LexLords NRI Legal Services West Bromwich By NRI Legal Services LexLords
NRI legal services NRI legal services (go to this site) , https://lexlords.com/defamation/; The civil construction work completed by the petitioner [GYT-TPL JV] in terms of condition no. The learned Attorney General representing the State Government, in all fairness, stated that he was not in a position to resile from the statement already made on behalf of the State Government as recorded in the order on 12. (2) Vide Sudarsaram v. We do not appreciate the submission on behalf of the respondent that since the petitioner had constructed the viaduct for a high speed railway project, the petitioner would not have the experience of constructing a viaduct for a metro.
Held, that as the said sum of Rs. However, that is not the prosecution case. 2 (a) was for an intercity high speed railway project in China and in the said contract, the petitioner had completed a viaduct of 7. 2(a) thereof that a contractor or a joint venture company is required to have the experience in Metro Civil Construction work and of completing a viaduct having a length of not less than 5 kms. It is a special liability created on purely religious grounds and can be enforced only against the sons of the father and no other coparcener.
As soon as they heard about the death of Sultan Bhat, they ran away from the hospital. There is no authority to show that it is in any way dependent upon the constitution of the family either at the time when the debt was contracted or when the obligation is sought to be enforced. II to the Business Profits Tax Act, 1947, for the chargeable accounting period commencing on the 1st April, 1946. Both the appellant and his wife were attacked.
This argument has been supported by one section of applicants in the accompanying impleadment applications. The Subordinate Judge appointed Veerappa Pillai as Receiver on 17th March, 1945, and the five disputed buses were deliv- ered to him on 26th April, 1945. It is true that the High Court has come to the conclusion that all the injuries caused to the deceased were caused by the appellant Buta Singh. 2016, but wanted this Court to consider the anomalous situation created because of the fresh merit list; and to overcome that difficulty, it would be advisable to allow the State Government to restore the position as it existed prior to the issuance of the Government Order dated 28.
Such family debt, however, stands on quite a different footing from a personal debt contracted by the father which does not benefit the family. 5,08,637 was never earmarked or declared as a reserve, but was, on the other hand, earmarked for distribution as dividend on the 28th February and 3rd April and was actually so distributed, it cannot be deemed to be a reserve and added to the paid-up capital in determining the company's capital under rr. If that be so, we fail to fathom as to why the technical bid of the petitioner was disqualified though the petitioner has constructed a viaduct for Pearl River Delta Intercity high speed railway project in China of the length of 7.
The liability of his sons to pay such debt does not rest on the principle indicated above, according to which the junior members of a family are made to pay the family debts. The plaintiff will have costs of this court as well as of the court below. On the other hand, the subject of debts has been dealt with by the author of Mitakshara quite separately and it has apparently no connection with the provisions made by the author relating to inheritance and constitution of the family.
759, 230 and 81 and began to run them on the same route under the temporary permits he held. That would result in upholding the impugned decision dated 07. They had sustained injuries. We are, therefore, of the opinion that the submission of the learned Counsel for the State cannot be accepted in the facts and circumstances of this case. Besides, even if it were so, having regard to the nature of the incident, it is difficult to say that he exceeded the right of private defence for the obvious reason that he could not have weighed in golden scales in the heat of the moment the number of injuries required to disarm his assailants who were armed with lethal weapons.
In the course of assault on them they caused injuries to the deceased and the prosecution witnesses. The petitioner has admittedly constructed a viaduct of not less than 5 km for the prestigious Pearl River Delta Intercity high speed railway project in China. 149, 155, 188 the strength of the purchase by his predecessor in the execution sale simply because the father was not the manager or karta of the joint family at that time. Later, he repaired the other three buses M. In our view, the petitioner has the experience of constructing a viaduct of not less than 5 kms.
The liability, therefore, has its basis entirely on the relationship between the father and the son. in length in a Metro Civil Construction work contract and had also received more than INR 3200 million for satisfactorily completing the said contract. It is also relevant to mention, that the appellant " Brij Lal and the co-accused " Kashi Ram got themselves admitted to a hospital. 2014 - so that admission to all Post Graduate Degree Courses can be made on the basis of merit as per the marks obtained in the Common Entrance Examination.
The suit was decreed in 587 his favour on 2nd May, 1946. The distinction sought to be made by the respondent NMRCL between the construction of a viaduct for Intercity High Speed Railway Project and the construction of a viaduct for the metro rail project, is illusory and not real. The action on the part of the NMRCL of disqualifying the petitioners technical bid is clearly arbitrary and is liable to be set aside. Veerappa Pillai was discharged from receivership on 18th September, 1946.
We find on a reading of the tender conditions and particularly clause 4. It is not disputed by the respondent that metro would mean a railway or an underground railway. 6 and 7 were repaired by him and put on the route under his temporary permits. Behl, learned Counsel for the State, however, vehemently argued that the appellant had exceeded his right of private defence. The result is that this appeal is allowed, the judgment and decree of the High Court are set aside and those of the trial judge restored.
