L-NLProc/TathyaNyaya-and-FactLegalLlama-NyayaScrape-Datasets huggingface dataset:
Purshottam Das Tandon Dead By Lrs.& Anr vs Military Estate Officer & Ors

2. The elaborate facts will necessarily have to be recited for the purposes of bringing out the controversy involved and also to embark upon a scrutiny of the correctness of the impugned conclusions recorded by the High Court in the order under challenge.

3. The suit property is Bungalow No. 29, Chaitham Lines, Allahabad covered by Survey No. 143, Old Cantonment, Allahabad. There is no dispute that late Lala Manohar Lal grandfather of the present appellant had purchased the said property for a sum of Rs. 2900/- in a Court auction held on 25.11.1848. The auction sale was confirmed by the Court on 27.12.1848. The possession of the property of the predecessors-in-interest of the appellant and thereafter of the appellant is not in dispute.

11. The High Court, by the impugned order, has taken the view that the judgment and decree passed in the inter-pleader suit holding the appellant to be entitled to receive the rent in respect of the property would not operate as a res judicata so as to confer any finality to the issue of title in respect of the property. Thereafter, taking into account the judgment dated 06.07.1970 rendered by the High Court in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 175 of 1969, the High Court left the parties with the option of moving the civil court for adjudication of title. Accordingly, the writ petitions were dismissed.

The subject matter of the two proceedings i.e. inter-pleader suit and the appeals arising therefrom and the writ petitions filed by the appellant are, therefore, not directly and substantially the same so as to attract the principle of res judicata enshrined in Section 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Certainty of the above principle would not require us to trace the elaborate case law readily available on the subject.

15. Having regard to the nature of the dispute and the highly contentious issue raised, if in view of the earlier order dated 06.07.1970 passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.175 of 1969, the High Court had dismissed the Writ Petitions leaving it open for the appellant to avail the remedy of civil suit to get the title to the property adjudicated by a competent civil court, no fault, muchless any infirmity, can be found so as to warrant our interference. Accordingly, the civil appeal will have to be dismissed which we hereby do.

17. The above position has been emphasised for being kept in mind while dealing with all possible future litigations concerning the property in question without, of course, expressing any opinion on the merits of the claims/contention of any of the parties.
A.R. Dahiya vs Securities & Exchange Board Of ...

1 This Appeal assails the Judgment dated 19.4.2006 of the Securities Appellate Tribunal which upheld the order of the Securities and Exchange Board of India dated 1.8.2003. The factual matrix is that one Mr. V.P. Garg (hereinafter referred to as ‘Garg’) entered into an ‘Assisted Sector Agreement’ with the Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘HSIDC’) on 4.1.1993, for the purpose of setting up a modern resort hotel complex at Village Chowky, Tehsil Kalka, Haryana. The parties agreed to collaborate for the profitable implementation and operation of the project in the assisted sector through a company already incorporated by Garg under the name and style of Polo Hotels Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Target Company’). HSIDC extended a term loan to Garg and also subscribed to 3,00,000 shares of Rs. 10/- each of the Target Company. Clause 24 of the Agreement provided for buy-back of the shares of HSIDC. The said clause is reproduced for facility of reference:

4 On 20.4.1999, Garg and the Appellant entered into an agreement whereby the Appellant agreed to purchase the entire share capital of 28.09% held by Garg at the rate of Rs. 8.50 per fully paid up equity share. Since this acquisition was in excess of 15% of the total shareholding of the Target Company, the Regulations under the SEBI (Substantial Acquisition of Shares and Takeovers) Regulations, 1997, were attracted. In order to comply with the Regulations, the Appellant made a public announcement on 24.4.1999 making an offer to the remaining shareholders of the Target Company to purchase a minimum of 20% shares of the said company at an offer price of Rs. 8.75 per equity share.

18 We neither find any merit in the appeal, nor any infirmity in the order of SEBI dated 1.3.2003. Thus Appeal is dismissed.
Voluntary Health Ass. Of Punjab vs Union Of India & Ors

2. The grievance has a narrative, and it needs to be stated.

14. The Union of India was directed to file an affidavit of the Additional Secretary of Health and/or any other concerned Additional Secretary clearly stating what steps had been taken and on the basis of the steps taken, what results have been achieved. It was also directed that all the States shall file their responses through the concerned Health Secretaries. The direction further contained that the affidavits shall be comprehensive and must reflect sincerity and responsibility.

33. Keeping in view the deliberations made from time to time and regard being had to the purpose of the Act and the far reaching impact of the problem, we think it appropriate to issue the following directions in addition to the directions issued in the earlier order:-

(f) The Courts which deal with the complaints under the Act shall be fast tracked and the concerned High Courts shall issue appropriate directions in that regard.

(i) The Courts that deal with the complaints under the Act shall deal with the matters in promptitude and submit the quarterly report to the High Courts through the concerned Sessions and District Judge.

(l) The State Legal Services Authorities of the States shall give emphasis on this campaign during the spread of legal aid and involve the para-legal volunteers.

(m) The Union of India and the States shall see to it that appropriate directions are issued to the authorities of All India Radio and Doordarshan functioning in various States to give wide publicity pertaining to the saving of the girl child and the grave dangers the society shall face because of female foeticide.

(o) The States and Union Territories shall implement the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) (Six Months Training) Rules, 2014 forthwith considering that the training provided therein is imperative for realising the objects and purpose of this Act.

(p) As the Union of India and some States framed incentive schemes for the girl child, the States that have not framed such schemes, may introduce such schemes.

36. In our considered opinion, whenever there is an abuse of the process of the law, the individual can always avail the legal remedy. As we find, neither the validity of the Act nor the Rules has been specifically assailed in the writ petition. What has been prayed is to read out certain provisions and to add certain exceptions. We are of the convinced view that the averments of the present nature with such prayers cannot be entertained and, accordingly, we decline to interfere.

37. In the result, Writ Petition (Civil) No. 349 of 2006 stands disposed of in terms of the directions issued by us and Writ Petition (Civil) No. 575 of 2014 stands dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.

[Shiva Kirti Singh] New Delhi;

November 8, 2016
Trilok Singh Chauhan vs Ram Lal (Dead) Thr. Lrs.

2. Brief facts of the case, necessary to be noted for deciding this appeal are:

4. Parties led their evidences before the Trial Court including the documentary evidences. Trial Court after considering the evidences of the parties decided issue No. 1 in favour of the appellant that rate of rent is Rs.1500/- per month. Other issues were also decided in favour of the appellant, consequently, the Trial Court passed a decree of eviction against the respondent-tenant with balance amount of payment of rent and damages at the rate of Rs. 50/- per day.

15. Present is not a case where High Court set aside the finding of the Trial Court on any of above grounds where Revisional Court under Section 25 can interfere. High Court has not even referred to the reasons given by the Trial Court while coming to the conclusion that the rate of rent is Rs. 1500/ per month. We thus are of the view that judgment of the High Court is unsustainable.
Ic 29547 L Bobby Joseph vs Union Of India

1. The Appellant was granted Short Service Commission on 15.06.1969 and Permanent Commission on 15.06.1974. His promotion/seniority was fixed w.e.f. 12.08.1970. He voluntarily proceeded for his pre-mature retirement w.e.f. 15.07.1991 in the rank of Major. He was granted pension by an order dated 29.07.1991, as Major.

2. By an order dated 25.09.1991, the Appellant was granted substantive rank of Lt. Colonel. The Appellant sought for revision of pension as he was entitled for payment of pension applicable to the rank of Lt. Colonel 1 (TS) pursuant to the implementation of the 5 th Central Pay Commission. As the request made by the Appellant was rejected, he approached the Armed Forces Tribunal, Regional Bench, Kochi, which directed the reconsideration of the representation made by the Appellant.

3. By way of implementation of the direction issued by the Armed Forces Tribunal, the Respondent reconsidered the matter pertaining to the payment of pension applicable to the rank of Lt. Colonel (TS) to the Appellant. By observing that the Appellant did not complete 21 years of reckonable service which was required for grant of pension to the Lt. Colonel, as per the Army Order dated 20.03.1990, the Respondents held that the Appellant was not entitled for payment of pension applicable to the Lt. Colonel (TS). The Military Secretary Branch, M3-8A Integrated Headquarters of Ministry of Defence (Army) South Block, New Delhi was of the opinion that the Appellant fell short of the requisite 21 years by a period of 30 days.

8. For the aforementioned reasons, we allow the Appeal with costs, assessed at Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) which shall be payable to the Appellant within a period of four weeks.
Union Of India (Uoi) vs Ananto (Dead) And Anr.

3. The background facts in a nutshell are as follows:

Page 1156 (4) Every Lok Adalat shall, while determining any reference before it under this Act, act with utmost expedition to arrive at a compromise or settlement between the parties and shall be guided by the principles of justice, equity, fair play and other legal principles.

(5) Where no award is made by the Lok Adalat on the ground that no compromise or settlement could be arrived at between the parties, the record of the case shall be returned by it to the Court, from which the reference has been received under Sub-section (1) for disposal in accordance with law.

(6) Where no award is made by the Lok Adalat on the ground that no compromise or settlement could be arrived at between the parties, in a matter referred to in Sub-section (2), that Lok Adalat shall advice the parties to seek remedy in a Court.

8. The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent without any orders as to costs.
Tara Chand vs Sagarbai @ Chaiyalibai

5. As the demand contained in the said notice was not acceded to, a suit for redemption of the mortgage was filed by the respondent.

8. The High Court, however, by reason of the impugned judgment allowed the second appeal preferred by the respondent herein.

23. Such implied surrender may be either:-

33. In this case also, there is a clear intention on the part of the mortgagee only to retain his interest in that capacity and not as a tenant. The parties altered their position, A new relationship was created. It was acted upon and in that view of the matter, we are of the opinion that the High Court was correct in its view. There is, thus, no merit in this appeal which is dismissed accordingly with costs. Counsel fee assessed at Rs. 10,000/-.
Union Bank Of India And Ors vs M.T. Latheesh

The Scheme further provides the system for computation of the financial condition of the concerned family including the various heads of recurring and fixed incomes receivable by the family to determine their entitlement for the compassionate employment. It is pertinent to mention that the pension was not payable in the Bank prior to 1994 when an option for the same was given to the employees for the first time. The availability of pension to the family of the deceased employee is also one of financial parameters for computation of the financial condition of the family because, as aforesaid, the said option was exercised by less than half of the employees. The said Scheme was subsequently amended in 2003 to provide cash compensation in some of the deserving cases, who were otherwise qualified as per income norms, when the compassionate was not feasible.

The father of the respondent who was working as a Clerk-cum-Cashier in the Bank died on 12.8.2001. He was a pension optee.

In the case of those three persons who were provided with compassionate employment the net terminal benefits of the deceased employee after making deductions from the liabilities towards the bank for housing loan and other loan was Rs. 15,684/- Rs. Nil and Rs. Nil respectively. The compassionate employment to the persons Ms. K.K. Rasanna was provided on reconsideration of her case as per the directions of the High Court vide judgment dated 21.03.2003 in writ petition No. 22190/2002 filed by her. The other two cases came up for consideration under the new scheme where on adopting the criterion fixed in the new scheme, the total income of the family after clubbing the monthly pension and the interest income on the aforesaid lump sum terminal benefits was less than 60% of the last drawn salary of the said employee and therefore the widow became eligible to either a lump sum payment to make up the deflict of 60% or appointment under new compassionate employment scheme on being found suitable.

