It is submitted by learned counsel for the appellant that the substantial evidence which has been relied upon for recording the conviction by the GCM and the tribunal cannot form the foundation of conviction, for the confession made by the appellant at the police station lawyers in Supreme Cour of Indiat presence of the authorities cannot be taken into consideration, and that apart heavy reliance placed on the statement recorded in the summary enquiry under Rule 23 of the Army Rules, 1954 (for short the Rules) is totally sans legal substratum.

3 of the Order applied with equal force to cl. 4(3) with which this Supreme Court of India Advocates was concerned in the case of M/ s. Hospital, Bombay, and admitted her there, and that she died there on November 13, 1956. These were identified by Laxmibai's relations. Dhonde made various investigations and eventually on March 13, 1958, interrogated the appellant. 3 and to those that may under the last part of clause (d) be specified in the rules made under s. (a) of sub-section (2) of that section specifically authorises the specification of diseases or conditions to which the provisions of s.

It is urged by him when the weapon of causing injury, that is, the knife has not been recovered, and the evidence as brought on record would show that apart from the appellant other persons were also present in the room while the deceased was murdered, the circumstantial evidence could not have been regarded to have brought home the charge against the accused. The contravention of the statutory provisions contained in s.

Learned counsel would submit that the presence of the accused at the time of incident as per the evidence available on record is doubtful and, therefore, the conclusion that has been arrived at deserves to be dislodged on the bedrock that it does not meet the criteria of proof as per the principles laid down by this Supreme Court of India Lawyers in relation to acceptance of the circumstantial evidence. This argument was rejected and it was observed that the impugned clause was not at all similar to cl.

We want to make it clear that our letter of 5th December, 1977, is final and we do not agree to the proposed sale. 14A or of the Rules prescribing conditions and restrictions in that behalf alone could form the basis of the imposition of the penalty of forfeiture prescribed by the said proviso. Hospital and was able to find the clothes which Laxmibai wore when she died. -Sardar Kapur Singh (who will hereinafter be referred to as the appellant) was admitted by the Secretary of State for India in Council to the Indian Civil Service upon the result of a competitive examination held at Delhi in 1931.

The appellant then told him that be had taken Laxmibai to the G. Dwarka Prasad Laxmi Narain (1). Dwarka Prasad Laxmi Narain (1). 16 authorises the making of rules to carry out the purposes of the Act and cl. 55, it is in substance not materially different. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SHAH J. The appellants contend that the reasons given by this Court in upholding s. 16 which confers the general ule making power, i.

1080, referred to, 571 Although the procedure prescribed by the Public Servants (Inquiries) Act, 1850 is more detailed than that prescribed by r. 14A of the Bihar Sales tax Act, 1947, it had to be shown that he had acted contrary to the conditions and restrictions prescribed by the Rules and it was not enough to show that the collection of the sales tax made by him was otherwise illegal or improper. The first 'sub- section of is.

To bolster his submissions, he has commended us to decisions in Ravindran v. The Union of India, [1957] INSC 113; [1958] S. It is the first sub-section of s. The interdiction under the Act is applicable to conditions and diseases set out in the various clauses of s. Learned counsel has seriously criticized the approach of the tribunal in appreciation of the evidence on the ground that it is extremely perverse and does not withstand scrutiny. The police made enquiries at the G.

In a decision of the New Zealand Supreme Court of India Lawyer of Appeal, to which Mr Carlisle referred me, namely Globe Holdings Ltd v Floratos [1998] 3 NZLR 331 (and to which I shall return later) there is (at page 334) a citation from an earlier decision of the same court (Hawker v Vickers [1991] 1 NZLR 399 at 402-3) setting out the following statement of the approach in law: Held, further, that before the penalty of forfeiture could be imposed upon a dealer under the proviso to s. , it delegates to the administrative authority the power to frame rules and regulations to subserve the object and purpose of the Act.

Learned counsel would submit that the tribunal has failed to analyse the unacceptable and incurable discrepancies in the evidence of witnesses and, in fact, at places has relied upon certain hearsay evidence which make the analysis perverse and in the ultimate eventuate the judgment has become absolutely dented. We hereby treat this matter as closed as far as we are concerned and we will not meet you or any one else for any discussion further, in respect thereof.