Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.129 OF2018Adarsh Cooperative Housing Society Ltd. Petitioner(s) Versus Union of India & Ors. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, CJI The petitioner, a registered society, has preferred this petition under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking appropriate directions for prohibiting the respondent Nos. 4 to 7 from releasing/screening/publishing feature film, namely, Aiyaary with direct or indirect references to the petitioner society's land/building/membership, for such an action is bound to affect the Right to Life under Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution. It is also prayed that the said respondents should be commanded to delete all those parts in the ensuing feature film which has direct or indirect references to the society in question. 2 2. It is contended by Mr. Sanjay R. Hegde, learned senior counsel for the petitioner, that the film, which is going to be released, has projec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1745 OF2010CYRUS RUSTOM PATEL ...APPELLANT VERSUS THE CHARITY COMMISSIONER MAHARASHTRA, STATE & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT ARUN MISHRA, J.1. This appeal has been preferred questioning the dismissal of the Writ Petition by the High Court, vide impugned Judgment and Order dated 04-02-2008, thereby declining to interfere in the order passed by the Joint Charity Commissioner on 03-07-2004 granting sanction to development cum sale transaction.2. The B.C. Batliwala Agiary Trust is registered under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). The Trust, in its meeting dated 20-01-2003, decided to enter into an agreement with M/s. Astral Enterprises. It was noted in the 2 minutes of the meeting that the tenants in the premises had, in principle, agreed to the development of the Trust property at Tardeo, on the condition that the interest of the tenants would be looked after a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Original Civil Jurisdiction Writ Petition (C) No.118 of 2016 Shayara Bano Union of India and others Petitioner Respondents versus with Suo Motu Writ (C) No.2 of 2015 In Re: Muslim Womens Quest For Equality Jamiat Ulma-I-Hind versus Writ Petition(C) No.288 of 2016 Aafreen Rehman Union of India and others versus Petitioner Respondents Writ Petition(C) No.327 of 2016 Gulshan Parveen Union of India and others versus Petitioner Respondents Writ Petition(C) No.665 of 2016 Ishrat Jahan Union of India and others versus Petitioner Respondents Writ Petition(C) No.43 of 2017 Atiya Sabri Union of India and others versus Petitioner Respondents JUDGMENT Jagdish Singh Khehar, CJI. 2 Sl. No.1. Divisions Part-1 2. Part-2 3.4.5. Part-3 Part-4 Part-5 6.7. 8.9. A. B. C. Part-6 Part-7 I. II. III. IV. V. VI. VII. Part-8 Part-9 Consideration of the rival contentions, and our Index Contents The petitioners marital discord, and the petitioners prayers The prac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1822/2007 M/S. TATA MOTORS LTD. . APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES(SPL) & ANR. . RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.1446/2010 CIVIL APPEAL No.3733 of 2023 (@ SLP(C) No.11509/2017) CIVIL APPEAL No.3734 of 2023 (@SLP(C) No.12119/2017) CIVIL APPEAL No.11724/2018 CIVIL APPEAL No.3827/2011 CIVIL APPEAL No.3856/2013 CIVIL APPEAL No.5815/2012 CIVIL APPEAL No.2756/2012 CIVIL APPEAL No.3718 of 2023 (@ SLP(C) No.28859/2011) CIVIL APPEAL No.5969/2011 CIVIL APPEAL No.5967/2011 2 CIVIL APPEAL Nos.3716-3717 of 2023 (@ SLP(C) Nos. 15642-15643/2011) CIVIL APPEAL No.3821/2011 CIVIL APPEAL No.4019/2011 CIVIL APPEAL No.3822/2011 CIVIL APPEAL No.4021/2011 CIVIL APPEAL Nos.3719-3723 of 2023 (@ SLP(C) Nos. 31698-31702/2013) CIVIL APPEAL No.3735 of 2023 (@ SLP(C) No.25905/2013) CIVIL APPEAL No.4516/2018 CIVIL APPEAL No.10924/2018 CIVIL APPEAL No.1821/2007 CIVIL APPEAL No.9979/2018 CIVIL APPEAL...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
R1IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE4H DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022 PRESENT THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE T.G.SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.118 OF2021CONNECTED WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.53 OF2021 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.54 OF2021AND CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1068 OF2020IN CRL.A.118 OF2021 BETWEEN:1. Sri. Rangaswamy @ Ranga S/o Ramakrishnappa Aged about 31 years R/at Rangaswamy Provision Store 13th Cross, Near Mullakatamma Temple Mayura Nagara, Andrahalli Main Road Peenya 2nd Stage Bengaluru 560 058.2. Sri. R. Shankar S/o. Ramaiah Aged about 29 years R/at No.106, 2nd Cross 1st Main, Sanjeevini Nagar Hegganahalli, Peenya 2nd Stage Bengaluru 560 058. 23. Sri. Raghavendra @ Raghu S/o. Jayaram Aged about 29 years R/at Om Shakthi Temple Road Hegganahalli, Peenya 2nd Stage Bengaluru 560 058. ...Appellants (By Sri. B.V. Acharya Sr. Counsel for Sri. Vishnumurthy - Advocate) AND: State of Karnataka By Chamarajpet Police Station Rep. by Special Publ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
R1IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE4H DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022 PRESENT THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE T.G.SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.118 OF2021CONNECTED WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.53 OF2021 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.54 OF2021AND CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1068 OF2020IN CRL.A.118 OF2021 BETWEEN:1. Sri. Rangaswamy @ Ranga S/o Ramakrishnappa Aged about 31 years R/at Rangaswamy Provision Store 13th Cross, Near Mullakatamma Temple Mayura Nagara, Andrahalli Main Road Peenya 2nd Stage Bengaluru 560 058.2. Sri. R. Shankar S/o. Ramaiah Aged about 29 years R/at No.106, 2nd Cross 1st Main, Sanjeevini Nagar Hegganahalli, Peenya 2nd Stage Bengaluru 560 058. 23. Sri. Raghavendra @ Raghu S/o. Jayaram Aged about 29 years R/at Om Shakthi Temple Road Hegganahalli, Peenya 2nd Stage Bengaluru 560 058. ...Appellants (By Sri. B.V. Acharya Sr. Counsel for Sri. Vishnumurthy - Advocate) AND: State of Karnataka By Chamarajpet Police Station Rep. by Special Publ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
R1IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE4H DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2022 PRESENT THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE K.SOMASHEKAR AND THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE T.G.SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.118 OF2021CONNECTED WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.53 OF2021 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.54 OF2021AND CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1068 OF2020IN CRL.A.118 OF2021 BETWEEN:1. Sri. Rangaswamy @ Ranga S/o Ramakrishnappa Aged about 31 years R/at Rangaswamy Provision Store 13th Cross, Near Mullakatamma Temple Mayura Nagara, Andrahalli Main Road Peenya 2nd Stage Bengaluru 560 058.2. Sri. R. Shankar S/o. Ramaiah Aged about 29 years R/at No.106, 2nd Cross 1st Main, Sanjeevini Nagar Hegganahalli, Peenya 2nd Stage Bengaluru 560 058. 23. Sri. Raghavendra @ Raghu S/o. Jayaram Aged about 29 years R/at Om Shakthi Temple Road Hegganahalli, Peenya 2nd Stage Bengaluru 560 058. ...Appellants (By Sri. B.V. Acharya Sr. Counsel for Sri. Vishnumurthy - Advocate) AND: State of Karnataka By Chamarajpet Police Station Rep. by Special Publ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1986)LC440Tri(Delhi)
1. It is alleged in the present matter that the appellant company used to receive proofed coloured canvas from various proofers, which was given by them to tailoring, contractors, who used to fabricate such proofed canvas into tarpaulin with the aid of power operated sewing machines. The company's agency division, in this manner, was allegedly fabricating tarpaulin for more than 25 years but this fact was not reported to the Department. The process of fabrication of tarpaulin adopted by the company and other details regarding employment of contract labour, use of power operated sewing machines, etc. were also not intimated to the Department; nor was a sample of completed tarpaulin furnished to the Department to enable it to examine it for purposes of correct classification. At one stage, a clarification was sought by the company from the Department but on a hypothetical note stating that they were planning the manufacture of tarpaulin in their mills and not that they were already enga...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Reported in : (1991)LC129Tri(Delhi)
1. All the above appeals pertain to-M/s. Paramount Sinters Private Limited, Nagpur. They are all clubbed together for the purpose of hearing and disposal as the question for determination in all the appeals is identical. The Cross appeal of the Revenue is also heard and disposed of by this order.2. Appeal No. 1051 and 1052/86-C arise from a common appeal disposed of by the Collector of Central Excise, Bombay against the two orders-in-original dated 6-2-1985 passed by the Assistant Collector of Central Excise, Chanderpur confirming the demands made in the two show cause notices dated 29-9-1984 and 28-4-1985 respectively for the period from 1-11-1983 to 31-3-1984 and 1-4-1984 to 31-8-1984.3. The appellants are alleged to have removed from their factory a quantity of 3937.270 M.T. of Manganese Ore Sinters valued at Rs. 41,53,728.40 P. without payment of duty amounting to Rs. 4,15,372.84 P.for the period 7-4-1984 to 31-8-1984 and a quantity of 5251.030 M.T. of manganese ore sinters valued...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : [1985]57CompCas12(Bom)
Mrs. Sujata V. Manohar, J.1. The petition company, Centron Industrial Alliance Limited, has filed a company Petition bearing No. 84 of 1981 (See , under the provisions of s. 391 of the Companies Act, 1956, for sanctioning a scheme of amalgamation of the petitioner company with M/s. Brooke Bond India Ltd. The petitioner company was incorporated in the year 1949. It became a public limited company in the year, 1974. It is admittedly in financial difficulties since 1975. In September, 1976, the board of directors of the petitioner company was reconstituted and director sponsored or nominated by the State Industrial and Investment Corporation of Maharashtra Ltd. (SICOM) and United commercial Bank (UCO Bank) were inducted on the board of directors of the petitioner company. Ever since the petitioner company became a public limited company in the year 1974, the petitioner company has not paid any divided whatsoever under the shareholders. The company has been declared a relief undertaking un...
Tag this Judgment!