text stringlengths 5 5.67k |
|---|
In between 1979 and 1984,the State Government extended a facility of loan to the extent of Rs.6.13 crores to the Receiver appointed by the State Government for smooth functioning of the Sugar Mill,including payment of dues to sugarcane grower,repairing of machinery,etc Ratio |
It is also not in dispute that labour and other dues were payable by the Company apart from Sale Tax dues and the loan was given by the State Government between 1977-1984 for payment of such dues Ratio |
The High Court by the impugned judgment dated 1st March,2011,though noticed the aforesaid facts including the fact that the Collector,Tulsi Gaur by order dated 20th February,1992 held that there were dues of about Rs.10.44 crores payable by the Company,part of which can be adjusted from the compensation amount paid by ... |
The High Court though noticed that S.8 of the U.P.State Sugar Undertakings Acquisition Act,1971 empowers the prescribed authority to decide any dispute regarding the amount payable to any person or authority in respect of earlier liabilities of the undertaking,but it wrongly held that in view of the provisions of the U... |
any liability incurred by the Company or loan etc.taken by the receiver is not payable by the Company Ratio |
It is always open to the competent authority to seek recovery of the amount if due from the Company or to adjust the dues Ratio |
The Collector,Tulsi Gaur was not a party by name Ratio |
The order dated 20th February,1992 passed by the Collector was also not under challenge,inspite of the same the High Court declared the order dated 20th February,1992 as illegal Ratio |
For the reason aforesaid,the impugned order dated 1st March,2011 passed by the High Court in W.P.No.10220 of 1996 etc.cannot be upheld RPC |
The same is accordingly set aside RPC |
The matter is remitted to the District Collector,Meerut to determine the liability of the Company upto the date of vesting i.e.28th October,1984 after notice to the parties RPC |
The authority while so determining shall take into consideration the liability of the Company as on 28th October,1984,including labour charges,Sales Tax,loan amount given by the State Government etc.if payable RPC |
After determination of liabilities and adjustment of the dues which is payable by the Company,if any amount is found payable to the Company,the appellant shall pay the amount within four months from the date of determination RPC |
On the other hand,if any amount is found payable by the Company,the Competent authority may recover the amount,in accordance with law RPC |
C.A.No.7122 of 2003,C.A.Nos.7123-7124 of 2003 and C.A.No.7125 of 2003 RPC |
For determination of the issue involved in C.A.Nos.7122 of 2003,7123-7124 of 2003,7125 of 2003 and 7126-7129 of 2003 relevant factual matrix of the case is as follows FAC |
After giving credit of Rs.4.33 crores payable by the State Government on account of amounts towards compensation for acquisition of land,the liability of the Company was determined at Rs.6.09 crores on 20th February,1992.A sale proclamation was accordingly issued FAC |
The land of the Company measuring 1.391 Hectares in village Maliyana was put to auction FAC |
The appellants-M/s FAC |
Rudra Estate Pvt RLC |
Ltd.and another were the highest bidders FAC |
According to Auction purchasers,the entire amount was paid as per highest bid FAC |
Title to the land was also transferred in their favour FAC |
The Company being aggrieved preferred a Civil Misc FAC |
Writ Petition No.16451 of 1999 before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad challenging the sale proclamation dated 28th March,1992,order dated 30th May,1992 passed by Sub-Divisional Magistrate,Meerut confirming the sale of the properties owned by the Company and the order dated 5th April,1999 passed by the Commiss... |
The said writ petition was allowed by the learned Single Judge by the impugned judgment and order dated 27th April,2001 with following observations: "For the facts and reasons stated above,this petition succeeds and is hereby allowed RLC |
The order dated 05.04.1999 (annexure-23),order dated 30.05.1992 (Annexure-7),sale proclamation dated 28.3.1992 (Annexure-2) are hereby quashed and the respondents are directed to restore back status quo ante as on before the auction sale dated 28.04.1992 was held,within a period of two weeks from the date a certified c... |
