L-NLProc/TathyaNyaya-and-FactLegalLlama-NyayaScrape-Datasets huggingface dataset:
Orissa Public Service Commn.& Anr vs Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr

2. The present appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated 08.12.2009 passed by the Orissa High Court at Cuttack whereby the High Court allowed the appeal filed by the Respondent No. 1 herein and ordered for rounding off of the aggregate marks of the Page 1 of 9 respondent from 44.93% to 45% along with two other candidates but not parties before the Court and held her eligible to appear in the interview as per Rule 24 of the Orissa Superior Judicial Service and Orissa Judicial Service Rules, 2007 [for short "the Rules"].

3. The facts leading to the filing of the present case are that the Orissa Public Service Commission [in short "the OPSC"] published an advertisement inviting applications from suitable candidates for the Orissa Judicial Service Examination, 2009 for direct recruitment to fill up 77 posts of Civil Judges (J.D), pursuant to which, the respondent No. 1 applied for the said post. She appeared in the Preliminary Written Examination held on 15.05.2009. Being successful in the Preliminary Written Examination, she appeared in the Main Written Examination which was held from 15-18.07.2009.

Immediately after publication of the result of the Main Written Examination, the respondent applied for her marks in the Main Written Examination and the mark sheet of the respondent was issued to her on her request on 27.10.2009, which she received on 03.11.2009.

4. After receiving the same, she came to know that she had secured 337 out of 750, i.e., 44.93% of marks in aggregate & more than 33% of marks on each subject. As per Rule 24 of the Rules the candidates who have secured not less than 45% of the marks in aggregate & not less than minimum of 33% of marks in each paper in the written examination should be called for viva-voce test. Since the respondent secured 44.93% marks in aggregate she was not called for interview/viva-voce. Aggrieved thereby she approached the High Court of Orissa by filing a Writ Petition W.P. (C) No. 16782 of 2009 with a prayer that she should have been called for the interview as the fraction of marks, i.e., 44.93%, secured by her should have been rounded off to 45% & in that way she would have fulfilled the criteria as per the Rules. The High Court vide its order dated 08.12.2009 allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent herein against which this appeal has been filed, upon which, we heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

233. On scrutiny, we find that the findings recorded in the above referred cases are not applicable to the facts of the present case.

15.In that view of the matter, the appeal is allowed and the judgment and order of the High Court is set aside leaving the parties to bear their own costs.

.................................................J (Dr. MUKUNDAKAM SHARMA) ..................................................J (ANIL R. DAVE) NEW DELHI, AUGUST 2, 2011.
P.Parasurami Reedy vs State Of A.P

2. The story of the prosecution in short is as under:-

Thereupon, PW-9 asked the complainant -PW1 to bring Rs. 500/- which were treated with phenolphthalein powder. Thereafter, the raiding party reached the office of accused at 4.50 p.m. However, up to 7.00 p.m. the accused was not found present in the office. Therefore, not finding the accused in his office, the raiding party returned to the office of PW9. The shirt in which the currency notes were kept was kept in the office of the Investigating Officer.

11. We have seen the judgments of the courts below wherein the sole evidence of the fingers being soiled in sodium carbonate turned pink has been relied upon. Both the courts below seem to have impressed by this situation alone. We do not feel it sufficient to convict the accused on this evidence alone and we would choose to give him the benefit of doubt.

12. The appeal is allowed. The appellant is on bail. His bail bonds are discharged.
Shehammal vs Hasan Khani Rawther & Ors

3. It is the specific case of the parties that Meeralava Rawther helped all his children to settle down in life. The 4 youngest son, Hassan Khani Rawther, the Respondent No.1, was a Government employee and was staying with him even after his marriage, while all the other children moved out from the family house, either at the time of marriage, or soon, thereafter. The case made out by the Respondent No.1 is that when each of his children left the family house Meeralava Rawther used to get them to execute Deeds of Relinquishment, whereby, on the receipt of some consideration, each of them relinquished their respective claim to the properties belonging to Meeralava Rawther. The Respondent No.1, Hassan Khani Rawther, was the only one of Meeralava Rawther's legal heirs who was not required by his father to execute such a deed.