The respondent filed an additional affidavit on 25.11.2004 in the High Court. The High Court during the course of the hearing of the writ appeal granted permission to the respondent to file an additional affiadvit mentioning additional facts in relation to the appointment made by the Bank under the scheme though terminal and other benefits were given to the dependants of deceased employees. He furnished certain details in the said affidavit.

In the present case, by declining the application submitted by the respondent after the proper consideration of the same in the light of the relevant parameters the appellant-Bank cannot be said to have acted in an arbitrary manner regardless of the constitutional principles.

In the result, the appeal is allowed and the orders passed by the learned Single Judge and of the Division Bench are set aside. However, there will be no order as to costs.
North West Karnataka Road Transport ... vs H.H.Pujar

3. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:

checking of cash bag of the respondent and non-examination of ticketless passengers. The order was challenged before the High Court. By order dated 21.10.2005, the learned Single Judge held that the order was correct so far as setting aside dismissal order is concerned, direction for reinstatement and continuity of service and consequential benefits. However, the direction relating to back wages was set aside. The writ appeal as noted above, was dismissed on the ground that the same was not maintainable.

2. Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment of a Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court in the writ appeal no.3830/2005 dismissing appeal against the order of learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.17519/2000. The writ appeal was dismissed as not maintainable and, therefore, the challenge in the present is essential to the order of learned Single Judge.

9. As rightly contended by the appellant since fairness of the proceedings was conceded and the respondent admitted that he had not issued tickets to 20 passengers, their non- examination is really of no consequence.

11. The appeal is allowed without any order as to costs.

..........................................J. (Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT) .........................................J. (P. SATHASIVAM) New Delhi, July 18, 2008 7
Committee Of Management Through Its ... vs The Director Of Higher Education

Facts 2. On 12th January, 1988 an advertisement was issued by the College for appointment to the post of Lecturers. It was stated in the advertisement that the appointment would be on an ad hoc basis and that C.A. Nos.917-918 etc. Page 1 of 11 the application for appointment should be received by the College on or before 31st January, 1988.

3. There is no dispute that the respondents did not apply in terms of the advertisement dated 12th January, 1988. However, much later, each of them submitted a letter on different dates between August 1988 and December 1989 to the effect that they had come to know that a post of a part-time Lecturer is lying vacant in the College and as such they may be considered for appointment against the part-time post. The College considered and accepted the application sent by the respondents and they were appointed to the post of part-time Lecturer for a fixed period of three months on a fixed salary. They continued as such till the end of April 1990.

11. Both these writ petitions, that is Writ Petition No. 27057 of 1996 and Writ Petition No. 33357 of 1997 came to be heard and disposed of by the High Court by a judgment and order dated 12th November, 1998. The writ petition filed by the respondents was allowed while the writ petition filed by the College was dismissed by the High Court.

(i) a member of the Commission nominated by the Government who shall be the Chairman;

(ii) an officer not below the rank of Special Secretary, to be nominated by the Secretary to the Government of Uttar Pradesh in the Higher Education Department;

C.A. Nos.917-918 etc. Page 9 of 11

(iii) the Director;

shall consider the cases of every such ad hoc teacher and on being satisfied about his eligibility in view of the provisions of sub-section (1), and his work and conduct on the basis of his record, recommend his name to the Management of the College for appointment under sub-section (1).

(3) to (5) xxx xxx xxx”

23. A bare perusal of these provisions makes it quite clear that they deal with the procedure of ad hoc selection and regularization of those selected on an ad hoc basis. These provisions have absolutely no application to the appointment of part-time Lecturers or their regularization. In fact the statute does not at all provide for regularization of part-time Lecturers.

Conclusion

………………………J (Madan B. Lokur) ……………………..J (Deepak Gupta) New Delhi;

December 5, 2017 C.A. Nos.917-918 etc. Page 11 of 11
Babulal Badriprasad Varma vs Surat Municipal Corpn. & Ors

The Government of Gujarat in exercise of its power conferred upon it under Section 65 of the Act made a scheme in respect of the town of Umra, Surat on 1.06.1999.

