L-NLProc/TathyaNyaya-and-FactLegalLlama-NyayaScrape-Datasets huggingface dataset:
M/S Hind Paints & Chemicals vs M/S Accurate Transformers Ltd

In a Winding Up proceeding, it was alleged that the respondent company was required to pay an amount of Rs.3,17,352/- to the appellant. It appears that on being provisionally appointed the Official Liquidator went to the premises of the respondent-company to take possession thereof. Thereafter, the respondent filed an application before the Company Judge for recalling the order of appointment of the Official Liquidator on the ground that the respondent-company had already paid the principal amount and that only the question of interest remains to be decided. The matter was heard by the Company Judge, who -2- also recorded the said fact and having regard to the provisions of the Delayed Payments to Small Scale and Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993, directed the respondent to pay to the appellant interest on the principal amount @ 9 per cent per annum, with liberty to the appellant herein, to move the civil court in order to establish its claim under the provisions of the aforesaid Act. An appeal was preferred by the respondent herein before the Division Bench, which modified the order of the learned Company Judge by withdrawing the leave granted to the appellant to move the civil court for claiming higher interest.

We, therefore, allow the appeal and modify the order of the Division Bench of the High Court impugned herein by restoring the liberty which had been granted by the learned Company Judge to the appellant to move the civil court for -3- higher interest. The appellant will be at liberty to move the civil court in terms of the liberty granted by the Company Judge.
Branch Manager,Federal Bank Ltd vs N.S.Sabastian

A perusal of the record shows that while he was working as clerk at Chengannur branch of Federal Bank Limited (for short "the bank"), the complainant-respondent introduced one Mr. M.P. Anil Kumar who opened savings bank account in that branch with account no.12291. On 3.4.2000, the respondent presented a chqeque drawn in his favour by Anil Kumar for a sum of Rs. 9.85 lakhs before Kunchithanni branch of the bank for collection and crediting the same in his account. It is worth mentioning that on the date of issue of cheque, Anil Kumar had less than Rs.150/- in his account. The cheque was sent for collection to Chengannur branch of ...2/-

the bank through M/s. Professional Couriers but the same was lost in transit. The respondent complained to the Manager of Kunchithanni branch of the bank about non-credit of Rs.9.85 lakhs in his account and then filed a petition before the Banking Ombudsman for the State of Kerala. The Manager of the Kunchithanni branch of the bank, vide his letter dated 5th June, 2000, informed the respondent that the cheque was lost in transit and advised him to get a duplicate cheque in lieu of the lost instrument. Thereafter, the Banking Ombudsman issued communication dated 10th July, 2000 to the respondent that there was no deficiency of service on the part of the bank and that he may take necessary steps to obtain duplicate cheque from the drawer by invoking Section 45A of the Negotiable Instruments Act or approach a court/appropriate forum for recovery of the money. However, instead of taking steps for obtaining duplicate cheque from the drawer, namely, Anil Kumar, the respondent filed a complaint before the State Commission claiming Rs.9.85 lakhs with interest @18% per annum. The bank contested the complaint by asserting that there was no deficiency of service because it had asked the complainant to obtain duplicate cheque which he failed to do. The bank also questioned the bonafides of the complainant- respondent by alleging that on the date of issue of cheque, the drawer had a negligible amount of Rs.112/- in his account.

The State Commission declined the respondent's prayer for award of Rs.9.85 lakhs but directed the bank to pay interest @18% per annum on the cheque amount from the date of its issue, i.e., 03.04.2000 till the date of payment. The National Commission dismissed the appeal preferred by the appellant and confirmed the order of the State Commission. Hence this appeal by special leave.

This being the position, the direction given by the State Commission for payment of interest to the respondent is liable to be set aside. Consequently, the order of the National Commission is also liable to be set aside.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, impugned orders are set aside and the complaint filed before the State Commission is dismissed.

No costs.
Deen Dayal & Ors vs State Of U.P

2: Swelling mark 5 x 5 cm on top and middle of head.