26. We are not, therefore, inclined to entertain the Special Leave Petitions and the same are accordingly dismissed, but without any order as to costs.
M/S Sharma Transports vs State Of Maharashtra & Ors

3. The transporters operate tourist vehicles between the States of Karnataka and Maharashtra and have been granted tourist permits by the State Transport Authority of Karnataka under Section 88 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 [hereinafter referred to as "the Act"]. The respondents, by their communication/circular dated 15.12.1995 had issued instructions to all the subordinate authorities under the Act to ensure that there was no luggage carried on the roof of the vehicles, as the same was not permissible under law. Due to this instruction, the checking authorities had started imposing and collecting fines to the tune of `1500/- for each entry and exit from the transporters for carrying goods on the roof of vehicles with tourist permits.

trailer combination specially constructed and used for the conveyance of individual load of exceptional length" and sub-Rule (3A) is applicable to "construction equipment vehicle". Only sub-

24. In the result, the appeals and writ petitions fail. They are dismissed. Costs are made easy.

...J. [ H. L. DATTU ] New Delhi, August 02, 2011.
Ramuthai vs State, Rep. By Inspector Of Police & Anr

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2317 OF 2009 The appellant Nallan is stated to have died during the pendency of this appeal in this Court while undergoing his sentence. We, accordingly, dispose of the appeal as having abated.

Palani Kumar, son of A1 and A2 i.e. Nallan and Ramuthai respectively was a friend of the deceased. As Palani Kumar was a person of dubious credentials A1 and A2 were not happy with the association and they would often tell the accused that they would not permit their son to go with them and some incident had taken place a week prior to the present one and there was a great deal of unpleasantness on that account. At about 9:00p.m. on the 21st September, 2002, P.W. 1 Ramanathan went to the nearby shop to purchase a beedi while the deceased followed him for purchasing a mosquito coil. After the deceased had made his purchase and was proceeding towards his house he found A1 to A6 armed with cutting weapons standing and waiting for him. A2, the appellant herein, exhorted her co- accused to kill Malaisamy on which the other accused attacked him with their weapons killing him at the spot. A First Information Report was thereafter lodged by P.W. 1 for offences punishable under Section 302 etc. of the Indian Penal Code. The trial court on a consideration of the evidence acquitted A7 and A8 of all charges. The other accused were however convicted and sentenced under Section 302 etc. of the IPC and awarded suitable terms of Crl.A. No. 2316 of 2009 3 imprisonment. An appeal was thereafter taken to the High Court by the convicted accused and the High Court has, by the impugned judgment, acquitted A5 and A6 as well. It appears that A3 and A4 filed no special leave petitions in this Court whereas A1 and A2 filed Criminal Appeal Nos. 2316 and 2317 of 2009. The appeal filed by A1 Nallan has already been disposed of by us as having abated and we are now left with the appeal of Ramuthai, the appellant before us.

6. For these cumulative reasons, we find that the appellant's conviction is unacceptable. We, accordingly, allow the appeal, set aside the order of the courts below insofar as the appellant Ramuthai is concerned and order her acquittal. She is stated to be in custody. She shall be released forthwith if not wanted in connection with any other case.

It is stated that the appellant Ramuthai is in custody. She shall be released forthwith if not wanted in connection with any other case.

The reasoned order shall be separately placed on record.
Idea Mobile Communication Ltd vs C.C.E.& C.,Cochin

4. The facts leading to the filing of the present case are that during the relevant assessment years, i.e., 1997-1999, the appellant was selling the SIM cards to its franchisees and was paying the sales tax to the State and activating the SIM card in the hands of its subscribers on a valuable consideration and paying service tax only on the activation charges. The Department of Sales Tax, State of Kerala, included the activation charges as part of the sale consideration of SIM cards on the ground that activation is nothing but a value addition of the "goods" and thus comes under the definition of "goods" under the Kerala General Sales Tax Act, 1963 (hereinafter referred to as "KGST Act") and accordingly levied sales tax on activation charges. The Department of Central Excise, Eranakulum (Service Tax Department) observed that a mere SIM card without Page 2 of 14 activation is of no use and held that the appellant is liable to pay service tax on the value of SIM card also. In both the cases interest and penalty were levied.

5. Being aggrieved, the appellant filed appeal before the respective appellate authorities under the KGST Act and Central Excise Act, 1944. There were consequential recovery proceedings against the appellant and the appellant filed Writ Petition O.P. No. 4973 of 2001(P) in the High Court of Kerala challenging the levy of service tax on the sale price of SIM cards and also challenging the levy of sales tax on the amounts recovered by the appellant by way of activation charges from its customers which was dismissed vide order dated 15.02.2002.

8. Aggrieved thereby, the respondent challenged the order of the Tribunal dated 25.05.2006 before the High Court of Kerala by way of Appeal being CE Appeal No. 20 of 2006. The High Court vide order dated 04.09.2008 allowed the appeal of the respondent - department against which this appeal has been filed, upon which, we heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

16. Being aggrieved by the aforesaid order dated 25.05.2006, an appeal was filed before the Kerala High Court by the department, which was disposed of by the impugned order dated 04.09.2009.

20. That being the position, we find no infirmity with the findings and reasoning in the Judgment and Order passed by the High Court and therefore the appeal has no merit and the same is dismissed.

There will be no order as to costs.
Amit Singh vs State Of Maharashtra & Anr

2) The facts of the case are:

(e) Challenging the said judgment of the High Court, the appellant filed Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 1114 of 2006 before this Court which was dismissed on 05.01.2007.

A. Whether the date of occurrence will be the reckoning date for determining the age of the alleged offender as juvenile offender or the date when he is produced in the Court/Competent Authority?

11) We have already referred to the entry relating to the date of birth of the petitioner in the Birth Certificate (Annexure-P1), entry relating to his date of birth in the Transfer Certificate (Annexure-P2), date of birth recorded in the mark sheet issued by the Council for the Indian School Certificate Examinations.

12) Under these circumstances, the petitioner is directed to be released from the custody forthwith. The writ petition is allowed.

AUGUST 08, 2011.
Ramachanrappa vs Manager,Royal Sundaram Allian.Co.Ltd

3. The facts of the present case are as follows :-

The court, by its order dated 9th of December, 2009, has awarded the compensation of `1,33,900/-, as against `1,13,900/- awarded by the Tribunal, with interest at 6% per annum on the enhanced compensation from the date of the petition till the date of realization. The appellant, being dissatisfied with the compensation awarded, is before us in this appeal.

6. Before the Tribunal, the appellant had examined himself (PW-1) and one Dr. P.K.Raju, Asst. Professor in Orthopaedics (PW-2) in support of his claim petition. The Doctor, in his evidence, has stated that the appellant cannot work as a coolie by using his right hand and cannot do any other manual work. Though, he was cross-examined, nothing adverse to the claim of the appellant is elicited.

16. The respondent-Insurance company is directed to deposit the enhanced compensation amount together with interest from the date of petition till the date of deposit before the Tribunal within a period of eight weeks from today. The enhanced compensation amount with interest shall be paid to the claimant on such deposit.

17. The appeal is allowed to the extent indicated above. Costs are made easy.
Urmila & Ors vs Rashpal Kaur & Ors

2. Feeling dissatisfied with the enhancement granted by the Division Bench of the Chhattisgarh High Court in the amount of compensation awarded by Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jagdalpur (for short, "the Tribunal"), the appellants have filed this appeal.

3. Shri Shivlal Verma (husband of appellant No.1, father of appellant Nos. 2 and 3 and son of Shri Swaminath and Smt. Tulsi Devi) died in an 2 accident, which occurred on 23.4.1999 when he was hit by the truck belonging to respondent No.1. The appellants and the parents of the deceased (both of them died during the pendency of the case before the Tribunal) filed a petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (for short, `the Act') for award of compensation of Rs.28,45,000/- by asserting that the accident was caused due to rash and negligent driving of the truck by its driver-Shri Ashok Kumar Dass (respondent No.2). They claimed that at the time of death, Shri Shivlal Verma was 28 years old and was earning Rs.60,000/- per annum by doing agriculture.

per annum from agriculture, but assessed his income at Rs.50,000/- per annum. The Tribunal noted that family of the deceased consisted of six members and in terms of the judgment of this Court in U.P. State Road Transport Corporation v. Trilok Chandra (1996) 4 SCC 362, the total number of units would be 9. The Tribunal then proceeded to make a deduction of Rs.1,500/- (Rs.911/- for 2 units of the deceased and Rs.589/-

towards his personal expenses) and concluded that dependency of the claimants would be Rs.2,600/- per month. Finally, the Tribunal applied the multiplier of 8 and held that the claimants are entitled to compensation of Rs.2,59,000/- with interest at the rate of 12% per annum with a stipulation that if the amount is not paid within two months, then they would be entitled to receive interest at the rate of 18% per annum.

is added to this amount under other permissible heads, as was done by the High Court, the total amount payable to the appellants would be Rs.5,45,400/-.

10. The appeal is accordingly allowed, the impugned judgment is modified and it is declared that the appellants are entitled to total compensation of Rs.5,45,400/-. Respondent No.1 shall, within a period of 6 three months from the receipt/production of copy of this judgment to pay to the appellants the total amount of compensation, after deducting the amount already paid in terms of the award of the Tribunal and the judgment of the High Court. Within that period, respondent No.1 shall also pay interest to the appellants at the rate of 6% per annum on the enhanced amount of Rs.1,24,800/- from the date of filing the claim petition. The balance amount shall be paid to the appellants within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of certified copy of this judgment.

