L-NLProc/TathyaNyaya-and-FactLegalLlama-NyayaScrape-Datasets huggingface dataset:
National Insurance Company Ltd vs Indira Srivastava & Ors

3. The learned Tribunal opined that in computing his income, the element of conveyance allowance only would fall outside the purview of income. On the aforementioned basis, the monthly income of the deceased was assessed at Rs.20364/-. Applying the multiplier of 13, as the age of the deceased was 45 years, it was held :

4. The High Court, on an appeal having been preferred both by the appellant as also the respondents, partly allowed the same by a common judgment holding that claimants were entitled to compensation calculated in case of the deceased at Rs.19,53,224/- along with interest @ 9% from the date of presentation of the claim petition till its realization, holding that travelling reimbursement could not be taken into consideration for computation of net income of the deceased.

24. In view of our finding abovementioned, the appeal is to be allowed in part in so far as the High Court had directed deduction of medical reimbursement and tax elements on the entire sum which according to the statute constitute income. But we decline to do so for two reasons. Firstly, the accident had taken place as far back as on 1st September, 1997 and secondly the Tribunal as also the High Court failed to take into consideration rise in income of the deceased by way of promotion or otherwise.

27. For the aforementioned reasons, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgment. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, there shall be no order as to costs.
Deddappa & Ors vs The Branch Manager, National Insurance ...

3. Shantamma, daughter of the appellant herein was sleeping in her hut. A tempo bearing No.KA 37 2257 which was being rashly and negligently driven by Respondent No.2 herein ran over her. She died on the spot. Household articles of the appellant also were damaged in the said accident.

9. Before embarking on the said question we may notice the admitted facts. Second respondent who was driving the vehicle was also the owner thereof. The insurance policy was to remain valid for the period 17.10.1997 to 16.10.1998. Respondent No.3 issued a cheque on 15.10.1997. The said cheque was presented for encashment before the Syndicate Bank. The Bank by its letter dated 21.10.1997 issued a 'Return Memo' disclosing dishonour of the cheque with the remarks "fund insufficient". First Respondent thereupon cancelled the policy of insurance. The said information was communicated to Respondent No.2. An intimation thereabout was also given to the R.T.O. concerned.

We, therefore, agree with the opinion of the High Court.

28. However, as the appellant hails from the lowest strata of society, we are of the opinion that in a case of this nature, we should, in exercise of our extra-ordinary jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, direct the Respondent No.1 to pay the amount of claim to the appellants herein and recover the same from the owner of the vehicle viz., Respondent No.2, particularly in view of the fact that no appeal was preferred by him. We direct accordingly.

29. We, therefore, allow the appeal with the aforementioned directions. In the facts and circumstances of the case, however, there shall be no order as to costs.
Sarabjit Rick Singh vs Union Of India

3. Appellant herein is said to be an Indian citizen. He allegedly holds an Indian Passport. He, however, indisputably is a resident of United States of America. Allegedly he had been running an event management company and promoting clubs into organizing entertainment, cultural events and shows in various parts of the United States of America for a long time.

6. A warrant of arrest is said to have been issued by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Housing Division for the arrest of the appellant. Pursuant to the request made by the Government of the United States of America, he was arrested on 10th November, 2002. The Government of India in exercise of its power conferred upon it under Section 5 of the Extradition Act, 1962 (for short, 'the Act') made a request to the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, to make an enquiry in respect of the alleged offences levelled against him. He was produced before the said court. The documents appended to the formal request for extradition containing 154 pages were supplied to him. He was granted an opportunity to file written statement.

7. On the premise that the said formal request did not satisfy the requirements of Article 9 of the Extradition Treaty as well as Section 7 of the Act, he filed an application for supply of deficient documents and requested supply of copies thereof to lead his defence. He also filed an application for adjourning the case for three weeks to engage a counsel. According to him, he felt handicapped having not been supplied with the statute of the US Sec 846. Affidavit affirmed by one Merietta I. Geckos and enclosed with the extradition request did not contain any document in support of the statement made in the said affidavit in which he had stated about the arrest of few alleged co-defendants, but no arrest memo or transcribes of the alleged conversations with the appellant which had led to their arrest had been annexed with the affidavit. His request to supply copies of the documents however, was declined by the learned Magistrate by an order dated 1st April, 2003.

40. Existence of prima facie case or bringing on record credible evidence at the stage of commitment is again a requirement of a statute. Section 7 speaks of manner, the jurisdiction and power of the Magistrate. It does not set the standard of proof. What is necessary for passing a judicial order may not stricto sensu be necessary for making a report.

