Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: rationale Year: 1999 Page 48 of about 477 results (0.007 seconds)

Nov 01 1999 (SC)

V.K. JaIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Nov-01-1999

Reported in : [2000]100CompCas827(SC); (2000)126PLR366; (2000)1SCC709

1. this writ petition filed under article 32 of the constitution for quashing various prosecution proceedings launched against this petitioner for the offence under section 138 of the negotiable instruments act merely on the ground that petitioner is unable to go to all the different courts where the cases are pending. he contends that he was not participating in the affairs of the company which issued the cheques. it is a defence which he can adopt in the prosecutions. but merely raising such a contention now is no ground for quashing the prosecutions.2. all the same, considering the plight of the petitioner in defending prosecution proceedings instituted at various places in india on the strength of the cheques issued by the company of which he was the director, we permit the petitioner to move the court concerned (before which the prosecution is pending in any of the cases) for exempting him from personal appearance. this can be done only after making the first appearance in the court concerned. if any such application is filed by the petitioner, we direct the court concerned to exempt him from personal appearance on the following conditions:1. a counsel on his behalf would be present in the particular court on days when his case is taken up;2. he will not dispute his identity as the accused in the case.3. he will be present in court when such presence is imperatively needed.with the aforesaid reliefs granted to the petitioner we dispose of the writ petition.

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 12 1999 (SC)

S.S.M. Brothers (P) Ltd. and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Cent ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jan-12-1999

Reported in : (2000)161CTR(SC)177; [2000]243ITR418(SC); (1999)3SCC229

order1. these appeals by special leave impugn the correctness of the view taken by a division bench of the high court at madras in tax case no. 146 of 1979 (see : [1985]155itr794(mad) and followed in tax case no. 140 of 1980. the questions before the high court were (page 796) :(1) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, it has been rightly held by the tribunal that the assessee was entitled to the higher rate of development rebate at 35 per cent, under section 33(1)(b)(b)(i) in respect of the machinery used by it in its business ?(2) whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the tribunal was right in holding that the assessee-company was engaged in the construction, manufacture or production of the textiles (otherwise processed) so as to be entitled for the higher rate of development rebate ?2. the tribunal in its order had stated that the assessee-appellant purchased cloth and on that cloth embroidery work was done with the aid of imported machines. in some cases the cloth was thereafter dyed again to obtain an uniform colour. it said that, 'after the embroidery finished product is something which in the realm of textile would be considered to be cloth entirely different from the basic cloth on which such embroidery work was done'. upon this basis it came to the conclusion that the asses-see was entitled to the benefit of development rebate at an enhanced rate under the provisions of section 33(1)(b)(b)(i) of the income-tax act, 1961. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 28 1999 (SC)

Abid Hatim Merchant Vs. Janeb Salebhai Saheb SaifuddIn and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Sep-28-1999

Reported in : 2000(1)SCALE407

order1. leave granted.2. the appear arising out of special leave petition being slp (c) no. 7393 of 1994 to stand disposed of by consent of parties in the manner following:1. the orders of the city civil court at bombay in charity application no. 18 of 1976 dated 5.8.1991 and 22.10.1991 as modified by the order of the bombay high court dated 15th july, 1993 in letters patent appeal no. 103 of 1991 stand confirmed subject to the following:2. (a) twenty three (23) beds in the proposed saifee hospital shall be reserved for the dawoodi bohra community (inclusive of beds provided under the orders mentioned in para (1) above.(b) seven (7) beds in the proposed saifee hospital shall be reserved for those persons who claim to be dawoodi bohras but have not given misaq to the head priest of the dawoodi bohra community. (dai-ul-mustaq).(c) the persons covered under (a) and (b) above, shall be entitled to free beds facilities on the same lines as being provided by the state government in terms of section 41aa of the bombay public trust act, 1959.for those, however, who do not fulfill the criteria prescribed by the state government under section 41aa of the said act. their entitlement pertaining to concession if any, shall be determined by the trustees of the saifee hospital trust.(d) the directions as above and incorporated in these consent terms are in the peculiar facts of the matter in issue and the same shall not be treated as a precedent on any count whatsoever in any other case or .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 20 1999 (HC)

B. Ratnamala Vs. G. Rudramma

Court : Andhra Pradesh

Decided on : Aug-20-1999

Reported in : 1999(6)ALD160; 1999(6)ALT59

orderb. prakash rao, j. 1. this revision is before us on a reference made by our learned brother b.s. raikote, j., differing with the view taken by another learned single judge of this court in m.a. gafoor v. mohd.jani and others, : 1999(1)ald159 , as to the interpretation of explanation i to article 47-a of schedule 1a of the indian stamp act (for shot 'the act').2. a few facts which are germane for answering the reference are: the petitioner had filed a suit in os no. 15 of 1996 on the file of the principal senior civil judge's court, kurnool seeking specific performance of an agreement dated 14-11-1988 which was marked as ex.a1 during the trial. on the objection taken by the respondent-defendant by filing an application in ia no.232 of 1988 seeking to impound the said doucument and levy stamp duty and penalty as a sale deed under article 47-a of schedule 1a of the indian stamp act, the trial court allowed the said application overruling the objection taken by the plaintiff-petitioner herein as to the permissibility of the said objection once the document is marked under section 35 of the act and held that the said document is insufficiently stamped and directed the plaintiff to pay the deficit stamp duty and penalty on ex.a1 or otherwise it was held that the document becomes inadmissible in evidence. aggrieved by the same, the plaintiff carried the matter in revision before this court.3. the document recites that the possession of the schedule mentioned property was .....

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 06 1999 (HC)

Mahesh Muljibhai Mistre Vs. the State of Maharashtra and Others

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Mar-06-1999

Reported in : AIR1999Bom404; 2000(2)BomCR846; 1999(3)MhLj844

ordern.p. chapalgaonker, j.1. this petition challenges the validity of section 51-1a and section 52 of the maharashtra municipal councils, nagar panchayats and industrial townships act, 1965; and also of article 243-t(4) of the constitution of india.2. the terms of office of the chairperson of a municipal council was conterminous with the term of elected councillors. by maharashtra act no. 41 of 1994, the said term was reduced to one year. it is contended that, in most of the local bodies, the term of office of the chairperson is coterminous with the office of the members, and reducing such term in the case of municipalities in maharashtra would be unreasonable. the second proviso to section 52 of the maharashtra municipal councils, nagar panchayats and industrial townships act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act'), which reads that, if a person is elected as a president to fill the casual vacancy of the office of the president, as provided in sub-section (8) of section 51, he shall continue in office of the president only so long as the person in whose place he is elected would have been entitled to continue, if such vacancy had not arisen. this proviso is also challenged on the ground that a person elected in a vacancy which is a casual one arising out of the death, or, resignation, removal, or, similar reason for removal of the president, would be entitled to continue only for the remainder of the term and he is denied opportunity to enjoy the office for the full .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 05 1999 (SC)

Delhi Development Authority Vs. Skipper Construction and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-05-1999

Reported in : 1999(3)SCALE11; (1999)6SCC18

order1. on 15th march, 1999, an order was passed by this court in this i.a. stating that prima facie, there was violation of the orders of this court by shri prabhjot singh sabbarwal and his wife harpreet kaur. we directed notice to be issued to the above said two persons and also directed the commissioner of police, new delhi to see that the notices were served on the abovesaid two persons. there was a further direction that shri prabhjot singh and harpreet kaur were to be present in this court today, the 5th of april, 1999 at 2 p.m. the commissioner of police was also directed to ensure the presence of the two persons today before this court.2. the office report dated 3rd april, 1999 shows that no compliance report has been received so far from the commissioner of police. however, the learned counsel appearing for smt. harpreet kaur submits that she is present in the court and on her behalf, time is requested for filing a reply to the show cause notice issued by this court. in the abovesaid order, we had also directed notice to be issued to m/s. shikha developers ltd., delhi. the office report shows that they have been served and their learned counsel seeks time to file counter affidavit.3. we grant two weeks time for filing counters.4. so far as prabhjot singh is concerned, he is not present in spite of the court's order, (though it was represented by a person who was present in the court that shri prabhjot singh was waiting outside for some time). be that as it may. he is .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 08 1999 (SC)

Manoj @ Bhau and ors. Vs. State of Maharashtra

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Apr-08-1999

Reported in : AIR1999SC1620; 1999(1)ALD(Cri)744; 1999(1)ALT(Cri)231; 1999CriLJ2284; 1999(3)Crimes3(SC); JT1999(2)SC580; 1999(2)SCALE470; (1999)4SCC268; [1999]2SCR487

g.b. pattanaik, j.1. the three appellants, who are accused nos. 1, 2 and 3 respectively, along with 3 others who have not preferred any appeal were tried by the learned additional judge, nagpur in sessions case no. 70 of 1990 for the offences punishable under 147, 148 and 302 read with section 149 indian penal code on the allegation that they formed an unlawful assembly and mercilessly assaulted deceased raju by means of gupti, knife, hockey sticks and motor-cycle chain on account of which raju succumbed to injuries sustained by him. the learned sessions judge on the basis of the prosecution evidence convicted all of the under sections 147, 148 and 302 read with section 149 indian penal code and sentenced them to suffer r.i for one year and to pay a fine of no. 100/- and, in default of suffer r.i for one week for conviction under section 147, and for section 148 sentenced each one of them to suffer r.i. for two years and to pay a fine of no. 100/- each and, in default to suffer r.i. for one week and imprisonment for life for the conviction under section 302 read with section 149 ipc with the further direction that the sentences would run concurrently. against the conviction and sentences two criminal appeals were preferred; one by the present appellants which was registered as criminal appeal no. 237 of 1991 and the other by the rest 3 accused persons which was registered as criminal appeal no. 227 of 1991 and both the appeals were heard and were disposed of by the common .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //