L-NLProc/TathyaNyaya-and-FactLegalLlama-NyayaScrape-Datasets huggingface dataset:
Md. Masood Alam @ Md. Masood vs State Of Bihar

1. This is a rather unfortunate case. The first informant P.W. 10 is the father of the appellant. As per the prosecution story, P.W. 10 had contracted a second marriage with the deceased Nazeema Khatoon sometime before the incident and she was pregnant as on that date. It appears that the appellant was upset with the second marriage of his father as he felt that his property would now be divided into two parts. As per the prosecution story, on the 2nd of March, 1995, at about 7:45p.m., PW 10 went to the village Mosque for namaz and while he was offering prayers he received information that his wife had been killed. He rushed back home and found that the appellant, his wife and his mother in law who had been present in the house Crl.A. No. 711 of 2008 2 when he had gone to the mosque, were missing. He, accordingly, lodged a report against these three persons as well as Mohd. Masi and Mohd. Shaukat who had been encouraging the appellant to sort out his step mother. The trial court relied on the evidence of P.W. 9 Tarsem who claimed to be an eye witness of the occurrence and after noticing some of the contradictions and differences vis-`-vis his evidence and that of P.W. 10, gave the benefit of doubt to four of the accused, but convicted the appellant for offences punishable under Section 302 and 120B of the IPC. The matter was thereafter taken in appeal by the accused. The High Court has given a finding that the presence of P.W. 9 had to be ruled out as he lived in a village some distance away, but relying on the circumstances of the case has arrived at the conclusion that it was the appellant who had been involved in the murder. The matter is before us after the grant of special leave.

3. A bare reading of the aforesaid extract would reveal that the circumstance culled out are germane to the matter and do reflect that the appellant was guilty of the offence. It cannot be forgotten that PW 10 was none other than the father of the appellant. We are, therefore, of the opinion that no case for interference is made out. The appeal is dismissed.

4. Fee of the learned Amicus is fixed at ` 7,000/-

.........................J [HARJIT SINGH BEDI] ........................J [CHANDRAMAULI KR. PRASAD] NEW DELHI APRIL 19, 2011.
Union Of India vs Dhiraj (D) Thru Lrs

While enhancing the compensation awarded to the claimant, the High Court fixed it at ` 345/- per square yard. In addition to the enhanced market value, the claimant was also held entitled to the solatium at the rate of 30% and interest at the rate of 9% per annum for a period of one year from the date of the Collector taking the possession and 1 thereafter at the rate of 15% per annum till the date of payment. The question of payment of interest on solatium was kept open subject to the decision of this Court in the reference pending at that time.

2. The pertinent facts of the present case are that a Notification under Section 4 of the Act was issued on 25th February, 1981 proposing to acquire considerable land situated in the Revenue Estate of Village Kondli, including the land which is the subject matter of the present appeal, for a public purpose, i.e. planned development of Delhi and at public expense. Declaration under Section 6 of the Act was made on 29th September, 1981. The Land Acquisition Collector, after following the due procedure of law, passed an award being award No.57/81-82 on 31st March, 1982 fixing the rate of compensation at ` 3,000/- per bigha. Dissatisfied with the compensation awarded, an application for reference under Section 18 of the Act was made to the Court of competent jurisdiction. The Reference Court answered the reference partially in favour of the claimants and fixed the market value of the acquired land at the rate of ` 10,000/- per bigha for ab-pash land and ` 5,000/- per bigha for gair-ab-pash land. Still dissatisfied with the compensation awarded, the claimants preferred appeals before the High Court of Delhi. The 2 Division Bench of the High Court which disposed of the appeal under consideration relied upon the judgment of another Division Bench of that Court (Devinder Gupta, J. being member to both the Benches) in the case of Anil Kumar Sharma v. Union of India [86 (2000) DLT 825] and further enhanced the compensation payable to the claimants to ` 345/- per square yard with the benefits aforenoticed. The Union of India felt aggrieved by this judgment of the High Court enhancing the compensation granted to the claimants to the extent of ` 345/- per square yard and had filed the present appeal before this Court.

Accordingly, the appeal is partially allowed while leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
Arumugam Servai vs State Of T.Nadu

- Firaq Gorakhpuri "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their creator by certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness"

14. We would also like to mention the highly objectionable two tumbler system prevalent in many parts of Tamilnadu. This system is that in many tea shops and restaurants there are separate tumblers for serving tea or other drinks to Scheduled Caste persons and non-Scheduled Caste persons. In our opinion, this is highly objectionable, and is an offence under the SC/ST Act, and hence those practicing it must be criminally proceeded against and given harsh punishment if found guilty. All administrative and police officers will be accountable and departmentally proceeded against if, despite having knowledge of any such practice in the area under their jurisdiction they do not launch criminal proceedings against the culprits.

17. Hence, we direct the administrative and police officials to take strong measures to prevent such atrocious acts. If any such incidents happen, apart from instituting criminal proceedings against those responsible for such atrocities, the State Government is directed to immediately suspend the District Magistrate/Collector and SSP/SPs of the district as well as other officials concerned and chargesheet them and proceed against them departmentally if they do not (1) prevent the incident if it has not already occurred but they have knowledge of it in advance, or (2) if it has occurred, they do not promptly apprehend the culprits and others involved and institute criminal proceedings against them, as in our opinion they will be deemed to be directly or indirectly accountable in this connection.

18. The appellants in the present case have behaved like uncivilized savages, and hence deserve no mercy. With these observations the appeals are dismissed.

19. Copy of this judgment shall be sent to all Chief Secretaries, Home Secretaries and Director Generals of Police in all States and Union Territories of India with the direction that it should be circulated to all officers up to the level of District Magistrates and S.S.P./S.P. for strict compliance. Copy will also be sent to the Registrar Generals/Registrars of all High Courts who will circulate it to all Hon'ble Judges of the Court.

th 19 April, 2011
State Of H.P.& Ors vs H.P.Nizi Vyavsayik Prishikshan ...

(b) Accordingly, in consultation with the State Governments and other concerned parties, National Council for Vocational 2 Training (NCVT) was set up in the year 1956 and was entrusted with the functions relating to establishing and awarding National Trade Certificates to craftsmen, prescribing standards and curriculum for craftsmen training in the technical and vocational trades throughout the country and advising and assisting the Central Government on the overall training policy and programmes. On similar lines, State Council for Vocational Training (SCVT) was created to deal with all the matters relating to Vocational Training at the level of the State. The Government of Himachal Pradesh, in consonance with National Policy of Education (NPE) 1986, as revised from time to time, decided to adopt a policy for producing manpower in the conventional as well as in emerging areas of the Engineering and Technology and in other professional disciplines. The Government, keeping in view the financial constraints to meet the immense requirement of investment in the field, also decided to encourage private sector participation in the State for which the Government was to extend all possible facilities and also to provide for some concessions for arranging the necessary 3 infrastructural facilities for the establishment of technical and other professional institutions in the State. In order to fulfill this objective, the State Government framed Technical Education Policy and the Department of Technical Education issued guidelines for Vocational Training Centres (VTCs) in Himachal Pradesh.

(d) A decision was taken in the meeting of SCVT held on 27.04.2006 to wind up certain courses for which there was little scope of employment or self employment and in its place new courses as per demand of the market/industry be started.

The implementation report may sent to this Department within 15 days.

Sd/-

Special Secretary (GAD) to the Government of Himachal Pradesh Additional Chief Secretary (Technical Education)"

Accordingly, we are satisfied that the High Court was not justified in interfering with the Cabinet decision dated 18.07.2009 which was not the issue or challenge in the writ petition. We are also unable to accept the conclusion of the High Court that the petitioner's association (respondent herein) is entitled to run all the courses under the principle of `legitimate expectation'.

14) With the above observations, the civil appeal is allowed with no order as to costs.

APRIL 20, 2011.
State Of U.P. & Ors vs M/S. Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd

3. The Government of Uttar Pradesh, however, for the purpose of levy of sales tax issued a notification on 12th September, 1986, in which it was stated that under Section 4 of the Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1948, Tractors with Power Take-off Horse Power not exceeding 25 would stand exempted from payment of tax under the Sales Tax Act, subject, however, to the condition that the said tractors are exempted from payment of Central Excise Duty.

4. A show cause notice was issued to the respondent from the Office of the Assistant Commissioner (Assessment)-I Sales Tax, Lucknow, stating therein that at the time of survey made, and as per the literature made available it was found that the, Page 2 of 10 horse power of the tractors of the respondent had been disclosed as 30 Horse Power. In the aforesaid show cause notice it was stated that in view of the facts mentioned in the said notice, the respondent may submit a reply as to why the return filed by the respondent would not be rejected and a provisional assessment order for the period in question may not be completed under Rule 41(5) of the Rules.

5. Pursuant to the aforesaid show cause notice issued, a detailed reply was filed by the respondent. The Assessment Officer considered the entire records and, thereafter, by his order dated 21st March, 1992, passed an assessment order on the basis of the contents of the notification dated 12th September, 1986, denying exemption from payment of sales tax to the tractors of the respondent.

6. After the aforesaid assessment order was passed, the respondent filed a writ petition before the Allahabad High Court with the following reliefs:

13. This appeal stands allowed to the aforesaid extent as indicated and leave the parties to bear their own costs. The parties shall appear before the appellate authority on 2nd May, 2011, for obtaining further dates in the appeal. We also request the appellate authority to take up the matter and dispose of the same as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt of the additional evidence, if produced by the parties.

April 20, 2011.
Jharkhnad State Hng.Board & Anr vs Akhileshwar Singh & Ors

3. Bereft of unnecessary details facts giving rise to the present appeal are that a Notification dated 22nd of July, 1964 was issued under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act for acquisition of different plots of land in Mouja Hirapur within the district of Dhanbad in the State of Jharkhand. Thereafter CA No. ... @ SLP(C) 23216 of 2009 2 Gazette Notification under Section 6 of the Land Acquisition Act was issued on 17th of August, 1965. The acquisition was for the purpose of housing scheme to be executed by the predecessor-in-interest of the appellants i.e. Bihar State Housing Board. Ultimately an award was made in the year 1976 and the predecessor-in-interest of the appellants was handed over the possession of the land measuring 66.44 acres of land. Shri Ram Narayan Aggarwala, the predecessor-in- interest of the writ petititioner-respondent No. 1 owned out of the acquired land an area of 0.36 acres of land i.e. 4 decimals of Plot No. 397, 3 decimals of Plot No. 398 and 29 decimals of Plot No. 399 of Mauja Hirapur. Separate award i.e. Award No. 80 was made in respect of this land. However, physical possession in respect of this 0.36 acres of land belonging to Shri Ram Narayan Aggarwala could not be taken, then as it had structure over it and was in occupation of said Shri Ram Narayan Aggarwala. Said Shri Ram Narayan Aggarwala did not accept the aforesaid award and filed an application for reference to the court of competent jurisdiction for enhancement of the amount of compensation. He further did not receive the amount of compensation and filed Writ Petition No. 212 of 1976 before the Patna High Court challenging the CA No. ... @ SLP(C) 23216 of 2009 3 acquisition of the aforesaid piece of land. A Division Bench of the Patna High Court by its judgment dated 29th of April, 1997 dismissed the writ petition and upheld the acquisition.