Statute 846 issue

Information viz-a-viz Evidence

Jurisdictional Issue

52. We, therefore, are of the opinion that an information need not be a documentary evidence or an oral evidence as is understood under the Indian Evidence Act.

53. For the reasons aforementioned, we are of the opinion that no case has been made out for interference with the impugned judgment. The appeal is dismissed.
Ajay Mohan & Ors vs H.N. Rai & Ors

6. Various proceedings appear to have initiated before the Revenue Courts in regard to inclusion of the name of the respondents in the Revenue Records. It is further accepted that the first appellant herein had executed three deeds of assignment in favour of the second appellant herein on or about 29.6.1991.

A suit was filed by the appellants before the City Civil Court, Bombay which was marked as Suit No. 4962 of 2006 claiming, inter alia, for a decree for permanent injunction restraining the respondents from creating any right in or over the suit land on the basis of revenue entries as also for a decree for permanent injunction restraining them from interfering with their possession and occupation thereupon.

In the said suit, the appellants took out a notice of motion marked as Notice of Motion No.3551 of 2006 and by order dated 13.10.2006, learned Judge, City Civil Court, Bombay refused to grant an order of injunction, inter alia, holding :

7. Appellants thereafter filed an application for amendment of plaint. They also preferred an appeal against the said order dated 13.10.2006 in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. The said appeal, however, was withdrawn stating that they would move the trial court for amendment of the plaint. While allowing the said prayer, an observation was made that the trial court shall consider the question in regard to the amendment of plaint without in any way being influenced by the observations made by the learned trial Judge in the impugned order. Although, the High Court allowed the appellants to withdraw the appeal, it directed the parties to maintain status quo for a period of two weeks.

10. Against the said order, the appellants again approached the High Court and by an order dated 10.1.2007, a learned Single Judge noticing that the proposed amendment fell short of relief of declaration that the suit agreement was null and void and to be set aside, came to the conclusion :

11. A Special Leave Application was filed before this Court against the said order which was marked as SLP (C) No.1218 of 2007. The same was disposed of by an order dated 2.2.2007, stating :

12. By an order dated 28.2.2007, the application for amendment was allowed. Keeping in view the fact that the plaintiffs' prayer for grant of interim injunction was confined in the earlier notice of motion till the disposal thereof, the plaintiff did not press for the second prayer expressing his desire to take out a separate notice of motion.

21. This appeal is dismissed with costs. Counsel's fee quantified at Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only).
General Manager, North West Railway & ... vs Chanda Devi

The Ministry have decided further as under:

The particular of the employee is as under. The employee was not expired while on injured on duty.

*** *** *** The settlement of employee is being done shortly. His wife filed an application for grant of family pension. The said application was rejected by an Order dated 23.4.2003 stating :

28. Recruitment of Government Employees must be made strictly in terms of the statutory rules. Entitlements of the employees being governed by statute or statutory rules, the question of attribution of any malice in our opinion by the Gujarat High Court was clearly erroneous.

29. For the reasons aforementioned, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained which is set aside accordingly. We, however, in exercise of our jurisdiction under Article 142 of the Constitution of India direct that in the event the respondent No.1 herein have been given any benefit including the benefit of family pension, the same shall not be recovered. These appeals are allowed with the aforesaid observations and directions. In the facts and circumstances of this case, there shall, however, be no order as to costs.
M/S. Kerala State Electricity Board vs Commr. Of Central ...

3. The basic fact of the matter is not in dispute. Appellant herein entered into an agreement with M/s. SNC Lavlin Inc. Montreal, Canada (Foreign company) in relation to various projects for obtaining consultancy services from them.

The relevant clauses of the said agreement are as under :-

12. Sub-rule (1) of Rule 6 of Service Tax Rules, as applicable at the relevant time, stipulated that in case of a person who was from outside India and did not have any office in India, the service tax due on the service rendered by him should be paid by such person or on his behalf by any other person authorized by him should submit to the Commissioner of Central Excise in whose jurisdiction the taxable services have been rendered by him a return containing specific details with necessary enclosures. Such returns along with a demand draft have to be submitted within a period of 30 days from the date of raising the bill on the client for the taxable services rendered.

21. We, therefore, are of the opinion that no case has been made out for interference with the impugned judgment.

22. The appeal is dismissed with costs. Counsels fee assessed at Rs.25,000/- (Rupees twenty five thousand only).
Sarabjit Rick Singh vs Union Of India (Uoi)

3. Appellant herein is said to be an Indian citizen. He allegedly holds an Indian Passport. He, however, indisputably is a resident of United States of America. Allegedly he had been running an event management company and promoting clubs into organizing entertainment, cultural events and shows in various parts of the United States of America for a long time.

