Details of Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.H. Kapadia

Born on 29th September 1947.

Enrolled as an Advocate on 10th September 1974. Practiced in the Bombay High Court, both on the Original Side and Appellate Side in Suits, Letters Patent Appeals, Writs, matters under Negotiable Instruments Act, Detention Matters, matters under Bombay Rent Act, matters under Bombay Municipal Corporation Act including trials concerning fixation of rate able value, matters under Maharashtra Land Revenue Code including trials concerning valuation of properties for the purposes of fixation of NA assessments, challenge to the validity of notifications fixing Standard Rent, appeared in AOs, First Appeals under the BMC Act, Second Appeals as also in Land Acquisition References under the Land Acquisition Act as also in matters under Bombay Land Requisition and Acquisition Act. This is apart from the practice in Industrial Law and Services Matters.

Appeared as a counsel for the Department in Income-Tax matters. Appeared as a counsel for BMC in matters concerning rate able value and Octroi. Appeared as a counsel for Bharat Petroleum Corporation and Hindustan Petroleum Corporation in High Court and Supreme Court in connection with service matters including disputes concerning framing of Pension Rules. Also appeared for the Management and Unions in matters under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 and ULP Act, 1972.

Appointed as an Additional Judge of the Bombay High Court on 8th October 1991 .

Appointed as a Permanent Judge of the Bombay High Court on 23rd March 1993 .

Appointed as a Judge of the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transaction in Securities) Act, 1992 on 15th October 1999 . During the above period, decided important matters under PIL pertaining to CRZ, financial matters under RBI and Banking Regulation Act; matters concerning the Constitutional validity of the 74th Amendment Act of 1992 dealing with Municipalities; matters under the Smugglers and Foreign Exchange Manipulators (Forfeiture of Property) Act, 1976; matters concerning Mergers and Acquisitions; matters under Payment of Bonus Act; matters under Industrial Disputes Act. In addition to the above, dealt with matters under the Income Tax Act concerning Valuation of closing stocks, Accounting treatment to be given to Modvat Credit Convergence of Tax Accounting with Commercial Accounting, etc.

As a Judge presiding over the Special Court has dealt with Civil and Criminal matters including matters concerning corroborative value to be given to the Report submitted by RBI and JPC vis-à-vis Evidence Act. As a Judge of the Special Court , has also dealt with Accounts and Finances of Banks and Financial Institutions as also accounts of the Share and Stock Brokers as also matters under Contempt o Courts Act where the Notified Parties had diverted their assets. As a Judge of the Special Court has framed Investment Schemes, Schemes dealing with Valuation and Disposal of Shares of Notified Parties as also Distributions of asset of the Notified Parties under the Act and declaring dividends to the Creditors of the Notified Parties.

Appointed as Chief Justice of the Uttaranchal High Court on 5.8.2003.

Elevated to the Bench of the Supreme Court of India on 18.12.2003.

Has keen interest in Economics, Public Finance, Theoretical Physics and Hindu and Buddhist Philosophies.

Due to retire on 29.09.2012 (F.N.)

Payment of subsistence allowance

Short info on Payment of subsistence allowance, according to Industrial Employment (Standing Orders) Act, 1946

are

(1) Where any workman is suspended by the employer pending investigation or inquiry into complaints or charges of misconduct against him, the employer shall pay to such workman subsistence allowance-


(a) at the rate of fifty per cent of the wages which workman was entitled to immediately preceding the date of such suspension, for the first ninety days of suspension; and

(b) at the rate of seventy-five per cent of such wages for the remaining period of suspension if the delay in the completion of disciplinary proceedings against such workman is not directly attributable to the conduct of such workman.

(2) If any dispute arises regarding the subsistence allowance payable to a workman under sub-section (1), the workman or the employer concerned may refer the dispute to the Labour Court, constituted under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947), within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the industrial establishment wherein such workman is employed is situate and the Labour Court to which the dispute is so referred shall, after giving the parties an opportunity of being heard, decide the dispute and such decision shall be final and binding on the parties.

(3) Not with standing anything contained in the foregoing provisions of this section, where provisions relating to payment of subsistence allowance under any other law for the time being in force in any State are more beneficial than the provisions of this section, the provisions of such other law shall be applicable to the payment of subsistence allowance in that State.]

अदालत की नई पोस्ट

IPC 499: Defamation

Whoever by words either spoken or intended to be read, or by signs or by visible representations, makes or publishes any imputation concerning any person intending to harm, or knowing or having reason to believe that such imputation will harm, the reputation of such person, is said, except in the cases hereinafter excepted, to defame that person.

Explanation 1.- It may amount to defamation to impute anything to a deceased person, if the imputation would harm the reputation of that person if living, and is intended to be hurtful to the fellings of his family or other near relatives.

Explanation 2.- It may amount to defamation to make an imputation concerning a company or an association or collection of persons as such.

Explanation 3.- An imputation in the form of an alternative or expressed ironically, may amount to defamation.

Explanation 4.- No imputation is said to harm a person' s reputation, unless that imputation directly or indirectly, in the estimation of others, lowers the moral or intellectual character of that person, or lowers the character of that person in respect of his caste or of his calling, or lowers the credit of that person, or causes it to be believed that the body of that person is in a lothsome state, or in a state generally considered as disgraceful.

A three-fold salary hike to judges

The Lok Sabha gave its approval for a three-fold salary hike to judges but not before members expressed concern over the incidence of corruption in the judiciary, rising pendency of cases and long vacations that the courts continued to take.

The High Court and Supreme Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Amendment Bill, 2008, proposes to increase the salary of the Chief Justice of India from Rs 33,000 to Rs 1 lakh per month and that of other apex court judges from Rs 30,000 to Rs 90,000 per month. It seeks to increase the salary of the Chief Justices of high courts from Rs 30,000 to Rs 90,000 per month and that of HC judges from Rs 26,000 to Rs 80,000 per month.

Government approved amendments to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act

The government on Feb 11, approved amendments to the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, which would expedite the process of India's entry into Financial Action Task Force (FATF) -- an inter-governmental body combating money laundering and terrorist financing. "Some amendments have been made. The Bill will be introduced in the current session of Parliament and we will plan to get it passed if possible," he said. He said the changes in the Act were necessary for India to become a member of the FATF. "This is important in order to get India's membership in the Financial Action Task Force, which is an international body," he said, however, not elaborating what amendments have been proposed in the Bill.

India, along with South Korea, has been trying to become a full member of FATF. It was given the observer status in February 2007.

Union cabinet approved amendment to the Industrial Dispute Act

The Union cabinet on Feb 11, approved amendment to the Industrial Dispute Act, which will make it mandatory for industrial establishments to set up grievance redressal cells. It has also clearly defined that all disputes pertaining to public sector enterprises where the Union government has above 51% stake must be referred to a Central authority to adjucate. The new amendment will also allow labour courts to enforce a decree without involving the the labour department and district magistrate, as is the current practice.

At present, the labour department enforces the implementation of an award. The Act is being amended after more than two decades, and according to a labour ministry official, about half of a dozen recommendations have been approved by the cabinet, which includes laying down terms and conditions of presiding officers in Central tribunals and fixing time period for conciliation officers to settle disputes between a worker and an employer.