Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jun-22-2001
Reported in : 2001(2)ALD(Cri)257; 2001(2)ALT(Cri)148; 2001CriLJ3787
..... inform to the police. however,upon the information p. ws. 2 and 1 came t.6 the office of p.w. 3, seized mo. 1 in the presence of the mediators under a cover of panchanama and expert opinion was also sought and ex. p6 opinion confirms that mo. 1 was a fake note.now the point that arises for consideration .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jul-09-2001
Reported in : 2001(2)ALD(Cri)348; 2001(2)ALT(Cri)198; 2001CriLJ4063
..... . parvathamma ((p.w. 1) and p. venkataiah (p0.w. 3); and thereafter, he proceeded to kharnmam, held inquest over the dead body of the deceased in the presence of the mediators and sent the dead body for postmortem examination. the medical officer certified that the deceased would appear to have died 'due to shock and due to extensive burns'. on 20 .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Oct-10-2001
Reported in : 2002CriLJ2067
s.k. agarwal, j.1. this appeal was preferred by chinta, ram saroj and gyan das against their conviction under section 302 read with section 34 i.p.c. and section 323 read with section 34 i.p.c. they were sentenced to life imprisonment and six month's r.i. in the abovesaid two counts by the sessions judge, basti.2. the deceased jamil ahmad was a clerk with an advocate in the court at basti. he had litigation with the appellants of this appeal on some landed property. the date fixed in the case was 22-7-1980. deceased jamil ahmad along with his brother p.w. 1 mohd. umar, his mother p.w. 2 smt. jumratan and p.w. 6 jalis khan were going to jaunpur on 21-7-1980 to attend the case. at about 10.00 a.m. when they reached near muniwa ghat they were accosted by the four accused persons, the three appellants and vishwanath, who died during trial. they were lying in wait in nearby munja bushes. seeing the deceased along with his mother and brother coming towards them they pounced upon him. they started belabouring him with their respective weapons, phasra, lathi and ballam.3. according to f.i.r., chinta struck first a phasra blow upon the deceased. immediately that was followed by a blow of ballam by gyan das, due to which jamil ahmad fell down. when the witnesses mohd. umar and smt. jumratan rushed to save him, they were also assaulted by pharsa and lathis. mohd. umar was assaulted by chinta (appellant) with a pharsa and smt. jumratan was assaulted by vishwanath with lathi. an .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Orissa
Decided on : Nov-29-2001
Reported in : 93(2002)CLT55; 2002(I)OLR52
p.k. patra, j.1. this miscellaneous appeal under order 33, rule 1 (r) of the code of civil procedure (for short 'cpc') is directed against the order dated 10-4-2001 in misc. case no. 23 of 2001 arising out of title suit no. 3 of 2001 passed by the civil judge (senior division), bhubaneswar rejecting the prayer for temporary injunction under order 39, rules 1 and 3 read with section 151, cpc.2. appellant is the plaintiff in the suit. she filed the suit for declaration of her title, confirmation of her possession and permanent injunction in respect of the disputed homestead land meansuring ac. 0.250 decimals out of a total area of ac. 2.322 deciamals appertaining to plot no. 6, khata no. 191 of mouza chandrasekharpur, district-khuda. she prayed for temporary injunction against defendant-respondent nos. 1 and 2 till the disposal of the suit alleging that they were trespassers. defendant nos. 3, 4 and 5 are the vendors who sold the suit land to the plaintiff, vide registered sale deed nos. 4279 dated 28-10-1998 and 5762 dated 29-12-2000 and delivered possession of the same.3. as per the plaint averments, the raja of patia was the owner of the lands described in the schedule to the plaint which included the suit land. one tilotama samal, wife dhanurdhar samal was the lessee in respect of lands measuring ac. 1.80 decimals appertaining to plot no. 5 of khata no. 58 and ac. 2.320 decimals appertaining to plot no. 6/1939. after vesting of the estate of the raja of patia, tilotama .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Nov-19-2001
Reported in : AIR2002P& H147
m.m. kumar, j.1. this is a plaintiff-appellant's (for brevity 'the plaintiff) second appeal directed against the judgment and decree passed by the additional district judge, karnal dt. 6.3.1980. the additional dist. judge, karnal in his judgment partially agreed with the findings recorded by the sub judge, 2nd class, karnal on 13.2.1979. the relief claimed in the suit was that the registered sale deed dated 9.2.1976 executed by the plaintiff-appellant in favour of the defendant-respondent (for brevity 'the defendant') for a period of 99 years be declared as null and void and thus not binding on the plaintiff-appellant. as a consequence of the declaration, further relief claimed was that the plaintiff be given possession of agricultural land measuring 241 kanal 12 marlas situated in village bhauji, tehsil and district karnal, as described in the plaint.2. the case set up by the plaintiff is that she is the owner of the suit land measuring 241 kanals 12 marlas situated in village bhauji, tehsil and distt. karnal as per jamabandi for the year 1970-71. the defendant is her real brother's son. the agricultural property was inherited by the plaintiff from her husband after his death. it is claimed that the plaintiff was in self cultivating possession of the afore-mentioned agricultural land till kharif 1976. earlier to 1976, she used to give this land for cultivation to ramjilal and gian singh as tenant who were her husband's brother's sons. it is further pleaded that on account of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-28-2001
Reported in : 125STC304(P& H)
..... result, a miller who purchases paddy and sells rice to the foreign buyer, is exempted from payment of purchase tax. however, in case, the miller only sells it to a mediator, viz., the exporter, the transaction of purchase of paddy by the miller is not covered under sub-section (3).26. mr. sarin referred to the provisions of section 12 of .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-22-2001
Reported in : 2001IIIAD(Delhi)468; 90(2001)DLT423; 2001(59)DRJ112
..... that they would meet constable bhupender singh and pw-6 at the place of occurrence. not it was prosecution's case that the accused persons had any intention or pre-mediated to kill constable bhupender singh. in fact deceased bhupender singh confronted the accused and reminded them of their involvements in the sale of smack which allegations according to mr. thakur .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-19-2001
Reported in : 2001IIAD(Delhi)83; 90(2001)DLT455
ordera.k. sikri. j.1. parties to this appeal are related to each other. the appellants, who were defendants in the suit are brothers of respondent (plaintiff in the suit). respondent had filed suit no. 2 of 1997 against appellants in the court of district judge, delhi. this was s suit for possession, injunction and recovery of damages in respect of ground floor of house no. b-172, east of kailash, new delhi. suit was filed by the respondent/plaintiff on the averment that he was the owner of property no. b-172, east of kailash, new delhi as he had purchased the said plot from delhi development authority. president of india executed perpetual lease deed for the plot of land on 8th august, 1969. the plaintiff had allowed his brothers to stay with him on the ground floor of the house when the same was constructed. at that time, respondent was in madras. in 1980 he decided to shift his family from madras to delhi. at that time, first and second floor were constructed in the suit premises and respondent shifted to first floor. later relations between the three brothers became strained and the respondent asked the appellants to vacate the suit property. as they did not vacate, the respondent filed the suit for possession against the appellants. he also prayed for damages @ rs.3000/- per month and claimed rs.2000/- for unauthorised use an occupation for the period of 9th march, 1984 to 10th april, 1984. suit was contested by the appellants. the main defense of the, appellants was .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jul-30-2001
Reported in : 2003(1)ARBLR313(Delhi); 2002(63)DRJ82
..... form of arbitral award. at the most it is a private settlement between the parties which results in temporary, termination of the proceedings.13. settlement of the parties either through mediation or conciliation or as a result of their own efforts does not tantamount to an arbitral award or the culmination of the arbitral proceedings. it is an agreement for settlement .....Tag this Judgment!
Court : Rajasthan
Decided on : Dec-13-2001
Reported in : AIR2002Raj190; 2002(5)WLC90; 2002(4)WLN398
orderbhagwati prasad, j. 1. the present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner in the background that there was an agriculture hold-ing owned by one jethu singh s/o tej singh in khasara no. 759 measuring 12, 14 bighas situated at kheme ka kuan. jethu singh was holder of khatedari rights of this land. the said khatedar sold his rights in favour of respondent no. 3 by a registered sale deed. after sale, the aforesaid land came to be vested in respondent-samiti. a mutation was entered in the name of society through mutation no. 554. in the revenue record, in place of jethu singh, respondent no. 3 samiti was entered as khatedar. respondent no. 3 was constituted as housing cooperative society having its registered no.1188/q.2. the respondent no. 3 society made available plot no. 11 measuring 600 sq. yards (60 fts. x 90 fts) to one khushal singh, a member of the society vide annexure 1. the land was not converted and was allot-ted as agricultural land only. according to the petltitioner. it was mentioned in the allotment letter that conversion and development charges are to be borne by the member itself. the said khushal singh made an application for conversion of plot no. 11 measuring 600 sq. yards. the application presented by khushal singh was processed in accordance with law. the respondent trust has given its no objection for its conversion and the prescribed authority after fulfilment of all the requirements converted agricultural and into urban land by the order .....Tag this Judgment!