Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 302 , Section 323 , Section 34

Murder and hurt with common intention - Conviction and sentence for commission of the offences under - Appellant and other accused persons caused serious injuries on the head and body of the deceased by inflicting injuries by weapons like lohangi, kirpan and lathi which they were carrying with them - Statement of the two eye-witnesses, viz., PWs 1 & 2, supported by the proved medical evidence - Nature of the injuries caused to the deceased proved that the aforesaid injuries were caused with the intention of killing the deceased - The sword as also the lohangi and lathi, the weapons used during the incident recovered at the instance of the accused persons - Court found that it was not a sudden attack as it was proved that the accused persons were armed with deadly weapons like, lohangi and kirpan at the time of occurrence and gave blows of sword, lathi and lohangi on the vital parts of the body with the intention of killing deceased - Conviction orders against the appellant confirmed - Appeal dismissed.

Found In:  Judgement

Motor Vehicles Act,1988  - Motor Accident Claim

Deceased died on the spot - MACT applied the Multiplier of 9, and awarded a total compensation of Rs. 1,72,000/- along with 6 % interest per annum to the claimants - High Court - Enhanced the amount of compensation from Rs. 1,72,000/- to Rs. 3,39,000/- by applying multiplier of 18 instead of 9 - Appeal - In case where an unmarried young man dies, the average age of the parents will be taken for determining the multiplier and not the age of the deceased - Award passed by the Tribunal restored - Appeal allowed - No costs.

Found In:  Judgement

Indian Penal Code,1860  - Section 302 , Section 364 , Section 201 , Section 342

Trial court conviction - Appeal - Accused took away deceased - Subjected him to severe ragging - Caused head injury to deceased - Severed his head and limbs - Removed his gold ring, watch and gold chain - Caused his death - High Court acquitted - Reversing and setting aside conviction - Enough evidence on record - Accused having malice and ill-will against deceased - Refused to succumb to ragging demands - Evidence of witnesses clearly stated - Deceased was last seen alive in the company of accused - Accused made a voluntary confession in police custody at no stage of trial - Any allegation of torture in hands of the police - Clearly proves - Statement by accused - Given voluntarily - Is an admissible piece of evidence - PW-66, PW-65 and PW-77 categorically stated - Skull, torso and limbs recovered were of deceased only - Recovery of crime objects - Basis of information given by accused - Provides a link in - Chain of circumstances - Impugned judgment and order of High Court set aside - Trial Court restored - Appeal allowed.

Found In:  Judgement

Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957  - Section 120

Property tax - Petroleum installation - Payment of - In question - Whether an agreement for erection of oil storage tank with pump house, chowkidar cabins, switch room, residential rooms and verandah for storing oil decanted from railway tankers - Would amount to lease or license - Writ petition - Ld. Single Judge Petitioner was a license - Not liable for payment of any property tax - Full Bench of High Court - Held - Liable to pay property tax - Appeal - Unless parties to agreement had an intention to enter into a deed of lease - Administration would not have agreed to demise premises - Oil tanks construed as buildings for purposes of tax - Grantee/appellant is liable to pay tax - Held - Document in question constitutes lease in favour of appellant-grantee - Liable to pay taxes - Vacant land or property of Railways is not sought to be taxed - Property tax/Composite Assessment is sought to be made on installations/storage depots - Constructed by appellant by virtue of Section 120(2) DMC Act - Appeal dismissed - No costs.

Found In:  Judgement

The Land Acquisition Act, 1894  - Section 4 , Section 5-A , Section 6 , Section 17

Acquisition on urgency basis - Construction of metro station - Metro Railways Act, 1978 - Provisions - Whether applicable - Acquisition proceedings- Challenged - No express provision in Metro Railways Act - It cannot be construed - Metro Railways Act is a special Act - Nature - General law in LA Act would get obliterated and automatically repealed -Acquisition of land for Metro Railways - No reason to quash notification issued under Section 4 of LA Act to postpone the date of acquisition to a later period - Allowing appellants an opportunity-Getting higher compensation - Appeals dismissed.

Found In:  Judgement

Civil Law  - Demolition

Demolition - Shop - Apprehension of - Petition filed - No justifiable reason - Petition on basis of which petitioner believes that his shop would be demolished by respondent-authorities - Assurance given on behalf of respondent authorities - There is no proposal for demolition of shop in question - Except in accordance with law - Neither petitioner would be evicted from shop in question nor shop in question would be demolished - Writ petition disposed no costs.

Found In:  Judgement

U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act  - Section 229-B

Declaration - Plaintiff an exclusive owner of land in question - Dismissed by Assistant Collector - Reason land in question stood in name of Karta of joint family - All three brothers had tenancy rights - Entries in revenue record - Right of co-sharers recorded - Board of Revenue confirmed order of Assistant Collector - Writ petition dismissed -Supreme Court - Original plaintiff could not have been the sole tenant - There were other co-sharers - Order of High Court upheld - Petition rejected - No costs.

Found In:  Judgement

Civil Law  - Occupancy right

Occupancy right - Suit claiming right 1/6th share in property - Trial court decreed -High Court set aside - Appeals - Order never challenged - Attained finality - Deed executed favour of plaintiff not give any right to ask for partition or share in suit land -Appeals dismissed - No cost.

Found In:  Judgement

Civil Law  - Promissory note

Promissory note - Claim - Recovery of Rs.1,90,000/- - Suit filed by plaintiff/respondent - Trial Court dismissed - Holding - Promissory note was tampered by adding figure '1' so as to make Rs.1,25,000/- - Lower appellate Court reversed and decreed suit - High Court confirmed - Appeal - Expert, figure '1' had been written subsequently before '25,000/' in the Promissory note - Trial court rightly appreciated evidence of mediators - Evidence of mediators and hand-writing expert - Duly considered by trial court - Impugned order by High Court as well as the lower appellate court set aside - Trial Court restored - Appeal allowed - No cost.

Found In:  Judgement

The Land Acquisition Act, 1894  - Section 23 (1)

Payment of additional amount - In question - Condonation of delay - Allowed - Appellant raised issue, that the respondent in each of the appeals is not entitled to receive compensation under Section 23 (1A) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 which has been granted in their favour by the orders of the High Court - Supreme Court - Acquisition proceeding commenced with the notification under Section 4 issued on 06.03.2024 and it culminated in passing of the award by the Collector on 09.07.1980, i.e., before 30.04.1982, the date from which the amending Act 68 of 1984 was made applicable to the pending and subsequent proceedings - Not entitled to the benefit of Section 23(1A) - Appeals partly allowed.

Found In:  Judgement