L-NLProc/TathyaNyaya-and-FactLegalLlama-NyayaScrape-Datasets huggingface dataset:
C. Perumal vs Rajasekaran & Ors

(v) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The allegation was that the five accused, and A1 in particular, who was the main accused and involved with the deceased in a clandestine relationship, had raped her on the night intervening the 28 and 29th of January, 1999. The trial court in its judgment dated 31st August, 2000 held the case against the accused to be proved and they were, accordingly, sentenced to death under section 302 or Section 302/34 of the IPC and to various terms of imprisonment under the various other sections under Crl.A. 6-8 of 2004 2 which they had been charged.

3. The present appeals have been filed at the instance of the complainant who is the father of the deceased. We see from the record that A1 was the main accused. As per the death certificate which has been put on record, he has passed away on the 30th June, 2009. The appeal qua him is, accordingly, abated. We have, accordingly, examined the evidence with respect to A2 to A5.

5. We thus find no merit in these appeals which are, accordingly, dismissed.
Dav College Managing Committee vs Surender Rana & Anr

The first respondent was appointed on 1.8.1996, as Store Keeper, on probation for a period of one year, by the appellant, which runs a private unaided school. He was removed from service on 1.7.1997 by giving a month's salary in lieu of notice. The first respondent challenged his removal by filing an appeal before the Delhi School Tribunal. The said appeal was allowed on 15.1.2002 and the order of removal was set aside on the ground that the appellant had not taken the prior permission of the Director of Education. The writ petition filed by the appellant challenging the said order, was dismissed by a learned single Judge of the High Court on 8.2.2006 and the appeal filed by the appellant was also dismissed by a Division Bench on 30.11.2006. The said order is challenged in this appeal by special leave.

4. In the circumstances, the orders of the Tribunal and the High Court holding that the termination without the previous approval of the Director under Rule 105 was illegal, does not call for interference. The appeal is dismissed.
Narinder Kaur vs Punjab & Haryana High Court & Ors

Feeling aggrieved, the appellant filed CWP No.16151 of 2003 before the High Court. The High court by the impugned judgment has dismissed the petition giving rise to the present appeal.

conclusion that on the basis of the discretionary rules, the appellant is not entitled to claim change in her date of birth.

In view of the presumtive value which attachs to the birth and death records, this Court is of the opinion that appeal deserves to be allowed.

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal succeeds. The

judgment dated 20.4.2006 rendered by Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in CWP No. 16151 of 2003, is hereby set aside. CWP No. 16151 of 2003 filed by the appellant in the High Court is allowed. The order dated 12.5.2002 passed by Punjab and Haryana High court on its Administrative side rejecting the application dated 12.4.2002 made by the appellant to the High Court with a request to change her date of birth from 26.1.1971 to 9.1.1972 is also set aside. The application dated 12.4.2002 made by the appellant to the High Court to change her date of birth from 26.1.1971 to 9.1.1972 stands allowed. Both the respondents are hereby directed to carry out necessary changes in service record of the appellant by mentioning her date of birth to be 9.1.1972. The appeal accordingly stands disposed of.
Sunil Sharma& Ors vs Bachitar Singh & Ors

2. On 2.08.2006, around 4.40 PM, one Mrs. Sunita Sharma (aged 41 years) was returning to Panchkula from Chandigarh on her scooter, when the offending vehicle (a Tata 407 bearing registration no. HR-58-5649) driven by the second respondent hit her and ran over her. She was declared dead when taken to hospital.

3. Legal heirs of the deceased, her husband and two children, filed a claim petition before the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) claiming Rs.40,00,000/- as compensation, along with interest @ 24% p.a.

5. Aggrieved by the award of MACT, the claimants filed an appeal before the High Court of Punjab and Haryana for enhancement of compensation. The High Court applied the multiplier of 14, instead of 11 applied by MACT. The High Court took annual dependency same as that calculated by MACT, i.e. Rs.72,000. Accordingly, High Court awarded Rs.2,16,000/- over and above what was awarded by MACT.

