L-NLProc/TathyaNyaya-and-FactLegalLlama-NyayaScrape-Datasets huggingface dataset:
Rajendra And Ors. vs State Of Maharashtra

2. The deceased Rekhabi was married to the appellant No. 1 herein on May 01, 1995. Appellant No. 2 was the father-in-law while appellant No. 3 was the mother-in-law of the deceased. The occurrence is alleged to have taken place on the night intervening 29-30 September, 1995 at about 2.30 a.m. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant No. 1 needed a sum of Rs. 20,000/- (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) to obtain a job in the State Transport Department for which he had applied on the 10th August, 1995. He had asked his wife to convey the demand to her parents but the parents were unable to fulfill the said demand. According to the deceased she was being continuously beaten by the accused for the last about 3-4 days before the date of occurrence.

3. On the night of occurrence, according to the prosecution, while the deceased was sleeping she was called to the adjoining room and while appellant No. 1 held her, appellant No. 3 sprinkled kerosene oil upon her and appellant No. 2 set her on fire. After doing so they ran away. The deceased also ran out of the house and raised an alarm which attracted several persons to the place of occurrence which included PW-7 Devidas and PW-8 Bansilal, another neighbour. They threw a guilt on her and extinguished the fire. The deceased was removed to the local hospital for treatment. It is not disputed that she was brought to the hospital by her neighbours and her husband appellant No. 1 and father-in-law appellant No. 2. The Police Sub Inspector PW-9 on getting information about the occurrence rushed to the hospital and recorded the statement of the deceased in the presence of treating physician PW-11. In her report to the PSI (PW-9) she stated that she was called by the appellants and while her husband appellant No. 1 held 'her, appellant No. 3 sprinkled kerosene oil upon her and appellant No. 2 set her on fire with a match stick. The said report which was later treated as a dying declaration is said to have been recorded at 3.30 a.m. On the same day, a little later another dying declaration was recorded by a person nominated to act as Executive Magistrate by the Tehsildar for the purpose of recording dying declarations. PW-1 Dayaram Salave is the person who recorded the second dying declaration. The second dying declaration is to the same effect though specific role has not been assigned to the appellants as in the first dying declaration. There is, however, nothing inconsistent between the two dying declarations. The case of the prosecution is that later relatives of the deceased on coming to know of the incident came to see her at the hospital. From the record it appears that they came about 9.30 a.m.. PWs 2, 3, 4 and 6 were amongst the relatives who came to the hospital and in whose presence the deceased is stated to have made an oral dying declaration on the same lines as was stated in the first dying declaration before PSI PW-9.

6. The evidence on record is consistent and all the evidence points to the guilt of the appellants. We, therefore, find no merit in this appeal and the same is dismissed.
State Of Maharashtra And Ors. vs Gosikhurd Prakalpgrast Kalyankari ...

4. Counsel for the State of Maharashtra submitted before us that the aforesaid Gosikhurd Project was inaugurated in the year 1983 with a view to provide irrigation facilities to the districts of Bhandara, Chandrapur and Nagpur which fall within the vidarbha region of the State of Maharashtra. It was originally planned that the project shall be executed within 10 years but on account of financial difficulties and other problems of the State, nothing could be done immediately. In fact, bonds were issued and between 1997-2000, some amount was also collected for the project. On 24.11.1998 Section 4 Notification under the Land Acquisition Act was issued. However, since the response to the bonds was not encouraging between the years 2000-2003, though the lands were acquired in the sense that awards were made, the possession was not taken and consequently, the land owners were not paid the compensation.

7. We record the statement of the Counsel for the State that Rs. 453 Crores have been deposited with the Land Acquisition Collector and possession of the lands acquired has been taken.

9. We are informed that the main Writ Petition is to be heard and disposed of shortly. We, therefore, direct that the parties may urge their contentions with regard to payment of interest before the High Court hearing the Writ Petition, and the High Court, having regard to the provisions of the land Acquisition Act will decide the said question in accordance with law. The directions regarding payment of interest at the rate of 12% per annum is stayed.

10. Counsel for the respondent states that the claimants have not been paid the amount of compensation payable to the land owners. Land Acquisition Officer is directed to take immediate steps to make the payment. We direct accordingly. This appeal is accordingly, disposed of. No orders as to cost.
Uttaranchal Road Transport Corpn.And ... vs Mansaram Nainwal

Factual background needs to be noted in brief.

The respondent was appointed as Driver in appellant No.1-U.P. State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as the 'Corporation'). On 10.10.1990 while the respondent was plying the bus No.UGA 938 on Mussoorie road, all of a sudden the vehicle met with an accident and fell into a ditch. Thereafter, a disciplinary enquiry was initiated against the respondent in which the charges against the respondent were found proved and the appellant vide its order dated 31.3.1993 dismissed the respondent from service. Thereafter, the respondent filed an appeal before appellant No.2, which was rejected on 30.6.1993. Thereafter, the respondent raised an industrial dispute under Section 4-K of the U.P. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (in short the 'Act'). The industrial dispute decided by the award was referred in the following terms:-

The Labour Court issued notice to the parties. The appellants and the respondent filed their written statement/objection. The stand of appellants before the Labour Court was that the respondent was appointed as a Driver. On 10.10.1990 when he was plying the bus No. UGA 938 on Dehradun-Mussoorie Road, due to his rash and negligent driving, the bus fell into the ditch in which 12 persons died and some other persons got seriously injured and the bus was also got damaged as a result of which the Corporation suffered a huge loss of Rs.2,50,000/-. It was also pleaded that the respondent was charge sheeted and a departmental enquiry was held against him in which full opportunity of hearing was provided to the respondent. In the enquiry, the charges against the respondent were found proved and he was removed from the service.

The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent with no order as to costs.
M/S. Sonebhadra Fuels vs Commissioner,Trade Tax, U.P.Lucknow

The appellant is carrying on business in coal and also manufactures 'coal briquettes', popularly known as 'coal tikli'.

The assessee applied for exemption/rebate of sales tax claiming that the coal briquettes are the same commodity as coal which had already been subjected to tax. However, his claim was rejected by the Assessing Authority vide Assessment Order dated 31.3.1999. Aggrieved, he filed an appeal which was dismissed by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 19.7.2001. His further appeal to the Tribunal was referred to a larger Bench of five members which decided against the assessee vide its order dated 16.3.2004.

In our opinion, the process mentioned above is clearly processing, treating or adapting the coal. Hence, in our opinion, it is a 'manufacture'.

A finding of fact has been given by the Tribunal that 'coal dust' and 'coal briquettes' are entirely different commercial commodities and we cannot interfere with this finding of fact. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.

Civil Appeal No. 1791-1793/2005 In view of the decision in Civil Appeal No. 1790/2005, these appeals are accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Commissioner Of Central Excise, Pune vs M/S. Cadbury India Ltd

The question involved in these appeals is about the valuation of milk crumbs, refined milk chocolate and four other products manufactured by the respondent - M/s. Cadbury India Limited, in its factory at Induri, Pune and captively consumed in that factory and other factories of the respondent in the manufacture of chocolate. No part of these products are sold by the respondent.

The assessee had showed the price of these goods supported by a statement verified by a chartered accountant. The statement indicated the cost of edible and packing material used in the manufacture including its overheads. A separate statement in support of the profit added was formulated and these assessments were provisionally approved.

According to settled principles of accountancy only the elements that have actually gone into the manufacture/production of these intermediates i.e. sum total of the direct labor cost, direct material cost, direct cost of manufacture and the factory overheads of the factory producing such intermediate products are included in the cost of production. The Appellant produced alongwith the reply to the Show Cause Notice the following authoritative texts: Wheldon's Cost Accounting and Costing Methods, Cost Accounting methods by B K Bhar, Principles of Cost Accounting by N.K. Prasad, Glossary of Management Accounting Terms by ICWAI.

For the reasons given above, we find no merit in these appeals and they are dismissed. No costs.

Civil Appeal Nos. 1856-1957/2002, 5232-5233/2003, 1425/2005 & 2878-2879/2005) In view of the decision in Civil Appeal Nos. 2947- 2948/2001, these appeals are accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Tata Cummins Ltd vs State Of Jharkhand & Ors

The petitioner company, which is a manufacturer of diesel engines and components, started its commercial production since 1.1.1996. On 22.1.1996 it applied for exemption of sales tax on purchase of raw materials and on sale of finished goods for a period of eight years i.e. upto 31.12.2003, which was ultimately allowed.

- Tata Cummins Ltd. having its office at Jamshedpur, fell within the Territorial Jurisdiction of the State of Jharkhand. The State of Jharkhand announced its first Industrial Policy on 25.8.2001, known as "Jharkhand Industrial Policy, 2001"

Since the appellant was availing the facility of Tax- deferment on 15.11.2000, in our opinion, he was not entitled to the benefit under Clause 28.1. Hence we agree with the view taken by the High Court. The appeal is dismissed.
M/S Rapti Commission Agency vs State Of U.P. & Ors

A brief reference to the factual aspects would suffice.

(2) The question whether the appellant has any liability to pay purchase tax shall not be dealt with in the proceedings relating to which the notice was issued on 8.7.2001 and the reply was filed on 11.7.2001.

