Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2006SC1471; 2006(4)BomCR851; (SCSuppl)2006(2)CHN149; [2006(3)JCR77(SC)]; JT2006(2)SC620; (2006)143PLR667; 2006(2)SCALE531; (2006)2SCC724
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. The father of the respondent herein was the owner of a shop in which the appellant was inducted as a tenant on 1st April, 1972. The monthly rent payable in relation to the said tenanted premises was Rs. 700/-. The original landlord, the father of the respondent having died on 5th March, 1979, the respondent along with his four sisters, became the owner of the said tenanted premises. He was an employee of Hero Honda Motors Limited. He retired from service having attained the age of superannuation. One year after his retirement, he filed an application under Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent and Eviction) Act, 1973 (`the Act') for eviction of the appellant from the shop in question on the ground of his bona fide personal requirement, i.e., for the purpose of running wholesale business in Ayurvedic medicines. The said application was dismissed by the Rent Controller holding that the bona fide requirement of the respondent in respect of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2006(2)SCALE625; (2006)9SCC282; 2006(1)LC389(SC)
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal is directed against the judgments and orders dated 06.10.2005 and 10.10.2005 passed by a learned Single Judge of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in First Appeal No. 988 of 2005 whereby and whereunder the appeal preferred by the Appellants herein from a judgment and decree dated 07.04.2005 passed by the Extra Assistant Judge, was dismissed.3. The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute. The Church of Brethren General Board (India) (CBGB) is a trust registered under the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950. It has a scheme of trust for administration, management including indicating mode of succession for appointment of trustees. In 1971 the Church of Brethren General Board (India) came into existence, which was registered in 1971. A public trust known as 'Church of North India' (CNI) was also registered before the Charity Commissioner in the year 1980-81. Yet another trust known as 'First District Church of Brethren' was registered under ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2006SC1319; 2006CriLJ1629; 2006(3)CTC193; I(2006)DMC471SC; JT2006(2)SC607; 2006(I)OLR(SC)610; 2006(2)SCALE482; (2006)3SCC161
S.B. Sinha, J. 1. The Appellant was convicted on a charge of commission of an offence under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life as also a fine of Rs. 5000/- by a judgment and order dated 10.01.2001 passed by Additional Sessions Court Kanyakumari District at Nagercoil in S.C. No. 183 of 1999.2. The deceased was the wife of the Appellant. They were not in good terms. The deceased nurtured grudge against him on the belief that the Appellant was having affairs with another woman (PW-12) who is wife of his eider brother (PW-11). On 4.10.1998 at about 10.45 a.m., some children had been witnessing television in the house of the Appellant. They came out therefrom stating that the deceased had asked them to go out of the house and bolted the door from inside. Upon hearing the same. PWs 1, 2 and the Appellant herein went back and broke open the door. Allegedly, the Appellant had poured kerosene on her and set fire to the deceased.3. It is ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2006(2)AWC1759(SC); [2006(109)FLR223]; (2006)2MLJ416(SC); 2006(2)SCALE560; (2006)9SCC256; 2006(2)SLJ485(SC)
S.B. Sinha, J.1. This appeal is directed against a judgment and order dated 14.07.2003 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana in CWP No.14261 of 2000 dismissing the writ petition filed by the Appellant herein questioning an order dated 24.08.2000 by reason whereof his offer for voluntary retirement was accepted.2. The Appellant was appointed as a Constable in Haryana Police. In 1992, he was promoted as Head Constable. He allegedly had been on unauthorized leave. The Station House Officer made a report to the superiors about his behavior and conduct. He was placed under suspension, whereafter a departmental proceeding was initiated against him. During the pendency of the said enquiry, according to the Appellant, when he was called to the office of the Superintendent of Police on 29.05.2000, filed an application wherein he, inter alia, expressed his intention to go for voluntary retirement with effect from 31.08.2000 in the following terms:Most respectfully I want to bring in your ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2006SC3548; 2006(2)AWC1470(SC); JT2006(3)SC48; (2006)IILLJ219SC; 2006(2)SCALE631; (2006)3SCC276; 2006(3)SLJ441(SC)
S.B. Sinha, J.1. These two appeals involving common questions of law and fact and arising out of the same judgment were taken up for hearing together and are being disposed of by this common judgment. Sheo Shanker Lal Srivastava, Appellant in Civil Appeal No.7539 of 2003, was appointed as a Stenographer in the Office of the Consolidation Commissioner, U.P. in the year 1963. He was deputed to work with the Lok Ayukta in the year 1978. One Arvind Kumar Singhal, Respondent No.3, was appointed as a Typist in the said office in the year 1980. Since 1988 he has been working as a Public Relations Officer. The post of Personal Assistant, which the Appellant was holding was redesignated as Private Secretary. He was later on given a higher scale of pay of Rs.3,000-4,500/- by way of promotion with effect from 21.07.1995. Owing to certain acts of misconduct, the Appellant had been censured and warned. The Appellant was asked to hand over the key of his almirah but he refused to do so. He also used...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2006SC1288; 2006(1)ALD(Cri)653; 2006(2)AWC1749(SC); II(2006)BC515(SC); 2006(3)BomCR98; [2006]130CompCas390(SC); (2006)4CompLJ419(SC); 2006CriLJ1683; 2006(2)CTC57; JT2006
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted. 2. The appellant herein filed a complaint petition in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Birbhum at Suri being CC No. 339 of 2004 alleging inter alia therein that several cheques of diverse sums issued by the respondent herein had been dishonoured, and, thus, they committed an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instrument Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 3. The appellant herein entered into a contract with the Respondent No. 1 herein (Company) for supply of stone chips. The company used to hand over post-dated cheques to the appellant towards the price of stone chips as also transport, handling, postage and other charges. The Company had issued six cheques of the following description in favour of the appellant:Sl.No.ChequeNo.DatedAmount1.45599710.06.2004Rs.5,33,7952.45599810.07.2004Rs.5,33,7953.45599910.08.2004Rs.5,33,7954.45599310.06.2004Rs.6,49,0855.45599410.07.2004Rs.6,49,0856.45599510.08.2004Rs.6,49,085Total...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2006SC1301; 2006(1)ALD(Cri)614; II(2006)BC391(SC); 2006(3)BomCR621; (2006)2CALLT42(SC); [2006]130CompCas341(SC); 127(2006)DLT747(SC); 2006(197)ELT18(SC); JT2006(3)SC421; (2006)4SCC278
P.K. Balasubramanyan, J.Leave granted in SLP (Crl.) No. 5892/2004.1. On receipt of notices under the Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the FERA) for showing cause why adjudication proceedings for imposition of penalty under Sections 50 and 51 of the FERA be not initiated against the appellant bank and some of its officers and further notices under Section 61 of the FERA giving an opportunity to the first appellant bank and its officers of showing that they had the necessary permission from the concerned authority for the transaction involved, the appellant bank filed Writ Petition No. 1972 of 1994, seeking a declaration that the relevant sections of the FERA are unconstitutional, being violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and for writs of prohibition restraining the authorities under the FERA from proceeding with the proposed adjudication and the proposed prosecution, in terms of the Act. Yet another writ petition was filed by the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2006SC1480; 2006(4)BomCR834; [2006(109)FLR291]; JT2006(3)SC23; (2006)IILLJ107SC; 2006(2)SCALE584; (2006)3SCC690; 2006(2)SLJ433(SC)
S.B. Sinha, J. 1 The appellant herein is a company incorporated and registered under the Companies Act, 1956. It deals in production and supply of seeds to the farmers. The respondent herein was appointed as an Assistant Field Officer. While he was working at Nanded, misconducts committed by him came to the notice of his superior officer. A preliminary enquiry was conducted thereabout whereafter a charge sheet was issued to him. The Enquiry Officer held:(1) It is proved that Shri H.D. Jadhao AFO has violated the instructions of D.M. Nanded for distribution of F/seeds on credit to the eligible seed growers of Deglur and Mukhed He is also responsible for non recovery of outstanding amount of Rs. 19,938.50 from the seed growers towards cost of F/seeds, Inspection fees & Application fees etc. out of this amount Shri Gorthekar is responsible for non deposition of Rs. 2675/- as per his undertaking & hence Shri Jadhao stands responsible for non recovery of net amount of Rs. 17,263.59.For the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2006SC2965; 2006(2)AWC1763(SC); (SCSuppl)2006(3)CHN13; [2006(3)JCR168(SC)]; JT2006(3)SC221; RLW2007(1)SC290; 2006(2)SCALE699; (2006)4SCC432
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is directed against the Judgment and Order dated 11th September, 1988 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Jharkhand High Court, Ranchi in Appeal from Appellate Decree No. 176 of 1988 whereby and whereunder a second appeal preferred by the respondents herein from a Judgment and Decree dated 18.7.1988 passed by the 6th Additional District Judge, Palamau at Daltonganj in Title Appeal No. 26 of 1987 setting aside the Judgment and Decree dated 27.6.1987 passed by Munsif, Daltonganj in Title Suit No. 11 of 1986, was allowed. 3. The respondents herein filed a suit against the appellant, inter alia, for a declaration that the transaction dated 24.6.1977, although ostensibly expressed in the shape of a deed of sale, was in fact a transaction of usufructuary mortgage and for a further declaration that the said transaction stands redeemed under Section 12 of the Bihar Money Lenders Act, 1974. The respondents herein further sought for a decree dir...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2006SC3572; 2006(3)ALT5(SC); 2006(2)AWC1597(SC); 2006(3)CTC566; [2006(3)JCR87(SC)]; JT2006(3)SC515; 2006(3)MhLj531; 2006MPLJ434(SC); 2006(2)SCALE535; (2006)3SCC205
R.V. Arun Kumar, J.1. Leave granted in all these Special Leave Petitions.2. These appeals are directed against the judgment of the High Court whereby the High Court set aside the judgment of the Reference Court passed under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act and remanded the case to the Reference Court for fresh determination of the market value of the acquired land.3. Briefly, the facts are that a large tract of land was acquired vide a notification dated 14th August, 1987 under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act. The acquired land falls within the municipal limits of the city of Meerut (U.P.). The Special Land Acquisition Officer (SLAO) noted the potentiality of the acquired land for purposes of building activity in his award dated 22nd February, 1990. He however, fixed the market value of the acquired land at Rs. 30/- per square yard. A reference under Section 18 of the Act at the instance of the claimants was decided by the learned District Judge, Meerut vide judgment dated ...
Tag this Judgment!