Reported in : I(2006)ACC701
ordern.k. mody, j.1. being aggrieved by the inadequacy of the amount awarded by 1st mact, mandsaur, in claim case no. 139/97 vide award dated 13.5.1998, whereby a sum of rs. 25,000 has been awarded along with interest @ 12% per annum, the present appeal has been filed.2. learned counsel for the appellant submits that breakup of rs. 25,000 awarded by the learned tribunal is as under:towards permanent disability : rs. 15,000towards pain and sufferings : rs. 5,000towards loss of income : rs. 5,000.3. it is submitted that appellant has sustained grievous injuries. there was permanent disability of 25% in the right knee of the appellant. there was deformity of femur bone in the right leg. it is evident from the statement of dr. p.k. upadhayaya, who was cmo in district hospital at mandsaur. it is submitted that amount awarded is at lower side. no amount is awarded towards medical expenses. similarly no amount has been awarded towards expenses incurred by the appellant on other heads. it is also submitted that respondent no. 4 has been wrongly exonerated on the ground that driver of the vehicle was not having the proper licence. it is submitted that at the relevant time respondent no. 1.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : [2006]144STC262(Uttra)
.....the assessee was allowed and the appeal of the revenue was dismissed.3. the question of law involved in this revision is as under :whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the sales tax tribunal was justified in holding that the dealer had no mens rea in issuing form iiic(2) to the purchaser, even though he had not actually paid any tax 4. heard shri pitamber maulekhi, learned counsel for the revenue and shri syed nadim, learned counsel for the assessee.5. the assessee is a dealer who runs a rice mill. he produces rice and rice polish. he obtained eligibility certificate under section 4-a of the u.p. sales tax act, 1948. the dispute pertains to the penalty imposed for the assessment years 1985-86 and 1986-87.6. learned counsel for the revenue, argued that the assessee, a new manufacturing unit, registered under the sales tax act, 1948, obtained eligibility certificate under section 4-a of the aforesaid act. as such, it was exempted from the tax for the impugned assessment years. there is no dispute that he did not pay any tax for the assessment year, yet it issued form iiic(2) to the purchaser of his rice, which means that he gave a declaration of the purchaser that.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2006CriLJ503
.....act, 1972 to undergo imprisonment for two years and a fine of rs. 2000/- and default of payment of fine to further undergo 3 months s.i.2: the brief facts are that a complaint was filed before the trial court alleging therein that on 24-11-1980 at 7 a.m. from motor road in village natwar four pods of musk weighing 10 tolas 5 anas worth rs. 12,000/- was recovered from the possession of the respondent. the prosecution led evidence and the respondent in his statement under section 313 cr. p.c. denied the allegations made in the complaint and stated that he was taken into illegal custody and thereafter he was handed over to the police. he has made a complaint to the higher authorities and he has been implicated due to enmity. after appreciation of the evidence the learned trial court convicted the respondent and sentenced him as mentioned above. feeling aggrieved by the said order an appeal was preferred before the learned sessions judge who allowed the appeal and acquitted the respondent. the learned sessions judge acquitted the respondent-accused only on the ground that the assistant wild life warden was not competent to file the complaint. as such the comlaint was not made in.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : AIR2006Jhar78; [2006(2)JCR357(Jhr)]
.....was made with regard to sharda devi's case and it was observed by the hon'ble supreme court that the wordings of section 54 of the land acquisition act merely refers to the forum of an appeal and the non obstante clause did not restrict the right of appeal from one bench of the high court to another bench as provided in clause 10 of the letters patent.12. there is no denying the fact that the provisions of the coal hearing areas (acquisition &. development) act, 1957 and those of the land acquisition act, 1894, act are similar and the provisions relating to appeal are also similar. consequently, in view of the observations made by the hon'ble supreme court in sharda devi's case, as explained further by a division bench of this court in the case of banshi mahto and ors. v. deputy commissioner, hazaribagh and ors. 2005 (3) jcr 119, these appeals must be held to be maintainable.let these appeals be listed for admission on 9th august 2005 at the top.
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2005(II)OLR462
.....the petition filed under section 311 cr.p.c. by the petitioner and declined to recall p.ws. 6 and 11 for cross-examination.2. succinctly stated the fact of the case leading to filing of this crlmc is that the petitioner faced trial for the offence under sections 304-a/201 ipc read with section 39 of the electricity act in the aforesaid case on the allegation that one udayanath patra expired, coming in contact with a live electric wire stealthily taken by the petitioner underneath the cultivable land of the deceased to his house. at the stage of recording of accused statement, the petitioner filed a petition under section 311 cr.p.c. on 10.6.2005 with a prayer to recall p.ws. 6 and 11 for their cross-examination on the ground that since p.w.6 was examined in absence of the counsel engaged on behalf of the petitioner he could not be cross-examined and that p.w. 11 was an accused in u.c. case no. 56 of 1997 which was not within the knowledge of the petitioner earlier and that he is required to be cross-examined further with reference to that case for just decision of the present case. learned s.d.j.m., rejected the petition holding that p.w.6 is not a material witness and the.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 101(2006)CLT25; II(2005)DMC829; 2005(II)OLR438
.....for hearing of the appeal, have not yet been prepared and so there is no likelihood of hearing of the appeal in near future. keeping in view the fact that the petitioner has already remained in custody for more than four years, out of the total period of 7 years, if holidays etc. are deducted, there is likelihood of the petitioner being released after one year or one and half years. in that view of the matter, the petitioner would be at least, entitled to be considered for his release on bail. furthermore, on merits also since there is no corroborative evidence in support of the allegation of continuous torture on account of demand of dowry as against the petitioner and the medical evidence having failed to prove the exact cause of death, by which the deceased can be said to have met with an unnatural death to attract the ingredients of the offence under section 304-b of the indian penal code, the petitioner may be also entitled for a clean acquittal in this case. however, without going into the merits of the case, keeping in view of the facts as narrated above and further taking into consideration of his age, he can even undergo the remaining period of his sentence to be.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : 2005(II)OLR460
.....order dated 20.5.2005 passed by the government of orissa in panchayati raj (g.p.) department in exercise of the powers conferred upon it under sub-section (2) of section 115 of the orissa gram panchayat act, 1964 (orissa act 1 of 1965) and the rules framed thereunder. by the said order the state government has been pleased to place the petitioner under suspension from the office of sarpanch, phasiguda gram panchayat.3. mr. das, learned sr. counsel relying upon section 115 (2) of the amended provisions of the orissa gram panchayats (amendment) act, 2004, forcefully submitted that as no proceeding has been initiated till date, the government lack initial jurisdiction to suspend the petitioner. sub-section (2) of section 115 of the amended act reads as follows :'(2) the state government, may pending initiation of the proceeding on the basis of their opinion under sub-section (1), by order, for reasons to be recorded in writing, suspend the sarpanch or naib-sarpanch, as the case may be, from the office.' 3. the words 'pending initiation of the proceeding' mean and connote that before initiation or contemplating to initiate proceeding, the sarpanch can be put under suspension, upon.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2005)141PLR738
.....and badowal kalan, distt. gurdaspur. however, the dispute was raised which relates to 8 standard acres 8-3/4 units of village badowal kalan. in fact, this area was allotted to one smt. dayal kaur widow of isher singh through her legal heirs buta singh son of kesar singh, surain singh son of bila singh, asha singh son of mulla singh and jagir singh son of teja singh of village badowal, tehsil batala, district gurdaspur and excess area measuring 5 standard acre's 5-1/2 units was cancelled vide order dated june 26, 1961, by the chief settlement commissioner, punjab, jalandhar. a review petition was filed by the aforestated legal heirs, which was dismissed by the chief settlement commissioner vide order dated march 6, 1968. the aforestated orders were challenged by way of c.w.p. no. 1243 of 1968, which was dismissed by this court vide order dated april 5, 1968, the special leave petition registered as civil appeal no. 1381 of 1969, was dismissed on december 1, 1978. resul-tantly, the allotment made to kartar singh on 3.1.1967, was upheld. as a sequel thereto the rehabilitation department was bound to put the petitioner into possession of the land so allotted. instead the land.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : II(2006)ACC259; 2006ACJ2284; (2006)142PLR457
.....of rs. 1,50,000/- as compensation on account of the death of surinder pal, who died in a road accident on 4.11.1991 at 2.30 p.m.2. in brief, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that surinder pal aged 24 years and was running a canteen at railway station, jammu, was hit by a truck bearing registration no. pbn-6215 being driven by mohal lal, respondent no. 7, while the former was riding a motorcycle bearing registration no.pcw-1930. surinder pal was killed at the spot. the truck in question was owned by kashmira singh (respondent no. 6) and was insured with the oriental insurance company ltd., pathankot (appellant herein). the legal heirs of surinder pal deceased i.e., his mother, three sisters 'and one brother field claim petition. the tribunal found that the accident had been caused on account of the rash and negligent driving of the truck by mohan lal driver (respondent no.7). the tribunal passed the award for an amount of rs. 1,50,000/- with 15% interest from the date of application till date of payment. as the truck was insured, the liability wasplaced on the insurance company-the appellant. now the insurance company has filed this appeal to challenge the award.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPTReported in : (2006)144PLR610
.....determination of the matter. the order recorded by the presiding officer of the court as to what had taken place during the trial is conclusive. in fact it is absolute verity and is to be taken precisely as recorded by the court. the stand taken by the petitioner contrary to what has been recorded by the presiding officer is not to be accepted. in fact the petitioner cannot circumvent the order passed by the curt by taking a contrary stand to that which had been recorded by the court. therefore, the stand taken by the petitioner which is contrary to the position on record is to be rejected. another aspect that needs to be considered is that the learned civil judge (junior division), in her impugned order has noticed the fact that the petitioner did not apply for certified copy of the order dated 21.11.2000 assuming that the case of the landlady-respondent had been dismissed in default. it was as such found that there was no sufficient cause for setting aside the ex parte proceedings.9. the decision in g.p. srivastava v. r.k. raizada and ors. (supra) referred to by the learned counsel for the petitioner is inapplicable to the facts of the present case. the hon'ble supreme court.....
Tag this Judgment! Ask ChatGPT