Net Payable= Rs.14,541 - Rs.1,310 = Rs.13,231/-

b. Deduction for Personal Expenses

c. Revision in Pay Scale

16. In the present case, the deceased was aged 41 years. Thus, we allow an addition of 30% by way of future prospects. The annual income of the deceased would thus be Rs.1,59,640/-. Considering the age of the deceased, a multiplier of 14 is to be applied. Accordingly, annual dependency comes to Rs.22,34,960/-.

d Compensation for Loss of Love and Affection, Consortium, Funeral Rites

18. Thus, total compensation payable to the claimants-appellants is Rs.22,59,960/- which is rounded off to Rs.22,60,000/- with interest at the rate of 6% from the date of filing the claim petition.

19. Accordingly the appeal of the claimants-appellants is allowed to the extent indicated above.

20. The respondents are jointly and severally liable to make the aforesaid payment, after adjusting payment, if any, is made. Such payment is to be made within three months. No costs.
Syed Mehaboob vs The New India Assurance Ltd

2. The appellant-claimant was a driver-cum-cleaner of lorry bearing No. HR 38 F 8781 and the same was stopped in front of WIPRO company at Ring Road on 31.12.2001, when at about 9 a.m., driver of the lorry bearing No. TN 34 A 2994 dashed against the appellant. The appellant sustained multiple injuries and was rushed to Sanjay Gandhi Hospital and then to Victoria Hospital.

4. The Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (MACT) concluded that the accident occurred due to actionable negligence of the lorry driver bearing No. TN 34 A 2994 as a result of which the appellant sustained injuries.

Loss of income during laid up period - Rs.18,000/- Loss of income on account of disability - Rs.1,92,000/- (Rs.1000 X 12 X 16) Medical and incidental expenses - Rs.30,000/-

TOTAL - Rs.3,20,000/-

11. We are of the opinion that the award of the Tribunal is well-

14. We have been through the award of the Tribunal and are satisfied that the award of compensation is not arbitrary, unreasonable or excessive. It is passed after taking into consideration relevant factors and in the facts and circumstances of the case it is correct. The reduction in compensation by the High Court is in fact arbitrary and thus, we set aside the judgment of the High Court.

15. Compensation shall be payable to the appellant as per the award of the Tribunal.

16. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.

17. No order as to costs.
Parimal vs Veena @ Bharti

Registered AD was returned to the Court with report of refusal, as she declined to receive the AD notice. Under the Court's orders, summons were affixed at the house of the respondent/wife, but she chose not to appear.

(F) Two years after the passing of the decree of divorce, on 16.10.1991, the appellant got married and has two sons aged 17 and 18 years respectively from the said marriage.

(Emphasis added)

22. The first appellate Court should not disturb and interfere with the valuable rights of the parties which stood crystallised by the trial Court's judgment without opening the whole case for re-hearing both on question of facts and law. More so, the appellate Court should not modify the decree of the trial Court by a cryptic order without taking note of all relevant aspects, otherwise the order of the appellate Court would fall short of considerations expected from the first appellate Court in view of the provisions of Order XLI, Rule 31 CPC and such judgment and order would be liable to be set aside. (Vide B.V. Nagesh & Anr. v. H.V. Sreenivassa Murthy, JT (2010) 10 SC 551).

More so, the High Court did not consider the grounds on which the trial Court had dismissed the application under Order IX, Rule 13 CPC filed by the respondent/wife. The appeal has been decided in a casual manner.

25. In view of the above, appeal succeeds and is allowed. The judgment and order dated 17.7.2007 passed by the High Court of Delhi in FAO No. 63 of 2002 is set aside and the judgment and order of the trial Court dated 11.12.2001 is restored.
State Of Punjab vs Amarjit Singh & Anr

2. In regard to acquisition of land belonging to the respondents, the reference Court by judgment dated 5.3.2001 awarded compensation at the rate of Rs.6,96,000/- per acre alongwith statutory benefits under Section 23(1A), 23(2) and 28 of the Act. The respondents filed an execution application wherein they claimed additional amount of 12% 2 per annum for the period 11.11.1993 to 16.6.1994 (that is from the date of notification under Section 4(1) of the Act till the date of the award) under Section 23(1A) of the Act, not only on the market value of the land, but also on the solatium amount. The said claim was accepted by the Executing Court by order dated 8.5.2008. The revision filed by the appellant was rejected by the High Court on 4.9.2008. The said revisional order of the High Court is challenged in this appeal by special leave.

9. In view of the above, the appeal is allowed, the orders of the High Court and the Executing Court, in so far as they hold that additional amount under Section 23(1A) is payable on solatium, are set aside. It is declared that additional amount under Section 23(1A) is awardable only on the market value determined under the first factor of Section 23(1) of the Act and cannot be calculated on the solatium payable under Section 23(2) of the Act.
Rama Krushna Roy vs State Of Orissa

2. According to the prosecution, the deceased Santilata was the wife of the appellant and married about a year prior to the date of occurrence and they were residing in a portion of the house belonging to PW-1, M. Appa Rao. A day prior to the lodging of the report i.e. 30th of June, 1994 the deceased along with her husband i.e. appellant herein came together, went in their house and closed the door. After some time, the landlord, PW-1 M. Appa Rao heard screams of the deceased whereupon he went to the portion of the house in which the appellant and his wife were residing 2 and knocked the door. According to the prosecution, appellant opened the door and when M.Appa Rao entered the room, he found Santilata in a severely burnt condition covered with a bed-sheet. The appellant came out of the house and fled away. M.Appa Rao brought Santilata to the hospital on a trolley-rickshaw and on being asked Santilata disclosed that it is the appellant who poured kerosene oil on her and lighted the match-

stick with a view to kill her. PW-1, M.Appa Rao gave the report of the incident at Jeypur Town Police Station on 30th of June, 1994 at about 12 Noon. On the death of Santilata on 1st of July, 1994, Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code was added. The deceased was taken to Sub-Divisional Hospital, Jeypore where his statement was recorded by the attending Assistant Surgeon PW-20, Dr. Bijayananda Padhi.

ring. He was annoyed as I got the same. My husband is after my second number sister Bidulata that is why the quarrel.

5. We are of the opinion that the trial court and the High Court did not err in relying on the evidence of PW-20, Dr. Bijayananda Padhi and the dying declaration to convict the appellant. Appellant is on bail, his bail bonds are cancelled and he is directed to surrender to serve out the remainder of the sentence.

6. In the result, we do not find any merit in the appeal and it is dismissed accordingly.
State Of Orissa & Ors vs Saroj Kumar Jena

2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that the respondent stood appointed as a Lower Division Clerk (hereinafter called as LDC) by the governing body of Mahanga Puspagiri Mahavidyalaya, Irakana, Cuttack, on 18.8.1985. His appointment was duly approved by the Director of Higher Education (hereafter called appellant No.2), vide order dated 6.11.1990. The said respondent was promoted to the post of Upper Division Clerk (hereinafter called UDC) w.e.f. 3.3.1990 and thereafter to the post of Head Clerk w.e.f.

3. The respondent made a representation to fix his pay in the pay scales of the posts of UDC and Head Clerk. However, the said representation was rejected vide order dated 20.3.1999, in view of the fact that he did not possess the requisite qualifications i.e. he had not passed the accounts examination, as required under the Orissa Non-

4. Being aggrieved, the respondent approached the High Court by filing the writ petition No.11122/1999, which has been allowed vide impugned judgment and order dated 5.8.2005. Hence, this appeal.

9. In view of the above we do not find force in the appeal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs.

However, in the facts and circumstances of the case, in case the pay scale of the respondent had not been fixed as directed by the High 5 Court, all the formalities shall be completed in compliance with the High Court's judgment within a period of three months from today.

Arrears, if any, should be paid to him within a period of three months thereafter.
Sri Indra Das vs State Of Assam

2. The facts of the case are similar to the facts in Arup Bhuyan vs. State of Assam Criminal Appeal No.889 of 2007, which we allowed on 3.2.2011.

4. The facts of the case are that one Anil Kumar Das went missing from the evening of 6.11.1991, and his dead body was recovered after two months on 19.1.1992 from the river Dishang. Five persons including the appellant were charged for his death. The appellant was not named in the FIR. No prosecution witness has attributed any role to the appellant. The charge sheet in the case was filed after a gap of nine years from the date of the commission of the offence, and charges were framed more than four years after filing of the charge sheet. There is no evidence against the appellant except the confessional statement.

6. However, the appellant has been convicted under Section 3(5) of TADA which makes mere membership of a banned organization a criminal act, and sentenced to five years rigorous imprisonment and Rs.2000/- fine.

