(1)
ABID HATIM MERCHANT ........ Vs.
JANAB SALEBHAI SAHEB SHAIFUDDIN AND OTHERS ........Respondent D.D
03/02/2000
Facts:Sir Adamji Peerbhoy established a trust in 1883 A.D. for the Dawoodi Bohra Community.The trust property included a plot of land at Queens Road, Bombay, which was later used for charitable purposes, including the construction of a mosque and a building.The trust faced challenges and requisitions over the years, leading to the establishment of Saifee Hospital Trust in 1973.Disputes arose regar...
(2)
SHEO NAND AND OTHERS ........ Vs.
THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION ALLAHABAD AND OTHERS ........Respondent D.D
03/02/2000
Facts: The appellants claimed Sirdari rights over plots in three villages, disputed by the Deputy Director of Consolidation. The recorded tenure-holder, Jethu, was considered to have died a civil death, leading to the question of property vesting in the Gaon Sabha.Issues:Validity of the Deputy Director's decision to vest property in the Gaon Sabha.Applicability of Section 11-C in consolidatio...
(3)
M/S. RAINBOW COLOUR LAB AND ANOTHER ........ Vs.
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS [OVERRULED]
........Respondent D.D
02/02/2000
Facts:The case involves the interpretation of the 46th Constitutional Amendment related to the definition of 'sale' and 'works contract.'The Commissioner of Sales Tax, M.P., issued a Circular opining that the job done by photographers amounts to a "works contract" post the constitutional amendment.The Assessing Officer re-assessed the turnover of the assessees based o...
(4)
SUMAN SETHI ........ Vs.
AJAY K. CHURIWAL AND ANOTHER ........Respondent D.D
02/02/2000
Facts:Appellant issued a cheque to Respondent No. I.Cheque returned with "insufficient funds" remark.Respondent No. I issued a notice of demand within 15 days, claiming the cheque amount and additional charges.Appellant failed to meet the demand.Complaint filed by Respondent No. I before the Metropolitan Magistrate.Issues:Magistrate deemed the notice invalid, as the demanded amount excee...
(5)
ABDUL RASHID IBRAHIM MANSURI ........ Vs.
STATE OF GUJARAT ........Respondent D.D
01/02/2000
Facts: The appellant, an auto-rickshaw driver, was intercepted while transporting gunny bags containing Charas. The search was based on prior information, but the searching officer failed to record it in writing and send a copy to his superior. The appellant admitted the recovery, but disputed knowledge of the contraband.Issues:Compliance with procedural requirements under Sections 42 and 50 of th...
(6)
CHINTAMANI GAJANAN VELKAR ........ Vs.
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS ........Respondent D.D
01/02/2000
Facts: The appellant, a landholder, contested the classification of their land as private forest under the Maharashtra Private Forests (Acquisition) Act, 1975. An initial order by the Deputy Collector favored the appellant, citing water-logging and the timing of the notice under Section 35(3) of the Forest Act, 1927. The Revenue Tribunal, Maharashtra, on appeal by the State, overturned the decisio...
(7)
KOLHAPUR CANESUGAR WORKS LTD. AND ANOTHER ........ Vs.
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ......Respondent D.D
01/02/2000
Facts: The appellant, a subsidiary of Kolhapur Sugar Mills Ltd., was issued a fresh license for sugar manufacture. After a claim, the excise authorities allowed a rebate of excise duty. Subsequently, a notice was issued under Rule 10A, asking the appellant to show cause why the erroneously allowed rebate should not be recovered. On August 6, 1977, Rules 10 and 10A were omitted, and a new Rule 10 w...
(8)
OBERAI FORWARDING AGENCY ........Appellant Vs.
NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. AND ANOTHER ........Respondent D.D
01/02/2000
Facts:Second respondent hired trucks to transport broken rice.Appellant paid freight as instructed by carriers and consignor.Consignment lost; second respondent claimed Rs. 93,925.55, settled at Rs. 64,137 by insurance.Second respondent executed Letter of Subrogation and Special Power of Attorney in favor of the first respondent.First respondent filed a complaint under Consumer Protection Act agai...
(9)
RAM AWADH (DEAD) BY LRS. AND OTHERS ........ Vs.
ACHHAIBAR DUBEY AND ANOTHER ........Respondent D.D
01/02/2000
Facts: The appellants are the legal representatives of a subsequent purchaser involved in a suit for specific performance filed by Bachna. Bachna sought specific performance of an earlier agreement to sell a property. She had not initially pleaded readiness and willingness, but later introduced this plea through an amendment.Issues:Whether Bachna and her legal representatives were at all material ...