Reported in : [2006(108)FLR1082]; (2006)IILLJ307Del
.....however, only on the ground that services of these letters were not proved, no reliance was placed of these letters.7. normally findings are of facts are not to be interfered with in writ proceedings under article 226 of the constitution of india when such an award is challenged. however, learned counsel for the petitioner has shown various contradictions in the case set up by the workman and on that basis it is argued that the findings rendered are perverse. it is, inter alia, pointed out that :(a) first of all, there is no allegation of terminating the services of the workman, made in the statement of claim. although it is stated that the management had regular practice of refusing duty to the workmen, there is no specific allegation that even the workman in question was refused duty. it is also not stated as to on which date the management had refused him the duty.(b) in the examination-in-chief, the workman stated that he was refused duty by the management with effect from 1st april, 1983 whereas in the cross examination he mentioned that the management refused to give work on 12th april, 1983 for the first time.thus there were clear contradictions by the workman on this.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 123(2005)DLT268; II(2005)DMC501; 2005(83)DRJ509
.....dated 04.02.2005 of the additional sessions judge, delhi in criminal revision 55/2004, whereby the learned judge has while interfering in an interim order passed by the metropolitan magistrate, karkardooma, under section 125 cr.p.c. reduced the interim maintenance directed to be paid to the wife holding that she was not entitled to any maintenance since she was an income tax payee.2. counsel for the petitioner submits that only an interim amount was fixed by the metropolitan magistrate and the order was not a final one. he further submits that the findings of the additional sessions judge are wrong inasmuch as the petitioner being an income tax assessed is capable to maintaining herself. he submits that at the time of marriage in 2001, since there was a demand of car from the in-laws a sum of rs.3,50,592/-(rupees three lakh fifty thousand five hundred and ninety two) was credited to the account of the petitioner, ms. rakhi, which was then passed on by way of a cheque towards the charges of car and subsequently thereafter there was consistent decline in the credits in her account to the extent that on 07.03.2005 her account stands credited to the amount of rs.1,322/-(rupees one.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 122(2005)DLT418; II(2005)DMC377
orderr.s. sodhi, j.crl. m.a. 9778/2004:1. delay condoned. application disposed of.crl. rev. p. 673/2004 & crl. m.a. 9776/2004.crl. rev. p. 673/2004 is directed against the order of the additional sessions judge, delhi dated 4.6.2004 whereby the learned judge has framed a charge under section 498a/306/302/34, ipc.2. counsel submits that such charge cannot be framed since they are diametrically opposite.3. i have gone through the records and perused the order dated 4.7.2004 as also studied sections 306/302/34. obviously, counsel for the petitioner is correct in submitting that charge of 306 and 302/34 cannot be framed. particulars of charge are essential to be supplied while framing of charge in which case if kanta devi has committed suicide she cannot be murdered.4. in his view of the matter, the order dated 4.6.2004 is set aside. the trial court is directed to re-frame charges, if so made out, on the material available before it.5. with this crl. rev. p. 673/2004 is disposed of crl.m.a. 9776/2004 also stands disposed of.a copy of this order be given dusty to counsel for the petitioner.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR2006Raj43; RLW2005(4)Raj2676; 2005(4)WLC442
.....to learned counsel for the petitioner, the trial court had no jurisdiction to ignore the terms and conditions of the arbitration clause and in fact, by the condition no. 25 of the agreement, the plaintiff-respondent agreed for the procedure for appointment of the arbitrator and it gave unfettered and absolute right to the defendant to appoint the sole arbitrator and fix the place for arbitration proceedings, which in this case is agreed for to be at mumbai only. learned counsel for the petitioner also referred an application dated 23rd feb., 2001 alleged to have been submitted before the trial court whereby the petitioner informed the trial court that the petitioner-defendant has already appointed the arbitrator and, therefore, the matter may be referred to the sole arbitrator appointed by the petitioner.5. learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the judgment of the hon'ble supreme court delivered in the case of gesellschaft fur b. forschung mbs, germany v. kopran laboratories ltd. and anr. (slp (c) no. 1190/2002) decided on 13.3.2003) decided on 13.3.2003 wherein after noticing the fact that high court appointed arbitrator in violation to the terms of the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : RLW2005(4)Raj2672; 2005(4)WLC255
.....passed by municipal council, banner vide which, the petitioner has been alloted a plot at mahaveer nagar on current market price.2. the bare minimum fact, on which the relief aforesaid is sought to rest reveal that a plot bearing no. ah-4 was allotted to the petitioner on concessional rate by municipal board, barmer in the month of january, 1976. the petitioner deposited amount of rs. 140/- on 24.01.1976 evidenced through receipt annexure-1. the possession of this plot however could not be given to the petitioner on the ground that there was some dispute going on in the court, wherein injunction was also granted regarding the said plot. after a lapse of as many as six years vide communication dated 17.7.1982, petitioner was called upon to state as to whether he was interested to get the plot and in case he was not interested then he should submit an affidavit. the petitioner submitted his affidavit and another plot da-31 was alloted to him vide order dated 6.10.1983. the possession of this plot too could also not be given to the petitioner for one reason or the other. constrained in the facts of the case as mentioned the petitioner kept on approaching the respondents and.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2005(4)CTC17