6. In order to reconcile the defence case with the medical evidence Dr. Dubey came up with an explanation. Learned Counsel suggested that in course of her fall in the deep well (water surface in the well was at a depth of 60-70 ft.) Asha Devi might have smashed her head against the wall of the well and as a result she went into coma even before hitting the water surface. We are totally unable to accept the submission. According to the investigating officer the mouth of the well was half covered by wooden planks and a pulley was fixed over the other open half for pulling up the filled up bucket. With that kind of arrangement it is highly unlikely for a person to slip and fall down in the well. But even assuming that such an accident took place no injuries as found on the person of Asha Devi can be caused in course of the fall into the water. The investigating officer described the well in question as a kuccha well, that is to say its inner walls were not brick lined. Asha Devi had suffered two injuries, one over her nose 6 and the other in the parietal area of the head. The doctor was quite definite that the two injuries were the result of two separate blows by some hard and blunt substance. In cross examination he said that the two injuries could be caused by dashing against two different projections; those could not caused by a single projection. We are completely unable to see Asha Devi falling down inside the well and getting her face and head smashed twice against two projections jutting out from the soft clay inner walls without any lining of bricks. We have no manner of doubt that Asha Devi was first beaten and then her body was dumped into the well when she was dying or was already dead.

The evidence on record fully establishes that there was a persistent demand of dowry by the appellants and they subjected Asha Devi to cruelty and harassment in connection with the demand and eventually beat her to death due to its non-fulfilment.

15. We are satisfied that all the ingredients of Section 304-B of the Penal Code are fully satisfied and on the evidence on record no other view is possible but to hold that the three appellants are guilty of committing dowry death.

16. In view of the discussions made above, it follows that the view taken by the trial court was completely untenable and the High Court was fully justified in reversing its verdict in appeal preferred by the State. We thus find no merit and substance in any of the submissions made on behalf of the appellants. The appeal fails and is accordingly dismissed.
R.S.Jakhod vs Balwan Singh

By the impugned order, the Disciplinary Committee of Bar Council of India found the appellant guilty of professional misconduct and directed that his name be removed from the rolls of the State Bar Council of Punjab and Haryana.

On 31st October, 2006, notice was issued only on the quantum of punishment. At that time, operation of the impugned order was not stayed.

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in-part and, while upholding the finding of processional misconduct, we set aside the direction given for removal of the appellant's name from the rolls of the State Bar Council and direct that his licence shall remain suspended for a period of six months from today.
Er.Gurcharan Singh Grewal & Anr vs Punjab State Electricity Board & Ors

4. In the written statement/counter affidavit filed on behalf of the respondent, Punjab State Electricity Board, and its officers, it was stated in Paragraph 7 that the relief claimed by the petitioner had already been granted. When the writ petition came up for final hearing the High Court on 23rd September, 2005, disposed of the same by passing the following order :-

15.We, accordingly, allow the appeals and set aside the judgment of the High Court. Consequently, the writ petition is also allowed and the respondents are directed to extend the benefits of pay parity with Shri Shori to the appellant No.1, as was done in the case of the appellant No.2.

16. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent.

17.There will, however, be no order as to costs.

_____________________J.

(ALTAMAS KABIR) _____________________J.

(MARKANDEY KATJU) New Delhi Dated: 09.01.2009
Alkapuri Coop. Housing Society Ltd vs Jayantibhai Naginbhai(D) Thr.Lrs

5. Indisputably, in the said suit, the respondent-plaintiff filed an application for grant of temporary injunction which was rejected by an order dated 18th December 1985. Respondent thereafter filed an application for his impleadment in the suit filed by the appellant herein. We are informed at the Bar that the said matter is pending before the Gujarat High Court.

16. The High Court, in our opinion, in a case of this nature, should not have interfered with the discretionary jurisdiction exercised by the learned 3rd Additional Sr. Civil Judge. The question as to whether an application for amendment should be allowed in spite of delay and laches in moving the same, would depend upon the facts and circumstances of each case wherefor a judicial evaluation would be necessary.

19. For the reasons aforementioned, we are of the opinion that the High Court committed a jurisdictional error in interfering with the well considered judgment and order of the learned 3rd Additional Sr. Civil Judge rejecting the application filed by the respondents for amendment of the plaint. The impugned judgment is, therefore, set aside and the appeal is allowed.