Plot Nos. 17/7 and 17/8 were owned by Respondent No. 4 herein. Appellant was a tenant under the said respondent in respect of Plot No. 17/8 admeasuring 1067 sq.m. He used to run a business of marble and stone therein. A road widening project was proposed in terms of the said scheme. Notices therefor were issued both to the appellant as also the respondent no.

5. The validity and/ or legality of the said notice was questioned by the appellant by filing a writ petition in the High Court of Gujarat inter alia contending that the purported final allotment of plot No. 165 in favour of 5 the respondent no. 3 and allotment of final plot No. 157 in favour of the respondent no. 4 were made without issuing any notice as envisaged under Sections 52 and 53 of the Act.

In view of the above, the issue is whether it was open to him to assert his purported right to special notice in respect of the final allotment in the instant case given the fact that he did not pursue his objections to the draft scheme and subsequently did not object/participate during the proceedings for re-allotment.

[emphasis supplied] Applying the above principles to the present case, it must be held that the benefit of notice provided under the Act and Rules being for the benefit of the Appellant in which no public interests are involved, he has waived the same.

36. Mr. Lalit submits that his client is ready and willing to pay some reasonable amount to the respondent No. 3 in whose favour plot No. 165 has been finally allotted. Issuance of any such direction, in our opinion, is legally impermissible.

37. We, therefore, are of the opinion that in this case, no relief can be granted to the appellant. He may, however, take recourse to such remedy which is available with him in law including one by filing a suit or making a representation before the State.

38. For the reasons aforementioned, the appeal is dismissed. No costs.

May 02, 2008
Sumersinbh Umedsinh Rajput @ Sumersinh vs State Of Gujarat

On being analyzing barrel wash (before performing test firing in this laboratory) of the said revolver the presence of residuals of nitrate and lead of the fire arms were seen. It suggests that firing was done from the revolver of the said Sample D before it has been brought to this laboratory.

5. The complainant examined himself as PW-8. One Amratlal (PW-2) who is the PSI of CID and had allegedly accompanied the complainant sought to support the prosecution case. However, he did not have any personal knowledge about the incident. He heard thereabout only from the complainant. In regard to seizure of the article, PW-7 Khengarbhai stated:

10. According to PW-8, he came to know about the firing on hearing of sound of fire. He had immediately put his finger in the trigger of the revolver and caught the appellant from his wrist. If the finger of the complainant himself was on the trigger of the revolver, it is difficult to believe that the appellant was responsible for the act complained of. According to him, seizure took place at the place of occurrence but panch witnesses contradicted him as according to them, they were made to sign the seizure list only at the police station. In his statement before the investigating officer under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, PW-8 stated:

15. If the prosecution case of attempt to murder of PW-8 by gun-shot injury fails, resultantly, the prosecution under Section 25 of the Arms Act would also fail.

16. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of this case, we are of the opinion that no case has been made out even under Section 353 of the Indian Penal Code. The appeal is allowed. Appellant is directed to be set at liberty unless wanted in connected with any other case.
Sasikumar vs State Of Tamil Nadu

4. The trial court placed reliance on the evidence of PWs 5, 6 and 7 and on the dying declaration recorded to hold the appellant guilty. In appeal, the High Court upheld the conviction under Section 302 IPC while upsetting the conviction in terms of Section 307 IPC.

8. This is a case where the basis of conviction of the accused by the trial Court was the dying declarations. The situation in which a person is on his deathbed, being exceedingly solemn, serene and grave, is the reason in law to accept the veracity of his statement. It is for this reason that the requirements of oath and cross-examination are dispensed with. Besides, should the dying declaration be excluded, it will result in miscarriage of justice because the victim being generally the only eye-witness in a serious crime, the exclusion of the statement would leave the Court without a scrap of evidence.

10. Above being the position, the conclusions of the Trial Court and the High Court placing reliance on the dying declaration cannot be faulted. We find no merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed.