Another omission on the part of the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner is his failure to comply with the provisions of s. In that case, the intention of the minor to become separated from the coparceners other than his father is really expressed on his behalf by his father. Even NRI Legal Services under Section 40(3)(jj)(a) of the Gujarat Act, the maximum permissible contribution of land by land owner cannot exceed 50%. Provided that the contribution shall not exceed half the accrued increment in value.
Despite authorities existing and governing the field, it has come to the notice of this Court that sometimes the court of first instance as well as the appellate court which includes the High Court, either on individual notion or misplaced sympathy or personal perception seems to have been carried NRI Legal Services away by passion of mercy, being totally oblivious of lawful obligation to the collective as mandated by law and forgetting the oft-quoted saying of Justice Benjamin N.
Though the High Court has power on a review of the evidence to reverse the order of acquittal, yet in doing so it should not only consider all matters on record including the reasons given by the Trial Court in respect of the order of acquittal, but should particularly consider those aspects which are in favour of the accused and ought not also to NRI Legal Services act on conjunctions or surmises nor on inferences which do not arise on the evidence in the case.
We hold that the respondents were not justified in returning only 35% of reconstituted plots and retaining 65% for different purposes mentioned by them. Therefore, in the absence of any reasonable procedure arrived at by the Respondents, taking 65% of the area of the plot as development contribution is wholly unfair and arbitrary, and is also impermissible as per Section 50 (6)(vi) of the 1973 Act. It needs no special emphasis to state that prior to the said decision, there are series of judgments of this Court emphasizing on appropriate sentencing.
The defence of the appellant was a total denial and even if the recovery of the blood-stained strands of female hair was put to the appellant, he would undoubtedly have denied such recovery as having been made at his pointing out the place. The examination of the accused recorded by or before the Committing Magistrate NRI Legal Services does not appear to have been tendered by the prosecutor in the present case; at least we do not find any such statement in the printed paper-book. Cardozo Justice, though due to the accused, is due to the accuser too and follow an extremely liberal sentencing policy which has neither NRI Legal Services permissibility nor social acceptability.
But it may happen that there is a division between the father and his own minor son, and in that case, the minor would normally be represented by his mother or some other relation, and a partition so entered into has been recognised to be valid and effective to bring about a severance in status. Once a course and an institution is notified in the First Schedule as per Section 11 of the Act as a recognized course and a recognized institution, the admission capacity or its increase in any recognized course needs only the permission of the Central Government as per the scheme under Section 10A of the Act.
the tribunal’in a more comprehensive and consolidated form bringing before the tribunal all the parties interested in it. On a consideration of the evidence, we think that the reversal of the order of acquittal by the High Court was not warranted. In our opinion, the bona fides of the appellant on which reliance is placed by Dr. The Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police who gave evidence of the recovery of blood-stained hair from a place pointed out by the appellant was not even cross-exa- mined on the point.
We are satisfied, however, that no prejudice has been caused. Under the scheme of the Act, permission is for the admission capacity and recognition is for the course and the institution. The minor has no doubt the right to have the partition set aside if it is shown to have been prejudicial to him but if that is not established, the partition (1) (1917) I. That was an important circumstance against the appellant and when the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner examined the appellant under the provisions of s.
342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure he should have asked the appellant to explain this circumstance. We take this opportunity of inviting the attention of the learned Additional Judicial Commissioner to this very serious omission. Banerjee are really not: adjudicated upon by the Industrial Tribunal and that it would be more convenient NRI Legal Services and in the interest of industrial peace and harmony that the dispute should be referred to .
Contending that investigating officer made no efforts to conduct an impartial investigation, the learned Senior Counsel submitted that the investigating officer made no efforts to conduct impartial investigation which coupled with the embellishments in the prosecution case regarding the demand of dowry raise serious doubts arise about the prosecution case. 287 of the Code of 1349 Criminal Procedure.