Ltd.being aggrieved by the said judgment preferred review application under Order XLVII Rule 1 CPC for review of the judgment and order dated 27th April,2001 passed by the High Court FAC |
The review application was disposed of by an order dated 3rd September,2001 with the following observations: "In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances,in my opinion,it will meet the ends of justice if I grant three months time to the respondent no.2 and 3 to refund the amount in question to the auction purchase... |
It is ordered accordingly RLC |
Another application was filed by M/s FAC |
Ltd.under Order XIVII Rule 1 CPC for review of the order dated 3rd September,2001.The said review application was dismissed by the impugned judgment dated 15th March,2002 FAC |
The aforesaid orders have been challenged in C.A.No.7122 of 2003 (M/s Ratio |
Rudra Estate Pvt.Ltd.& Anr.vs Ratio |
Jaswant Sugar Mills Ltd.& Ors.),C.A.Nos.7123-7124 of 2003,C.A.No.7125 of 2003 (Shri Munindra Singh & Anr.vs Ratio |
Jaswant Sugar Mills Ltd.& Ors Ratio |
and C.A.Nos.7126-7129 of 2003 (Commissioner,Meerut Division,Meerut vs Ratio |
M/s Jaswant Sugar Mills Ltd Ratio |
On 30th October,2002 C.A.No.7122 of 2003 preferred by M/s RLC |
Ltd.was taken up and this Court passed the following order: "Delay condoned RLC |
Out of the 3 special leave petitions,the only special leave petition which we find worth being entertained,after hearing the learned senior counsel for the petitioners,is as against the order dated 15.3.2002.Issue notice to respondents No.2 to 4 only limited to the question as to why the amount directed to be refunded ... |
Dasti service in addition is permitted RLC |
The other two special leave petitions are dismissed RLC |
On 24th January,2003,C.A.Nos.7123-24 of 2003 preferred by Shri Munindra Singh & Anr.were taken up and this Court passed the following order: "Delay condoned RLC |
Permission to file the Special Leave Petition is granted RLC |
After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners,we are satisfied that no fault can be found with the impugned judgment of the High Court so far as the setting aside of the sale is concerned RLC |
The learned counsel for the petitioners invites our attention to the Order dated 20.10.2002 (page 94C of the Paper Book).Issue notice to respondent nos.1 to 4 limited to the question as to why the amount which will be directed to be refunded to the petitioners herein consequent upon the sale having been set aside shoul... |
Tag with SLP(C)No.21540/2002 RLC |
As against the said order C.A.Nos.7126-29/2003 FAC |
Commissioner,Meerut Division,Meerut & Ors FAC |
Jaswant Sugar Mills Ltd.) have been preferred by the Commissioner,Meerut Division,Meerut FAC |
The said case was also tagged with the aforesaid appeals FAC |
In view of the fact that this Court vide order dated 27th RPC |
April,2003 in C.A.Nos.7123-7124 of 2003 held that this Court is satisfied that no fault can be found with the impugned judgment of the High Court so far as the setting aside of the sale is concerned,we dismiss the appeals,so far it relates to cancellation of auction sale RPC |
We have heard the parties only on the limited question as to why the amount which has been directed to be refunded to the auction purchasers-appellants herein should not bear reasonable interest Ratio |
In a situation like in the present case,one cannot hold of any statute entitling the auction purchasers to claim interest,in case the auction got cancelled or set aside by the Court of law Ratio |
Counsel for the parties also could not refer any of the clauses of auction prescribing interest on refund of amount in case of cancellation of auction or sale Ratio |
The question arises as to whether in such a situation an auction purchaser can claim interest on equitable ground Ratio |
In State of Maharashtra and others vs PRE |
Maimuma Banu and others,(2003) 7 SCC 448 2003 Indlaw SC 625,the question arose as to whether interest was payable on rental compensation PRE |