(3) It will be for the appellant to establish that the transaction in question was of inter-State character. (4) The appellants shall be given opportunity to file further reply and place such materials as according to it are relevant before the concerned authority within four weeks from today. (5) Considering the reply and further reply and materials to be placed for consideration by the appellant, the concerned trade tax authority shall decide the issue in accordance with law.

The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent without any order as to costs.
Radha Amma And Anr. vs C. Balakrishnan Nair And Ors.

2. The facts necessary for the disposal of this appeal are the following:

3. The plaintiffs were supported by the remaining defendants except defendant No. 2. The aforesaid defendant No. 2 pleaded that so far as properties shown as Item Nos. 8 to 16 in the plaint were concerned they were his self-acquired properties and were not tavazhy properties. Thus, Items 8 to 16 belonged exclusively to him and the remaining defendants as well as the plaintiffs had no partible interest therein.

Defendant No. 2 also pleaded that he was never Karanavan of the tavazhy and that he was never in management of the family properties. Thus he acquired the properties at Items 8 to 16 out of his own self-earnings which were wholly unrelated to the income of the family. The Trial Court framed the following issues in the suit:

We, therefore, allow this appeal, set aside the judgment and order of the Division Bench of the High Court and restore that of the learned Single Judge. There will be no order as to the costs.
Commissioner Of Trade Tax, U.P vs M/S. Modipan Fibres Company

Respondent, M/s. Modipan Fibres Company, deals in production and sale of Nylon and Polyester yarn. It was granted an eligibility certificate under Section 4-A of the Act in terms of Notification No.1093 dated 27.7.1991. For the assessment year under consideration, the respondent disclosed total production at 12,222,827 metric tones. It disclosed sales of 313.206 metric tones in the State of U.P. and 1008.55 metric tones as interstate sales. 10,461.189 metric tones of goods were shown as stock transfer. The assessee thus claimed that total sale of the goods was 11782.945 metric tones. The base production according to the eligibility certificate granted to the dealer was 9460 metric tones. It claimed exemption from payment of tax on turnover (for the entire year) of sale of goods weighing 2,322.945 metric tones i.e. after reducing the base production from the total sale of goods in a year. The Assessing Authority, however, granted exemption to the extent of turnover on the sale of 1,321.756 metric tones of goods. The claim of the respondent was restricted on the ground that the base production was achieved on 4.1.1993 and the exemption from payment of tax can be granted on the sale of goods after the base production is achieved.

For the reasons stated above, we do not find any merit in these appeals and dismiss the same, leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
Subash Mohan Lal vs Pawan Kumar And Ors.

3. Leave to defend was refused to the appellant since he had failed to pay the costs earlier awarded. That order has been upheld by the High Court.

4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we feel that the interest of justice will be served if the appelalnt is given an opportunity to pursue the matter before the Additional Rent Controller, Delhi subject to his paying a sum of Rs. 6,000/- (Rupees six thousand only) by way of costs to the respondents herein within a period of four weeks from today. This appeal is accordingly allowed and the order of the Additional Rent Controller, Delhi dated 6.9.2005 is set aside.

6. We direct the parties to appear before the Additional Rent Controller, Delhi on 4th September, 2006 when he shall fix a date of hearing. On the next date of hearing the Addl. Rent Controller shall hear the parties on the question of grant of leave to defend and pass an order in accordance with law. The appellant may file his rejoinder, as was directed by the Addl. Rent Controller within a period of two weeks from today. The appeal is allowed. No order as to the costs.
Vijayalashmi Rice Mill And Ors vs Commerical Tax Officers, Palakol And ...

Most of the petitioners-appellants are registered firms, while some of them are individual traders engaged in the business of rice milling. It is alleged that they are regularly submitting returns to the Commercial Tax Authorities reflecting their turnovers of purchase of paddy as well as sale of rice every year and accordingly they pay purchase and sales tax. They are challenging the levy of cess under the Andhra Pradesh Rural Development Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred as "the Act") which levies cess in addition to the purchase or sales tax being paid by them. It is alleged that the aforesaid cess under the Act does not fall under any of the entries in List-II or List III of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution. Hence it is alleged that the aforesaid levy of cess is invalid.

Thus the factual averment in the writ petition is limited to the plea that there is no specific service rendered to a particular dealer from whom the fee is realized. There is no factual averment that there is no broad correlation between the total amount of cess realized and the total value of the service being rendered to the people living in the rural areas.

With the aforesaid observations these appeals are dismissed. No costs.

Civil Appeal Nos. 5133/1999, 5134-5137/1999, 5138-5140/1999, 5141/1999, 5142-5143/1999, 5144-5146/1999, 5147/1999 & 5148/1999 In view of the decisions in Civil Appeal Nos. 5120-5132 of 1999 these appeals are accordingly dismissed. No costs.
Principal, Mehar Chand Polytechnic & ... vs Anu Lumba & Ors

It was directed that the total wages payable to the employees should not exceed 2/3rd of the amount of the grant. It was further stated that even deputation should not be encouraged. By a circular letter dated 07.04.1998, the Technical Teachers' Training Institute, inter alia, issued the following directions to the Principal of the Polytechnic :

Indisputably, no post was created. The objective of the project was not to provide employment but to give some input to the people at the rural level by educating them so as to enable them to utilize their lands more beneficially. The project although lasted for a long time, but visualized to be of limited duration, by reason thereof no substantive appointment was to be given. The project was to be manned by a few persons on a temporary basis.

They made a representation for grant of scale of pay, which was rejected. A writ petition was filed before the Punjab & Haryana High Court. An interim order was passed directing the Central Government to put them on a regular scale of pay.

Pursuant to the said resolution, the said Respondent was asked as to whether she possessed the requisite qualification, to which she stated that she had obtained a certificate from M/s Babbage Institute of Computer Studies, which although was registered with the Registrar of Firms and Societies but was not recognized by any competent authority.

For the reasons aforementioned, the impugned judgments cannot be sustained. In view of the fact that limited notice was issued in Civil Appeal Nos.7051 and 7052 of 2002 arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) Nos.11597 and 22493 of 2001, we set aside only that part of the judgment whereby and whereunder the Appellants had been directed to create posts and regularize the services of the Respondents therein. The impugned judgments of the High Court to the aforementioned extent are set aside.

In view of our findings aforementioned, the transfer cases are also disposed on the same terms. The appeals are, thus, allowed, to the extent mentioned hereinabove. The parties shall, however, pay and bear their own costs.
Anand Regional Co. Op Oil S. Union Ltd vs Shaileshkumar Harshadbhai Shah

The Respondent was working as an Assistant Executive in the Quality Control Department of the Appellant Cooperative Society. On an allegation that he had committed a misconduct, a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against him. The disciplinary proceeding was initiated relying on or on the basis of a letter dated 16.9.1993 of Shri Shreedharani, the then Chief Executive working in the Appellant's, addressed to the Chairman complaining about the serious misconduct committed by certain employees including the Respondent on 15.9.1993. In the departmental proceeding Shri Shreedharani and other persons were examined as witnesses. The Enquiry Officer found the Respondent guilty of the alleged misconduct on his part, holding:

Punishment of dismissal from service was imposed upon him. An industrial dispute was raised culminating in a reference made by the appropriate Government to the Labour Court, Anand on 25.10.1996. Before the Labour Court, the Appellant inter alia raised a contention that in view of the nature of duties performed by the Respondent herein he does not fall within the definition of 'workman' as contained in Section 2(s) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (for short "the Act"). The Labour Court negatived the said contention of the Appellant.

Judging by the said standard, we are of the opinion that the First Respondent did not come within the purview of the exclusionary clause of the definition of workman. Ananda Bazar Patrika (supra) was followed by the court in a large number of cases.

There is, however, another aspect of the matter which cannot be lost sight of. Identical allegations were made against seven persons. The Management did not take serious note of misconduct committed by six others although they were similarly situated. They were allowed to take the benefit of the voluntary retirement scheme.

The impugned judgment is modified to the aforementioned extent. This appeal is allowed in part and to the extent mentioned hereinbefore. There shall be no order as to costs.
Anup Kumar Kundu vs Sudip Charan Chakraborty And Ors

Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:

However, our setting aside the order of the High Court shall not be considered to be a bar for any party aggrieved by the order of the authorities to seek appropriate remedy. We do not express any opinion about the maintainability of the grievance on merits. Since the appellant is continuing on the basis of an interim order it shall be open to him to move the authorities about justifiability of his continuance. This direction is given considering the fact that the appellant as well as the State Government have accepted the position that the Government's order which was quashed did not have any effect, because of certain other earlier orders. We express no opinion in this regard also. In view of the background facts noted above, the appeal is allowed in the aforesaid extent. No costs.
National Textile Corporation (Guj.) ... vs State Bank Of India & Ors

section (2), which arose before that day, shall be enforceable against the Central Government or the National Textile Corporation.

An appeal was preferred thereagainst before the City Civil Court. The said appeal was dismissed by an order dated 18.08.1980, holding :

1958 Act :

For the reasons aforementioned, we are of the opinion that the High Court was not correct in taking the views, it did. The judgments and orders passed by the High Court are, therefore, set aside with liberty to the parties to file appropriate suits or proceedings before appropriate forum(s) for recovery of the remaining amount, provided any cause of action therefor survives.

Subject to the observations made herein, the appeals are allowed. No costs.