45. The appeal is consequently allowed and the impugned judgment is set aside.

FEBRUARY 10, 2011.
Ravinder Raj vs M/S. Competent Motors Co. Pvt. Ltd.&Anr

2. The petitioner, Mr. Ravinder Raj, who is appearing in person, applied to Maruti Udyog Ltd.in 1985-1986 for booking a Maruti Car-800 and 2 deposited a sum of Rs.10,000/- as initial/advance booking payment. On 15th July, 1988, the respondent No.2 informed the petitioner by letter of even date that his Maruti Car Allotment No.0802-N-04051 had matured for delivery and requested the petitioner to make payment of the full amount of the price of the car for delivery of the vehicle after completing the necessary formalities. Pursuant to the above letter, the petitioner on 16th February, 1989, paid a total amount of Rs.78,351.05 which covered the price of the vehicle, insurance charges and other minor charges, including registration charges. There is no denial that the petitioner had opted for a cream colour vehicle.

3. On 1st March, 1989, there was an increase in the excise duty payable, causing a price hike of about Rs.6710.61. On 18th March, 1989, the petitioner received a letter from the respondent No.2 to deposit the excess amount payable as excise duty, and, accordingly, the petitioner did so under protest on 16th February, 1989.

5. The petitioner has contended that the delay in delivery of the vehicle to him by the 3 respondents was not occasioned by any failure or negligence on his part and the liability to pay the increased amount on account of increase in excise duty, was not that of the petitioner, but of the respondents concerned. The petitioner, therefore, applied to the District Consumer Forum for a direction upon the respondents to bear the increase in excise duty resulting in increase in the price. Such a prayer was rejected by the District Consumer Forum. The petitioner then went to the State Forum which allowed the petitioner's claim. Against the said order, the respondents went before the National Commission, which reversed the order passed by the State Forum. It is against the said order that the petitioner has come to this Court by way of this Special Leave Petition.

14. In such circumstances, the Special Leave Petition fails and is dismissed.

15. Consequently, in view of this order, the other Special Leave Petition in which interest on the amount claimed has been prayed for, does not survive and is also dismissed.

16. There will, however, be no orders as to costs in both the matters.
Ravinder Raj vs M/S. Competent Motors Co. Pvt. ...

2. The petitioner, Mr. Ravinder Raj, who is appearing in person, applied to Maruti Udyog Ltd.in 1985-1986 for booking a Maruti Car-800 and 2 deposited a sum of Rs.10,000/- as initial/advance booking payment. On 15th July, 1988, the respondent No.2 informed the petitioner by letter of even date that his Maruti Car Allotment No.0802-N-04051 had matured for delivery and requested the petitioner to make payment of the full amount of the price of the car for delivery of the vehicle after completing the necessary formalities. Pursuant to the above letter, the petitioner on 16th February, 1989, paid a total amount of Rs.78,351.05 which covered the price of the vehicle, insurance charges and other minor charges, including registration charges. There is no denial that the petitioner had opted for a cream colour vehicle.

3. On 1st March, 1989, there was an increase in the excise duty payable, causing a price hike of about Rs.6710.61. On 18th March, 1989, the petitioner received a letter from the respondent No.2 to deposit the excess amount payable as excise duty, and, accordingly, the petitioner did so under protest on 16th February, 1989.

5. The petitioner has contended that the delay in delivery of the vehicle to him by the 3 respondents was not occasioned by any failure or negligence on his part and the liability to pay the increased amount on account of increase in excise duty, was not that of the petitioner, but of the respondents concerned. The petitioner, therefore, applied to the District Consumer Forum for a direction upon the respondents to bear the increase in excise duty resulting in increase in the price. Such a prayer was rejected by the District Consumer Forum. The petitioner then went to the State Forum which allowed the petitioner's claim. Against the said order, the respondents went before the National Commission, which reversed the order passed by the State Forum. It is against the said order that the petitioner has come to this Court by way of this Special Leave Petition.

14. In such circumstances, the Special Leave Petition fails and is dismissed.

15. Consequently, in view of this order, the other Special Leave Petition in which interest on the amount claimed has been prayed for, does not survive and is also dismissed.

16. There will, however, be no orders as to costs in both the matters.
Jaswinder Singh Sohal vs Indian Bank & Anr

The appellant was directed to deposit Rs.80 lakhs as a condition for getting his appeal heard by the Debts Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Bombay. The Appellant could not deposit the said amount within the stipulated period, hence his appeal stood dismissed.

It is not disputed that the entire amount of Rs.80 lakhs has now been deposited by the appellant. In the facts and circumstances of this case, the delay in depositing the said amount is condoned. -2-

In the facts of this case, we deem it appropriate to direct that the appeal, which was dismissed in default for not depositing the amount in time, shall be restored to its original number and be heard expeditiously by the Tribunal.

This appeal is disposed of with these observations.

.....................J (DALVEER BHANDARI) .....................J (DEEPAK VERMA) New Delhi;

February 11, 2011.
Tej Bir & Anr vs State Of Haryana & Anr

3. According to the appellant no. 1, who was the informant in the said F.I.R. No.217 dated 29.6.2008 the facts of the case are that Ram Narain had three sons: Sher Singh, Kehar Singh and Mehar Singh and a daughter Raj Bala. Kewal Kishan is married to Raj Bala. Sher Singh was murdered on 29th March, 2005 and was survived by his wife Babita and two children. Kehar Singh also passed away in 2007. After the demise of these two brothers, some disputes with respect to the finances and property of the family arose.

5. The police were informed of this incident and the Inspector/Station House Officer of Police Station, Assandh reached the said Community Health Centre, and preferred an application to the Medical Officer so as to know the position of the injured. On being satisfied that the injured persons were fit to be examined by the police, the Inspector examined the injured, and recorded their statements u/s. 161 Cr.P.C. An F.I.R. was then registered against Kewal Kishan, Mehar 4 Singh, Raj Bala and Sarveshwar. The same day, Kewal Kishan, Mehar Singh and Raj Bala were arrested, and the said car belonging to Kewal Kishan was taken into possession.

10. But the same is not the situation here if we look at the charge.

14. For the reasons aforementioned, so far as charge against respondent No.2 is concerned, the judgment of the High Court in quashing the charge is set aside.

15. Charge framed against respondent No.2 is restored. Let him face the trial in accordance with law. The appeal is allowed.
S.K.M.Haider vs Union Of India & Ors

3. The appellant--S.K.M. Haider--joined the service in Northern Railway as Luggage Porter, Group `D' post, on December 1 3, 1991. The next channel of promotion from Luggage Porter is to the post of Ticket Collector. Having acquired eligibility for promotion to the post of Ticket Collector, the appellant appeared in the written test held by the respondents on January 8, 2003. He was successful in the written test and was called for viva-voce by the Interview Committee on February 25, 2003. On June 24, 2003, a provisional list of the candidates who were found suitable for the post of Ticket Collector on the basis of written test and viva voce was prepared in which the appellant's name was placed at Serial No. 25.

4. On July 3, 2003, the appellant appeared before the Medical Superintendent, Northern Railway, DRM Office, Ambala Cantt. (Respondent No. 3) for medical examination but he was not declared fit in Class B-2.

5. The appellant challenged the medical report dated July 3, 2003 by filing an appeal before the Chief Medical Director, Northern Railway. He was asked to appear before the Medical Board on September 15, 2004. The Medical Board found the appellant fit in Class C-2 with glasses. Based on the opinion of the Medical Board, the appeal preferred by the appellant challenging the medical report dated July 3, 2003 was rejected.

6. The appellant then got himself examined at All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi on November 3, 2004 and it is his case that he was found medically fit in Class B-2.

8. Being not satisfied with the order of the Tribunal, the appellant moved the High Court of Punjab and Haryana for redressal of his grievance but there, too, he was unsuccessful and the writ petition filed by him was dismissed on March 21, 2009.

14. Consequently, appeal is allowed; judgment and order passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on March 21, 2009 8 and the order dated February 8, 2006 passed by the Central Administration Tribunal, Chandigarh are set aside. The respondents shall now consider the appellant's claim for promotion to the post of Ticket Collector on the basis of his medical fitness in Class C-2 and his empanelment in the provisional list dated June 24, 2003 and appropriate order in this regard will be issued within two months from today. The parties shall bear their own costs.

(R.M. Lodha) NEW DELHI.

FEBRUARY 14, 2011.