10. In the result, the appeal is allowed, impugned judgment and order of the High Court is set aside and the writ petition stands dismissed. There shall be no order as to costs.
Union Of India & Ors vs M/S. Master Construction Co

3. The respondent -- M/s. Master Construction Company (for short, `the contractor') -- was awarded a contract (CA No. CEBTZ--14/95-96) on September 17, 1995 by the first appellant-- Union of India -- for the work, `provisions of OTM accommodation and certain essential technical buildings' to be erected and installed at Bhatinda. The first phase of the work was to be completed by July 20, 1996 and the second phase by January 20, 1997.

5. The work is said to have been completed by the contractor, albeit belatedly, on August 31, 1998. The completion certificate was issued on September 9, 1999.

6. The contractor furnished no-claim certificates on April 3, 2000, April 28, 2000 and May 4, 2000 and the final bill was signed on May 4, 2000.

7. The payment of final bill was released to the contractor on June 19, 2000. Thereafter, the bank guarantee amounting to Rs. 21,00,000/- was also released on July 12, 2000. Immediately after release of the bank guarantee, on that very day, i.e. July 12, 2000, the contractor wrote to the appellants withdrawing `no-claim certificates'; it also lodged certain claims.

8. The Chief Engineer, Bhatinda Zone, Bhatinda (Appellant No. 3 herein) vide his letter dated July 13, 2000 declined to entertain the claims of the contractor on the ground that the final bill has been accepted by the contractor after furnishing the `no-claim certificates' and no claim under the contract remained.

9. The contractor vide its letter dated September 10, 2000 requested the Engineer-in-Chief, Army Headquarters, Kashmir House, New Delhi (Appellant No. 2 herein) to refer the disputes between the parties for resolution to the arbitrator. The contractor stated in that letter that if the arbitrator was not appointed within 30 days from the date of request, it may be constrained to seek the remedy as may be available under the law.

25. In light of the above legal position, we now turn to the facts of the present case.

(emphasis supplied by us)

32. The appeal is, accordingly, allowed. The impugned order dated December 8, 2006 passed by the Chief Justice of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana is set aside. The parties shall bear their own costs.

(R.M. Lodha) NEW DELHI.

APRIL 25, 2011.
Zahoor & Ors vs State Of U.P

In this appeal for the reasons mentioned hereunder, no detailed facts are necessary.

We also see from the record that the appellant-Babu was of tender age on the date of the incident. The incident happened in the year 1979 which would now make him about 60 years of age as of now. We quite appreciate that one man has been shot dead but in the overall picture we feel that the ends of justice would be met if the sentence is reduced from 10 to 5 years under Section 304 Part-I of the IPC. The appeal against Zahoor and Subrati is allowed in toto but insofar as the appellant-Babu is concerned, the appeal is dismissed with the reduction in the sentence. -3-

In the meantime, we direct that the appellants- Zahoor and Subrati, who are in custody, shall be released forthwith if not required in connection with any other case. The appellant-Babu be released on the completion of his sentence of 5 years.

The appeal is disposed of accordingly.
Ram Singh vs Central Bureau Of Narcotics

2. According to the prosecution a secret information led to recovery of 2.1 Kgms. of opium by PW.7, Abdul Mazid, the District Opium Officer from a room adjoining the kitchen of a hotel situated at Sagrana on Neemuch-Chittor road. Appellant was working as servant in the said hotel. Jagdish Mawal (PW.6) the then Deputy Commissioner of Narcotics was one of 1 the members of the search party, who had seized the opium, drawn the seizure memo and recorded the statement (Ex.P/12) of the appellant on the same day. PW.8, Mahaveer Singh, at the relevant time was working as Inspector in the Central Bureau of Narcotics and on 19th July, 1997 itself at 23:45 hrs., he was appointed as the Investigating Officer of the case. He produced the appellant before the Special Judge on 20th July, 1997 and at his request appellant was remanded to his custody till 21st July, 1997. He recorded the statement (Ex.P/15) of the appellant on 20th July, 1997. In the statement (Ex.P/12) appellant confessed that the opium seized was brought by him in the hotel. In another confessional statement (Ex.P/15) recorded by the Investigating Officer appellant confessed that he had been working in the hotel for the last two months and brought the opium to the hotel from the house of its owner on his direction. He further confessed that opium tablets used to be sold to the truck drivers at the rate of Rs.30/- per tola.