[H.L. Dattu] New Delhi August 09, 2011.
Eastern Coalfields Ltd vs M/S Tetulia Coke Plant(P)Ltd.& Ors

The writ petition filed by the respondents, however, was pending consideration before the High Court. After the disposal of the cases involving similar issues which were raised and also disposed of by the aforesaid decision, which is now reported in 3 (2007) 2 SCC 640. The writ petition of the respondents herein also was taken up for consideration and a judgment and order was passed by the learned Single Judge disposing of the said writ petition on 25.03.2010. By the said order the High Court followed the decision of this Court in Ashoka Smokeless Coal India (P) Ltd. (supra) and passed orders and certain directions. The respondents were directed to furnish all documents to the counsel for coal company showing actual payments made by the respective applicants during the period from May, 2005 to December, 2006 and the difference between the amount paid and the amount notified by April 30, 2010. Another direction which was passed was that the documents furnished shall be verified by the concerned coal companies and in case of any difference, the parties to deliberate upon the matter so as to enable them to come to an accepted solution.

The legality of the aforesaid judgment and order came to be challenged by filing an appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court which was dismissed, as stated hereinbefore. Still aggrieved, the Appellants have filed the present appeal on which we have heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

The amount in terms of the settled accounts shall be paid by the respondents in accordance with law within a period of two months, failing which the amount will carry an interest @9% per annum.

In terms of the aforesaid order, this appeal is disposed of, leaving the parties to bear their own costs. 9
M/S Royal Enfield(Unit Of M/S Eicher Ld) vs Commr.Of Cen.Exc.Chennai

3. The appellant-company, previously known as M/s. Eicher Limited -

4. At the time of removal from the factory to depot the motorcycles were cleared in fully packed condition. It is also established from records that Rs. 190/- is being charged as packing charges by the appellant and, therefore, the said amount which was collected as packing charges must have been passed on to the buyers. The appellant-

company filed price declaration in Annexure-II for the vehicles sold from their depots and therein declared the depot sale price per vehicle and claimed abatement of Rs. 190/- per vehicle towards Page 2 of 12 packing charges.

7. Being aggrieved by the said order of the Commissioner of Central Excise [Appeals], Chennai assessee-company filed an appeal before the Tribunal, Chennai which also was rejected by the impugned judgment and order dated 24.11.2009 and, therefore, the present appeal was filed in this Court by the appellant-company on which we heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

(i) where the goods are delivered at the time of removal in a packed condition, includes the cost of such packing except the cost of the packing which is of a durable nature and is returnable by the buyer to the assessee.

18. Therefore, we agree and confirm the findings recorded by the Tribunal as also by the authorities below and dismiss this appeal but leaving the parties to bear their own costs.
Babu Bhai Thiba vs Ashok Ravi Shankar Narval & Ors

2. Since this appeal by special leave is directed against an order granting interim relief the same may be disposed of by briefly stating the relevant facts.

3. The appellant claims to have lent certain sums of money to respondent No.2, namely, Rafique Sarang. Subsequently, the disputes arose between the parties, which were referred to a named Arbitrator on 29.5.2001. 2 The Arbitrator passed an award declaring the respondent No.2 liable to pay a sum of Rs.78,96,300/- to the appellant i.e. Babu Bhai Thiba. The appellant sought execution of the Award in the Bombay High Court. It appears that an order was passed by the Bombay High Court in the execution application on 1.8.2003 directing attachment of several properties including the premises No.108 Palm Spring CGHS Limited, First Floor, Swamy Samarth Nagar, Andheri (W), Mumbai. At this stage, respondent No.1, Ashok Ravi Shankar Naval, filed Chamber Summons No.1277/2003 seeking an order for raising attachment of the aforesaid premises, on the ground that he is the owner, thereof. In support of his plea he relied upon two agreements dated 1.10.1999 executed by respondent No.2, Rafiq Sarang, his wife Mrs. Shahnaz Rafiq Sarang, with respondent No.1 and his wife. He claimed that under one agreement he had paid a sum of Rs.9,53,000/- in cash as a loan transaction. The second agreement was for sale of the aforesaid premises in case of failure to repay the loan amount. Since Rafique 3 Sarang failed to repay the loan, the premises were duly transferred in the name of respondent No.1 by the Society.

5. Initially at the time when the notice was issued on 17.8.2007 this Court directed that until further orders, no third party rights shall be created in the subject of dispute. Upon consideration of the entire matter, we are of the opinion that the interim relief granted earlier by 4 this Court needs to be continued during the pendency of the proceedings in the High Court. However, we direct that the aforesaid order of injunction will be subject to the appellant depositing a sum of Rs.15 lakhs with the Prothonotary and Senior Master of the Bombay High Court. The amount deposited in the High Court shall be invested in Fixed Deposit with a Nationalised Bank initially for a period of one year; to be renewed periodically for like term till the disposal of the matter by the High Court. In case the appeal filed by Respondent No.1 is dismissed, the amount deposited, together with accrued interest shall be refunded to the appellant. The appeal is disposed of accordingly.

........................................J (TARUN CHATTERJEE) .........................................J (SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR) NEW DELHI DECEMBER 15 , 2009.