C.A.No.154/09 @ SLP(C)No.9931/08 .... (contd.) -9-

.........................J. [DR. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA] New Delhi.

January 09, 2009.
Suraj Singh vs State Of M.P. & Ors

The appellants filed petitions under Section 5 of the Madhya Pradesh Samaj Ke Kamjor Vargon Ke Krishi Bhumi-Dharakon Ka Udhar Dene Walon Ke Bhumi Hadapane Sambhandhi Kuchakron Se Paritran Tatha Mukti Adhiniyam, 1976, (for short `the Adhiniyam') and claimed relief under Section 7 of the Adhiniyam by asserting that they belong to the category of weaker section of the backward caste; that they borrowed amount from Jai Kumar Jain (husband of respondent No.4 herein) and executed sale deed of land measuring 1.32 and 2.57 hectares respectively as security for return of the borrowed money; that they have repaid the loan within one year but instead of canceling the sale deeds, Jai Kumar Jain, in connivance with the revenue authorities, got the name of his wife, Smt. Sampat Bai, mutated in the revenue records.

- 2- The Sub-Divisional Officer, before whom petitions were filed issued notice to respondent No.4, heard the parties and passed order dated 22.6.1999 whereby he declared the sale transactions as null and void under Section 7 of the Adhiniyam and directed the concerned Patwari to delete the land which was subject matter of sale deeds from the land record of respondent No.4 and include the same in the land record of the petitioners (appellants herein). Respondent No.4 challenged the order of the Sub Divisional Officer by filing appeals under Section 8 of the Adhiniyam, which were allowed by the Collector on the premise that the appellants do not belong to weaker section. The Collector observed that the Sub Divisional Officer did not conduct enquiry in accordance with Section 6 of the Adhiniyam and held that he could not have nullified the sale deeds on the basis of preliminary enquiry. The writ petitions filed by the appellants against the order of the Collector were dismissed by the learned Single Judge who confirmed the finding of the Collector that the provisions of the Adhiniyam are not applicable to the cases of the appellants herein. Writ appeals preferred by the appellants were dismissed by the Division Bench. Hence, these appeals by special leave.

....5/-

Accordingly, the appeals are allowed, impugned orders passed by the Collector and confirmed by the High Court in writ petitions as well as in letters patent appeals are set aside and the orders passed by the Sub Divisional Officer are restored.
Ramjit & Ors vs State Of U.P

3. In all five persons had filed the appeal. During pendency of the appeal before the High Court appellant accused Mangaru died and the appeal stood abated so far as he is concerned. The learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Azamgarh, had found the five accused persons guilty in S.T. No.78 of 1982. The present appeal has been filed by four of the accused persons who were A2, A3, A4 and A5 before the trial Court.

The inquest proceeding on the dead body of Sukhai was conducted on 27.12.1981 by S.I. Lat Buksh Singh (PW-5) who prepared inquest report and connected papers. Thereafter, the dead body in sealed condition was 4 sent through the constable Ram Ugrah Pandit for post mortem examination which was conducted on 28.12.1981 at 2.00 p.m. by Dr. S.N. Sinha (PW-7) who prepared post mortem report. Various injuries were found on the person of the deceased. Investigation of the case was entrusted to S.I. Lat Buksh Singh (PW-5) who recorded the statement of the witnesses and after making spot inspection at the instance of the complainant Ramjit prepared site plan. Blood stained and sample earth were collected from two places in the field of occurrence and one knife was also recovered from the place where the dead body of the Sukhai was stated to be lying in the field and fard Ext.Ka.8 and KA-9 were prepared in this regard. Thereafter, blood stained lathi, gandasi and bhala were recovered from the well of accused Mangaru at the instance of witnesses and fard was prepared.

The High Court did not find any substance in the plea of the appellants and upheld the conviction.

7. That being so, in the peculiar facts of the case we are of the considered view that appropriate conviction would be under Section 304 Part I read with Section 149 IPC. The conviction is accordingly altered. The other convictions remain unaltered. Custodial sentence of 10 years in respect of offence punishable under Section 304 Part I IPC would suffice. The sentences in respect of other offences remain unaltered. All the sentences shall run concurrently.

8. The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent.
State Of H.P vs Ram Krishan

2. Background facts in a nutshell are as follows:

6. The High Court's conclusion is that no one examined the body of the deceased before it rolled down to ascertain whether he was alive or dead. It is relevant that all the eye witnesses had stated about the assault of the head of the deceased by the accused with the stone. Injury No. 9 was described as the fatal injury. At least five of the injuries were on the head, which can be related to the assault by the stone and more particularly injury No. 9 viz. the fracture in the left temporal region. Since the High Court's order is based on surmises and conjectures, it cannot be sustained and is set aside and the order of conviction recorded by the trial court stands restored. The 6 respondent shall surrender to custody forthwith to serve remainder of sentence.

7. Appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent.
S.S. Balu And Anr vs State Of Kerala And Ors

3. Appellants herein pursuant to or in furtherance of a requisition made by the State of Kerala before the Kerala Public Service Commission (for short, "the Commission") applied for the post of Lower Primary/Upper Primary School Assistants. On 5.6.1997, the Commission prepared a rank list, which was in force from 5.6.1997 to 5.6.2000. Appellants' name figured therein. The vacancies, however, were not filled up. However, as no vacancy was filled up by the Deputy Director of Education, writ petitions were filed before the Kerala High Court praying for issuance of a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order directing the Deputy Director of Education to report all the vacancies to the Commission so as to enable it to advise the respective candidates pursuant whereto and in furtherance whereof the appointing authority may issue offers of appointment. It is stated that the appellants were parties therein.

4. On or about 3.6.2000, pursuant to the direction of the High Court, dated 22.5.2000, the Deputy Director of Education reported 125 vacancies and on or about 5.6.2000, he reported further 50 vacancies just before the expiry of the rank list with a note that they were anticipated vacancies. However, as the vacancies were shown as anticipated vacancies, the Commission could not issue letter of advise against those 175 vacancies reported by the Deputy Director of Education.

7. Another writ petition marked as O.P. No. 28082 of 2002 was filed by a few candidates praying for quashing of the said Government Order dated 15.1.2002 upon grant of a declaration that 175 vacancies reported by the Deputy Director of Education should be filled from amongst the candidates whose names find place in the select list and for consequential directions.

xxx xxx xxx

Government Order was issued on 15.1.2002. Appellants did not file any writ application questioning the legality and validity thereof. Only after the writ petitions filed by others were allowed and State of Kerala preferred an appeal thereagainst, they impleaded themselves as party respondents. It is now a trite law that where the writ petitioner approaches the High Court after a long delay, reliefs prayed for may be denied to them on the ground of delay and laches irrespective of the fact that they are similarly situated to the other candidates who obtain the benefit of the judgment. It is, thus, not possible for us to issue any direction to the State of Kerala or the Commission to appoint the appellants at this stage.

19. For the reasons aforementioned, there is no merit in this appeal. It is dismissed accordingly. No costs.

JANUARY 13, 2009
Paul Enterprises & Ors vs Rajib Chatterjee & Co. & Ors

An advertisement was issued on or about 18.01.2001 by the State of West Bengal inviting applications from companies/firms/societies formed by unemployed youth for the purpose of grant of excise licence for country spirit shops in certain locations. Appellant No. 1, a partnership firm of the appellant Nos. 2 and 3 herein applied therefor. In terms of the said advertisement, respondent No. 1, which is also a partnership firm of which respondent Nos. 2 and 3 are partners as also several others, applied for allotment of the said country spirit shop.

4. In the select list, the appellant No. 1 was placed at Sl. No. 3 whereas the respondent No. 1 was placed at Sl. No. 1. The candidature of the respondent No. 1 was objected to by the appellants inter alia contending that the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 were not `unemployed youth' within the meaning of the said advertisement and two locations of the liquor shops proposed by them were not conducive therefor.

5. The District Magistrate, Bankura being a licencing authority directed an enquiry to be held. The Enquiry Officer, in his report, inter alia opined 3 that whereas the respondent No. 2 carried on seasonal business in paddy, Til, potatoes, etc.; the respondent No. 1 carried on business with his brother.

6. The Additional District Magistrate (Excise), Bankura, however, disagreed with the said view of the Enquiry Officer, opining:

23. Furthermore, the appellant No. 1 applied for and was granted the similar certificate. It is, therefore, too late in the day for him to contend now that the provisions relating to grant of certificate being devoid of any guideline or objective criteria should be declared ultra vires.

24. For the reasons aforementioned, the appeals are dismissed. In the facts and circumstances of the case, however, there shall be no order as to costs.

January 13, 2009
Revenue Divisional Officer-Cum-L.A.O vs Shaik Azam Sahem Etc.Etc

8. The High Court in support of its judgment, inter alia, relied upon a registered deed of sale dated 12.11.1987, which was marked as Exhibit B-3 whereby and whereunder four cents of land was sold for a sum of Rs.10,000/-. On that premise, it was contended that the value of the land per acre would be Rs.2,50,000/-. The High Court furthermore relied on its earlier judgment and order passed in A.S. No. 1095 of 1996 (Exhibit B-6) wherein market value of the lands acquired therein was fixed at the rate of Rs.2,70,000/- per acre.

In respect of the land covered by Exhibit B-6, a notification under Section 4(1) of the Act was issued on 30.06.1992 for the purpose of 4 establishing Bharat Gas Power Station. It was noticed that the lands which were acquired for the said Bharat Gas Power Station being situated at a distance of about 8 kilometers from Kurnool Town whereas the acquired lands were situated about 4-5 kilometers away from Kurnool Town.

20. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, one-third deduction, in our opinion, should be made towards development costs for the lands situated both in Pasupala village as also B. Thandrapadu village. Keeping in view the fact that the lands are abutting National Highway and near the district town, where a large number of educational institutions have come up, 10 per cent escalation per year has to be added. Thus, Rs. 1,41,666.66 per acre may be fixed for the lands in Pasupala village.

We have adopted the same method which had been adopted by the Reference Judge inasmuch as the Reference Judge had fixed market value 14 for the lands situated in Pasupala village at Rs. 1,00,000/- per acre and Rs.90, 000/- per acre in respect of B. Thandrapadu village.

21. The appeals are allowed to the aforementioned extent. No costs.

JANUARY 13, 2009
Oriental Insurance Co.Ltd vs Ram Prasad Varma & Ors

2. Ram Prasad Varma, respondent No. 1, an Assistant Executive Engineer, was employed with Oil and Natural Gas Corporation (ONGC) at Rajahmundry. On or about 9.9.1998, while he was going to the workshop, he was hit by a lorry bearing registration No. AP-16-W-5839. The lorry ran over his legs. He was admitted in the hospital. Indisputably, both his legs were amputated. The fact that an accident had taken place owing to rash 2 and negligent driving on the part of the driver of the said lorry is not in dispute. It is also not in dispute that, at the relevant time, respondent was aged 55 years and his annual income was Rs.2,27,471.00.

4. The Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal awarded a sum of Rs.19,63,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum from the date of filing of the petition till realization.

5. An appeal preferred thereagainst by the Insurance Company before the High Court in terms of Section 173 of the Act has been dismissed by reason of the impugned judgment. The High Court, however, considering the prevailing rate of interest reduced the rate of interest from 12% per annum to 9% per annum.

7. Indisputably, the respondent was an Assistant Executive Engineer. He was an income tax payee. He had submitted income tax return for the year 1998-99 showing his gross salary at Rs.2,27,471.40 and the amount of income-tax deducted at source was Rs.30,748.00. 4

19. The High Court has directed payment of interest at the rate of 9% per annum. We do not think that any case has been made out for interference with the rate of interest. The appeal is dismissed subject to the modification that from the gross income of the respondent, the amount of income tax as was applicable at the relevant time should be deducted. The Tribunal is directed to redetermine the amount of compensation in the light of this judgment. However, in the facts and circumstances of this case, there shall be no order as to costs.

JANUARY 13, 2009