3. Opium seized was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory for examination which found presence of 4.31 per cent of morphine in it. After the confessional statement recorded by the Investigating Officer on 20th July, 1997 he produced the appellant before the Special Judge on 21st July, 1997 along with the case diary and the copy of the same was furnished to him.

(underlining ours)

The second question posed at the outset is thus answered accordingly.

Further the evidence clearly points out that title to the opium vested in the owners of the hotel. The confession given by the appellant was only that he was servant of the owners of the hotel from where the opium was recovered. In the face of the state of evidence it is difficult to hold that the appellant was in conscious possession of the opium. Section 18 of the Act prescribes punishment for possession and that possession, in our opinion, has to be conscious. In the facts of the present case it is difficult to hold that the appellant was in possession of the opium and, therefore, his conviction and sentence cannot be sustained.

16. In the result, the appeals are allowed, impugned judgment of conviction and sentence is set aside. Appellant is on bail, his bail bonds are discharged.
Natha Shankar Mahajan vs State Of Maharashtra

2. As per the prosecution case, the relations between the accused and his wife were not cordial inasmuch as the husband suspected the chastity of his wife and believed that she had illicit relations with one Babulal Parsharam Mahajan. It is alleged that on the fateful day i.e. 19.3.1985, the accused thrashed the deceased whole night and ultimately, in the morning, he set her ablaze. Her screams were heard by her neighbour PW2 Bhagwan Mali who came and sent a information to her father Babu Lal Daga Mahajan that the deceased was burnt. It is the father who had taken the deceased to the hospital. After 2 reaching the hospital, she was treated by PW5 Dr. Dagadu Pawar who also arranged for recording her dying declaration. It is the prosecution case that her dying declaration was recorded by PW3 Bhalerao Bhimsing Salunke, an Executive Magistrate. PW5 Dr. Dagadu Pawar also made an endorsement on the dying declaration that the deceased was conscious and was in a position to give a statement.

6. Under the circumstances, we feel that both the courts below have committed no error in relying upon the dying declaration and convicting the accused. Therefore, this appeal fails and is dismissed.
Abdul Khader (D) By Lrs vs Tarabai & Ors

2. The predecessor of Abdul Khader, who is now represented by his legal representatives, are said to be Sajjada of the Darga of Hazarath Sheik Sirajuddin Junnedi of Shaik, Roza Gulbarga. Land comprised in survey 2 Nos.5, 6 and 7 situated at village Badepur, Taluk Gulbarga is said to be Service Inam Land under the Darga. Abdul Khader leased out the land to Basavannappa (husband of respondent No.1 - Tarabai) in 1957 for a period of five years at an annual rent of Rs.500/- and on that basis, the latter started cultivating the land.

3. Basavannappa gave interest free loan of Rs.6,000/- to Abdul Khader and also supplied him foodgrains worth Rs.3,500/-. After some time, he filed Suit No.35/1/1959-60 in the Court of Subordinate Judge at Gulbarga for recovery of the loan etc. During the pendency of the suit, the parties agreed to refer the matter for arbitration. After hearing the parties, the Arbitrators passed award dated 15.10.1959. They took cognizance of the fact that the land comprised in survey Nos.5, 6 and 7 was already leased out to Basavannappa for five years and declared that the plaintiff will have to recover the amount from the defendant by taking the land on lease for a period of 19 years after expiry of five years term. Abdul Khader filed objections against the award but the same were not entertained by the Subordinate Judge, who decreed the suit on 29.10.1959 in terms of the arbitration award.

19. In the result, the appeal is dismissed. The parties are left to bear their own costs.