Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2008SC3000; (SCSuppl)2008(4)CHN694; 2008AIRSCW5055; (2008)CLT70; JT2008(8)SC276; 2008(10)SCALE449
C.K. Thakker, J.1. This appeal is filed by the Eastern Coalfields Ltd. (`Company' for short) against an order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Calcutta on January 28, 2002 dismissing Review Petition filed by the appellant herein.2. The facts of the case are that the appellant is `Government Company' under Section 617 of the Companies Act, 1956. A scheme was formulated by the Company to offer employment to a person who is a land loser for 1 acre of land which has been acquired, purchased or used by the Company. Subsequently, the policy was changed and it was also provided that those who do not intend to get employment may be offered 800 Metric Tons (MTs) of coal in lieu of employment of a family member whose one acre of land has been acquired, purchased or used by the Company. The policy was again modified in 1996 and entitlement was increased to 1600 MTs.3. It is the case of the Company that it purchased land of the respondent admeasuring 1.26 acres and registered sale...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2008SC3006; 2008(56)BLJR2598; 2008CriLJ3881; II(2008)DMC363SC; [2008(4)JCR125(SC)]; JT2008(8)SC227; 2008(3)KLT576; 2008(10)SCALE602; (2008)9SCC632; 2008AIRSCW5063; 2008(4)LH(SC)2860
C.K. THAKKER, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The present appeal is filed by appellant No.1-wife and appellant No.2-daughter of respondent herein-Krishan Bhagwan Pathak. The appellants have approached this Court being aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna on May 3, 2007 in Criminal Revision No. 67 of 2007. By the said order, the High Court partly allowed the revision filed by the respondent-husband and modified the order passed by the Court of Principal Judge, Family Court, Bhojpur on October 30, 2006 in Miscellaneous Case No. 280 of 1997, renumbered as No.1 of 2005. 3. Shortly stated the facts of the case are that the marriage between appellant No.1 and the respondent was solemnized according to Hindu rites, customs and ceremonies before more than three decades. From the said wedlock, nine children were born. Appellant No.2-Kumari Babli is the youngest among all and she is the only child staying with her mother-appellant No.1. At the time of filin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2008SC3194; JT2008(8)SC615; (2008)152PLR210; RLW2008(4)SC3160; 2008(10)SCALE507; 2008AIRSCW5390; 2008(8)SCC593; 2008(4)LH(SC)2872
Aftab Alam, J.1. Heard counsel for the parties.2. Leave granted.3. This appeal arises for an eviction proceeding instituted by the appellant, the landlord, in terms of Section 13 of the Haryana Urban (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973. The eviction of the respondent, the tenant, was sought on a number of grounds, of which only personal necessity now remains relevant, and we, accordingly, propose to take note of facts germane to that ground. The Rent Controller, Faridabad rejected the Eviction Petition (24 of 1998) filed by the appellant by order dated 26 August, 2004. The Appellate Authority, however, allowed the appellant's appeal (Rent Appeal No. 6 of 2004) and ordered the respondent's eviction by judgment dated 28 March, 2005. The High Court in turn, set aside the appellate order and restored the judgment and order passed by the Rent Controller vide. the judgment and order dated 3 April, 2007 in Civil Revision No. 2344 of 2005 (O & M), preferred by the respondent. The High Court...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008(10)SCALE495; (2008)16VST468(SC); 2008AIRSCW5530
Arijit Pasayat, J.1. Leave granted.2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Kerala High Court dismissing two revision petitions filed by the appellants i.e. M/s. Pioma Industries, and M/s. Rasna Pvt. Ltd. The assessment years involved are 1997-98 and 1999-2000. The dispute lies within a very narrow compass.3. The question is whether 'Rasna' is taxable as a `beverage' or `non-alcoholic drink'. For the two assessment years the relevant entries were Entry 56 and Entry 87 respectively for the year 1997-98 and for the year 1999-2000 Entry 124A, 141 and 97 respectively. The assessing officer, the first Appellate Authority, the Tribunal and the High Court held that 'Rasna' is to be taxed as `non- Alcoholic drink'.4. According to the learned Counsel for the appellants, `Rasna' is a powder which is nothing but a soft drink concentrate and cannot be taken to be as `non-alcoholic drink'. It is nothing but a fruit in a powder form and a vegetative food preparation....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2009SC824:2008AIRSCW8121
ORDER1. Delay condoned.2. Having heard the learned Counsel for the parties and after going through the impugned order, we dispose of these applications and special leave petitions by passing the following order:A. The Learned Counsel for the State of Madhya Pradesh submits on instructions that Rs. 2,80,000/- has already been deposited in the Reference Court but the balance amount of Rs. 94,00,978/- has not yet been deposited, for which State seeks some more time to deposit the aforesaid balance amount of Rs. 94,00,978/-.B. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we extend the time to deposit the balance amount of Rs. 94,00,978/- in the Reference Court till 31st of August, 2008.C. There shall be an unconditional stay of all further execution proceedings till 31st of August, 2008.D. If the aforesaid balance amount of Rs. 94,00,978/- is not deposited within the time specified hereinabove, the interim order granted shall stand automatically vacated.E. The Respondents shall be ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR2008SC3266; 2008(5)ALLMR(SC)978; 2008(56)BLJR2544; [2008(118)FLR879]; JT2008(8)SC265; (2009)ILLJ215SC; (2008)6MLJ649(SC); 2008(10)SCALE431
D.K. Jain, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal, by special leave, has been preferred by the Central Bank of India, a public sector undertaking, against the judgment and order dated 6th April, 2005, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, in Writ Petition No. 2558 of 2003. By the impugned judgment, the writ petition filed by the first respondent, hereinafter referred to as `the employee', challenging the order of termination of her services has been allowed with a direction to reinstate her with continuity in service but without back-wages.3. The employee was appointed to the post of Clerk in the appellant-Bank with effect from 18th March, 1981, against a post reserved for 'Scheduled Tribes', as she had claimed to be belonging to 'Thakur Scheduled Tribe', on the basis of a caste certificate issued on 4th December, 1979. In March, 1991, she was promoted as Junior Officer. It appears that pursuant to the instructions issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Fin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2008(8)SC295; 2008(10)SCALE551
Arijit Pasayat, J.1. Challenge in this appeal is to the order passed by Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court dismissing several writ petitions. Three writ petitions were filed by the State of Uttar Pradesh through Secretary, Revenue Department, Smt. Lalita Chaturvedi and Ors. and by G.C. Mittal. These writ petitions were numbered as Civil Misc. Writ Petition Nos. 16775 of 1985, 9162 of 1987 and 9386 of 1987 respectively.2. In these three civil writ petitions, the disputed subject matter is Khasra No. 519, village Surjepur, Agra whose total area is four bighas one biswa which is recorded as property of Abdul Wahid in revenue record. At the time of division of the country, Abdul Wahid had migrated to Pakistan in 1947-48 and his aforesaid property, (Khasra No. 519, village Surjepur, total area four bighas one biswa) was declared as evacuee property and under Administration of Evacuee Property Ordinance, 1949 (Ordinance No. 1 1949) it vested in the Custodian of Evacuee Properties. La...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008(10)SCALE445; (2008)11SCC377; 2008AIRSCW5400; 2008(3)Crimes186; 2008(5)LH(SC)3194
Arijit Pasayat, J.1. These appeals are directed against the common judgment of a Division Bench of the Punjab & Haryana High Court disposing of appeals i.e. Criminal Appeal No. 527DB of 1995 and 547DB of 1995. The main judgment is in Criminal Appeal No. 527 DB of 1995. In these appeals two appellants were convicted by learned Sessions Judge, Rohtak in Sessions Case No. 13 of 1995.2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:On 18th January 1995, at about 8 or 8.30 a.m., Vijay since deceased, was going from his house towards the bazar for shopping and had gone a short distance, when the three accused Shibu alias Shiv Narain, Surender Singh armed with a pharsa and Bhagat Singh armed with a sword accosted him and Shibu told him that they were going to teach him a lesson for the slaps that had been given to him on 16th January, 1995. Shibu then caught hold of Vijay in his grip, whereas Bhagat Singh inflicted a sword blow on his left thigh, while Surender accused aimed a blow on his leg...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : JT2008(8)SC345; 2008(10)SCALE696; 2009(2)SLJ297(SC); 2008(6)Supreme21; 2008(5)LH(SC)3296
ORDER DATED 28.08.2003.YEAR 1996List of 120 candidates (pg. 193-197) all categoriesi) Break-up of 120 candidatesS.No.Requisition received from the GovernmentTotal No. of candidatesGeneralScheduled CastesScheduled TribesOther Backward classesRemarks11205222Nil46YEAR 1997List of 154 candidates (pg. 206-212) all categoriesi) Break-up of 154 candidatesS.No.Requisition received from the GovernmentTotal No. of candidatesGeneralScheduled CastesScheduled TribesOther Backward classesRemarks115412107Nil262Merit List revised on 14.07.200615812507Nil26YEAR 1999List of 98 candidates all categoriesi) Break-up of 98 candidatesS.No.Requisition received from the GovernmentTotal No. of CandidatesGeneralScheduled CastesScheduled TribesOther Backward classesRemarks1985314Nil31Note: In compliance of Hon'ble Supreme Court order dated 28.08.2003 only 50 candidates recommended from the eligible candidates of the year 1996 as per vacancy informed by State Government on 19.09.2002.Break-up for year 1996 vacanci...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2008(10)SCALE493; (2008)8SCC283; (2008)3SCC(Cri)487.
Arijit Pasayat, J.1. Though the petition was filed as a writ petition and was numbered as WP (Crl.) No. 192 of 2005, by order dated 1.4.2005 it was noted that in the notice it shall be indicated that the writ petition shall be treated as a Special Leave Petition against the judgment of the High Court and shall be disposed of in the light of this Court's judgment in Ghapoo Yadav and Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh : 2003CriLJ1536 .2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:Five persons faced trial for alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the 'IPC'). The trial Court convicted all the five accused persons including the appellant in this Writ Petition and sentenced him to undergo RI for life. All the accused persons preferred appeal which was numbered as Criminal Appeal No. 718 of 1989 before the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur. The High Court by its judgment dated 18.4.2001 dismissed the appea...
Tag this Judgment!