6. A warrant of arrest is said to have been issued by the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Housing Division for the arrest of the appellant. Pursuant to the request made by the Government of the United States of America, he was arrested on 10th November, 2002. The Government of India in exercise of its power conferred upon it under Section 5 of the Extradition Act, 1962 (for short, 'the Act') made a request to the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, New Delhi, to make an enquiry in respect of Page 0047 the alleged offences leveled against him. He was produced before the said court. The documents appended to the formal request for extradition containing 154 pages were supplied to him. He was granted an opportunity to file written statement.

7. On the premise that the said formal request did not satisfy the requirements of Article 9 of the Extradition Treaty as well as Section 7 of the Act, he filed an application for supply of deficient documents and requested supply of copies thereof to lead his defence. He also filed an application for adjourning the case for three weeks to engage a counsel. According to him, he felt handicapped having not been supplied with the statute of the US Sec 846. Affidavit affirmed by one Merietta I. Geckos and enclosed with the extradition request did not contain any document in support of the statement made in the said affidavit in which he had stated about the arrest of few alleged co-defendants, but no arrest memo or transcribes of the alleged conversations with the appellant which had led to their arrest had been annexed with the affidavit. His request to supply copies of the documents however, was declined by the learned Magistrate by an order dated 1st April, 2003.

(3) If the Magistrate is of opinion that a prima facie case is not made out in support of the requisition of the foreign State, he shall discharge the fugitive criminal.

(4) If the Magistrate is of opinion that a prima facie case is made out in support of the requisition of the foreign State, he may commit the fugitive criminal to prison to await the orders of the Central Government and shall report the result of his inquiry to the Central Government, and shall forward together with such report, and written statement which the fugitive criminal may desire to submit for the consideration of the Central Government.

Statute 846 issue

Jurisdictional Issue

52. We, therefore, are of the opinion that an information need not be a documentary evidence or an oral evidence as is understood under the Indian Evidence Act.

53. For the reasons aforementioned, we are of the opinion that no case has been made out for interference with the impugned judgment. The appeal is dismissed.
Keshav vs State Of Maharashtra

1. The deceased Uttam Sonwale is the brother-in-law of the appellant. His sister Sarjabai was married to the appellant. He was a resident of village Deulgaon, Taluka Loha in the District of Nanded. Vimalbai is the wife of the deceased. The deceased had taken some loan from the appellant at the time of the marriage of one of his sisters, Savita. Allegedly the appellant was demanding back a sum of Rs.50,000/- to Rs,60,000/-, from him although the principal amount was only Rs.5,000/-. Allegedly he did not allow the deceased to sell even a portion of the family land for the purpose of returning the amount of loan on the ground that his wife Sarjabai had a share therein. The deceased had also borrowed a sum of Rs.1,000/- from PW-6 , Nandu Bhalke.

2. On 18th December, 1995 PW-6 came to the agricultural land of the deceased, where he and his wife had been working and demanded back the said amount of Rs.1,000/-. Appellant and another person Gautam (original accused No.2) also came there. The deceased was expecting payment of some amount of compensation from the State. They allegedly decided to leave for Nanded for collecting the said amount of compensation. At about 3.00 p.m on that day they were allegedly seen together by PW-5, Taterao Sonwale. The deceased did not return back home. Allegedly on 20th December, 1995 the appellant informed the wife of the deceased that he had killed him and asked her not to disclose the said fact to anybody. He undertook to takeover the responsibility of cultivating her land and perform the marriage of her daughters. No First Information Report was lodged. No report was also given to the police in regard to the missing of the deceased, Uttam Sonwale.

15. For the reasons abovementioned, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained. It is accordingly set aside. The appeal is allowed. Appellant, who is in custody shall be released forthwith, if not required in connection with any other case.
Mahboob Deepak vs Nagar Panchayat Gajraula & Anr

2. Appellant was appointed as a daily wager on a remuneration of Rs.20/- per day in the services of respondent No. 1 on 30.7.1988. He is said to have been involved in financial irregularities. His services were terminated on and from 16.7.1989. He raised an industrial dispute contending that his services were to be regularized after three months of the joining the services. The said contention was accepted by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court in his award dated 30th November, 2002. On the said premise, the termination of services of the appellant was found to be illegal. It was directed :

13. In this view of the matter, we are of the opinion that as the appellant had worked only for a short period, the interest of justice will be subserved if the High Court judgment is modified by directing payment of a sum of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees fifty thousand only) by way of damages to the appellant by the respondent. Such payment should be made within eight weeks from this date, failing which the same will carry interest at the rate of 9% per annum.

14. The appeal is allowed to the aforementioned extent with costs. Counsels fee assessed at Rs. 10,000/-.
Delhi Development Authority, N.D. & Anr vs Joint Action Committee,Allottee Of Sfs ...

5. The flats constructed and allocated under the SFS Scheme are distinct and different from the other five schemes launched by the Authority. We shall advert to the said distinction a little later.

5.11 Those who are successful for a ready built flat will be called upon to make the payment in lump sum within 60 days. Others who are successful for a flat where the work is already in progress will be asked to deposit within 30 days a specified percentage anything upto 90% of the estimated disposal price representing the expenditure already made and the amount required for construction of flats in next 3 to 4 months.

12. The Vice-Chairman of the appellant who is said to be delegated with the power of the Authority to which reference would be made hereinafter took a policy decision which is reflected from Office Order issued on 16.8.1996, the relevant clauses whereof are :

Before the aforesaid revision took place, delays of one year or so were being regularised with usual charges, i.e., on payment of 18% interest per annum and restoration charges, etc. in few cases where delays are unusually long, current price has also been demanded.

2. A decision exists that while working out the current cost for flats in South Delhi, a surcharge of 20% from the price worked out as per old formula, will be added. This surcharge will continue to be added for South Delhi flats. The interest rates in the above case shall be @ 18% per annum on the default amount.

40. We, in this batch of appeals, are principally concerned, inter alia, with the interpretation of clause 4 of the Letters of Allotment.

It is further inform (sic) that the 5th SFS Scheme 1982 stands already closed, therefore, you are advised to return all the original FDR, Demand cum allocation letter and third copy of challan so that your case can be processed for the refund of the amount deposited by you.

I now, therefore, humbly APPEAL to you to condone the delay in the payment of installments for reasons stated above, on humanitarian and compassionate grounds and to regularise the allocation of the flat for which act of kindness I shall ever pray. I am also ready to pay any amount yet due in the form of interest.

Policy Decision :

65. Strong reliance has been placed upon the residuary power conferred upon the Authority to determine the cost of construction.

Applicability :

88. For the reasons aforementioned, the impugned judgment cannot be sustained which is set aside accordingly. The appeals are allowed with costs. Counsels fee assessed at Rs. 25,000/- in each case. Appeals filed by the DDA are dismissed.
State Of A.P vs A.S. Peter

The said godown was insured. The concerned Forest Officer gave an information to the police station that the respondent had made a false declaration regarding the stock shown in the godown and inflated the same in order to make unlawful gain, whereupon a First Information Report was lodged. Investigation was carried out upon obtaining permission of the concerned Magistrate. A chargesheet was filed upon completion of the investigation in the Court of III Additional Munsif Magistrate, Tirupati for alleged commission of offence under Sections 199, 200 and 200 of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, however, as some allegations had been made against the manner in which the local police conducted the investigation, the Additional Director General of Police, CID entrusted the case for further investigation to the Inspector of Police, CID, Prakasam District on 5.11.1997.

Before carrying out the said investigation, the Inspector of Police, CID filed a memo in the said Court with the prayer that the matter be adjourned. Although it does not appear that any express permission was granted for carrying out further investigation, the prayer of adjournment was allowed in terms of the said Memo. Further investigation was carried out whereafter an additional chargesheet was filed against Accused Nos. 1 to 3 in the Court of IV Additional Munsif Magistrate, Chittoor for offences under Sections 199, 200, 204 and 120 of the Indian Penal Code. More accused persons were also added in the chargesheet in the category of accused. Indisputably, the case was transferred from the Tirupati Court to a Designated Court at Chittoor.

Appellant filed an application before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh for quashing of the criminal proceedings inter alia on the ground that prior permission of the Magistrate was not obtained for further investigation as also on the ground that the same was conducted entirely by a different investigating agency.

14. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the judgment of the High Court cannot be sustained.

16. For the reasons aforementioned, the appeal is allowed.
C.S. Azad Krishi Evem Prodyogiki Vishwa vs United Trades Congress & Anr

4. Admittedly, Respondent No. 2 herein was appointed on daily-wages by the University on 1.07.1980. He was being paid wages on a daily basis. He worked as a Laboratory Assistant cum Attendant which is a Class IV post. The job of Assistant Clerk, however, was being taken from him on and from 1.11.1991. His remuneration was being paid at the rate of Rs. 40/- per day.

19. We place on record the aforementioned statement made by Dr. Padia that as and when Respondent No. 2 becomes entitled to be considered for being absorbed in the services of the University pursuant to the said scheme, his case may be considered. If his turn for consideration for regularization has already come, a decision thereupon shall be taken as expeditiously as possible.

20. The impugned judgment is set aside. The appeal is allowed with the aforementioned observations and directions. However, in the facts and circumstances of this case, there shall be no order as to costs.