In the said case,Government resolution provided for payment of rental compensation expeditiously but no provision was made to pay interest in case of delayed payment PRE |
This Court in the said case held: "10.The crucial question is whether there can be any direction for interest on rental compensation once it is held that the same has to be paid within the time frame,notwithstanding the fact that there is no statutory obligation PRE |
11.It is not in dispute that in certain cases payments have already been made PRE |
Though the inevitable conclusion is that the High Court is not justified in directing grant of interest on the logic of various provisions contained in the Act,yet there is an element of equity in favour of the landowners PRE |
It is,however,seen that the writ applications were filed long after the possession was taken PRE |
This factor cannot be lost sight of while working out the equities PRE |
It would,therefore,be appropriate if the appellants pay interest PRE |
6% from 1-4-2000 till amounts payable as rental compensation are paid to the landowners concerned PRE |
This direction shall not apply to those cases where the payments have already been made prior to 1-4-2000.Appeals are allowed to the extent indicated without any stipulation of costs PRE |
In the present case,we find that there was no mis-representation on the part of the auction purchasers; they deposited the total auction amount within the time stipulated Ratio |
It has not been in dispute that the title of the land was also transferred in their favour Ratio |
But for the reasons mentioned by the High Court the sale has been cancelled Ratio |
It has been ordered to refund amount in favour of the auction purchaser Ratio |
appellant(s).We find no reason as to why on equitable grounds the appellants should not get interest on the said amount Ratio |
Taking into consideration the aforesaid factor while working out equities,it would,therefore,be appropriate to direct the State to pay interest at the rate of 6% on the amount to be refunded as per the High Court's order with effect from 27th April,2001 and 3rd Ratio |
September,2001,the day,the High Court passed the impugned order Ratio |
The concerned respondents are directed accordingly Ratio |
C.A.Nos.6169-6171 of 2013,C.A.Nos.6172-6174 of 2013,C.A.No.7122 of 2003,C.A.Nos.7123-7124 of 2003,C.A.No.7125 of 2003 are allowed in terms of the directions as above RPC |
The appeals (C.A.Nos.7126-7129 of 2003) filed by the Commissioner,Meerut are dismissed RPC |
No costs RPC |
Appeals dismissed RPC |
Leave granted in SLP (Crl FAC |
No.3737/2014 FAC |
These appeals are preferred by four accused against the common Judgment of the High Court of Chhattisgarh at Bilaspur,confirming the Judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge,Bemetara,District Durg,convicting the appellants u/s.302 read with Ss.34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code [hereinafter referred to as "IPC"] and... |
These appeals have been taken up for disposal together since they arise from a common judgment of the High Court deciding the appeals of the accused FAC |
The appellant -Raju FAC |
Devendra Choubey (accused no.4) has filed Criminal Appeal No.822 of 2012.The appellant -Mahesh (accused no.3) has filed Criminal Appeal No.867 of 2013.The appellant -Beenu FAC |
Chandra Prakash (accused no.2) has filed Criminal Appeal No.589 of 2014.The appellant -Smt FAC |
Shashi Tripathi (accused no.1) has filed Criminal Appeal arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.3737 of 2014 FAC |
PW-1 -Dr FAC |
Sharda Prasad Tripathi is the husband of accused Shashi Tripathi FAC |
On 25.11.2003,when PW-1 -Dr FAC |
Sharda Prasad Tripathi came home from his clinic,found that his daughter-in-law Bhavna Tripathi has been murdered FAC |
He lodged a First Information Report (F.I.R.) on 25.11.2003 at about 20:45 hours FAC |
The crime was registered FAC |
He deposed in court that on 25.11.2003,when he returned home,he found servant Anil Kumar (PW-21) was weeping FAC |
When he went inside,he found his daughter-in-law -Bhavna and wife -Shashi lying in the courtyard FAC |
Bhavna was dead FAC |
Shashi was unconscious FAC |
There were numerous injuries,including incised wounds on Bhavna,none on Shashi FAC |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.