.....that 09.0 4.2005, 10.04.2005, 14.04.2005, 16.04.2005 and 17.04.2005 were holidays. even if we accept the claim of the government advocate, the fact remains that there were in between five clear working days. therefore, we are unable to accept the explanation of the learned government advocate.4. in a matter like this, we are of the view that the representation submitted by detenu should be considered and disposed of by the authorities concerned with a sense of urgency without avoidable delay. all the authorities, including the persons assisting the authorities have to act promptly and expeditiously. it is not only the duty of the government to see that the representation of detenu or his relatives is considered and disposed of in accordance with law, but it should also be disposed of within a reasonable time and communicated to the detenu without undue delay. the objective of article 22(5) of the constitution of india is the most speedy consideration of representation made by the detenu by the authorities concerned and without its expeditious consideration with a sense of urgency, the basic purpose of affording the earliest opportunity of making the representation would be.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [2005]127CompCas85(Mad); (2005)6CompLJ432(Mad); [2005]63SCL326(Mad)
.....judge ordered the company petition filed by mr. avichi in c. p. no. 319 of 1999 as closed. the said petition came to be closed only due to the fact that the company has already been ordered to be wound up. it must be borne in mind that the company petition filed by mr. avichi was not dismissed on the merits. in the circumstances, the proper rule of construction would be that the date of commencement of winding up proceedings shall be reckoned from the date of filing of c. p. no. 319 of 1999, though the said petition was closed in view of the fact that the company was ordered to be wound up in another petition.10. the company application has been filed under sections 531 and 531a of the act. section 531 relates to the fraudulent preference and the said section reads as under :'(1) any transfer of property, movable or immovable, delivery of goods, payment, execution or other act relating to property made, taken or done by or against a company within six months before the commencement of its winding up which, had it been made, taken or done by or against an individual within three months before the presentation of an insolvency petition on which he is adjudged insolvent, would.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : III(2006)BC113; (2006)3MLJ924
.....liability of the parties to perform the contract, it does not put an end to their liability to pay damages for any breach of the contract'.in the factual background that the contract was found to be still in existence for certain purposes, the supreme court has made the above observation. in the same decision, the supreme court has also held that whether the contract wholly superseded or not by a new contract between the parties, such dispute would fall outside the arbitration clause. the supreme court has held that if the new contract supersedes the earlier contract, the arbitration clause falls with it. as discussed earlier, the earlier partnership deed is held to be superseded by the agreement of compromise.23. the court below has not properly appreciated the fact that the claim is based only on the compromise, which is not the subject of the arbitration agreement. the arbitration agreement is only referred to in the deed of partnership, which has been superseded by the agreement of compromise. learned subordinate judge erred in referring the matter to arbitration and dismissing the suit. since the subject matter of the suit is founded upon the agreement of compromise, the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2005)6CompLJ463(Mad); [2006]66SCL414(Mad)
.....a suit no. 3781 of 1994 on the file of the high court, mumbai. the high court, mumbai, appointed a receiver, who took possession of the company's factory at vadalur, south arcot district and also books and records of the company. as the winding up of the company was ordered and the official liquidator was appointed, the receiver ought to have handed over possession of the assets of the company to the official liquidator, high court, madras. hence, an application in c. a. no. 701 of 2002, was filed seeking for a direction to the receiver, high court, mumbai, to hand over the assets, books and accounts and the records of the company in liquidation and also for a further direction to the receiver not to proceed with the sale of properties of the company in liquidation. it appears that the receiver appointed by the high court, mumbai, informed the respondent that she was discharged as receiver pursuant to the order passed by the presiding officer, debt recovery tribunal, mumbai, on may 24, 2002 and m/s. industrial and technology consultant of tamil nadu ltd., was appointed as a new receiver by the debt recovery tribunal. the above order came to be passed in view of the fact that.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2005(4)CHN658
.....saving and validation.-- anything done or any action taken under the principal act as amended by this act before the publication of this act in the official gazette shall be deemed to have been validly done or taken under the principal act as amended by this act as if this act were in force when such thing was done or such action was taken.'10. the west bengal land reforms (amendment) act, 2000 was published in the official gazette on march 14, 2001. the lower appellate court passed the order of pre-emption on february 5, 1996. this court dismissed the revisional application of the pre-emptee on march 25, 1998.11.therefore, the decision of the lower appellate court granting pre-emption in favour of the pre-emptor shall be deemed to have been validly passed under the principal act. there is no substance in the revisional application under article 227 of the constitution of india.12. the revisional application is, therefore, rejected.13. i make no order as to costs.14. let xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the applicants on urgent basis.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT