/2(7-3), 23/2(0-17), situated in village Khai, Tehsil Ferozpur on the ground that he was in continuous possession of this land since Khariff 1989. The case recommended by the Tehsil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2004(1)ARBLR599(SC); 2004(2)JKJ1[SC]; JT2004(5)SC142; 2004(4)SCALE418; (2004)5SCC698
Y.K. Sabharwal, J.1. The main issue to be determined in these appeals is whether 563 articles lying in 'Toshakhana' (Treasury of the State of Jammu & Kashmir) can be declared as the private property of the appellant or this issue deserves fresh determination by Government of India or it be referred to arbitration for adjudication. The background under which the issue has come up for consideration may first be noticed.2. The appellant is son of Maharaja Hari Singh, ex-ruler of Jammu and Kashmir. An instrument of accession of Jammu and Kashmir was Executed by Maharaja Hari Singh on 26th October, 1947. The articles in question comprising of jewellery and gold articles etc. were transferred from Toshakhana at Jammu to Toshakhana at Srinagar on 17th September, 1951. Maharaja Hari Singh died on 26th April, 1961. During his lifetime, Maharaja Hari Singh did not claim the articles in question as private property. The Government of India, in pursuance of Clause (22) of Article 366 of the Consti...
Tag this Judgment!