Court : Kerala
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE B.KEMAL PASHA THURSDAY, THE16H DAY OF JANUARY201426TH POUSHA, 1935 RCRev..No. 66 of 2013 () ------------------------- RCA. NO.59/2010 OF RENT CONTROL APPELLATE AUTHORITY,ERNAKULAM. RCP. NO.110/2006 OF III ADDITIONAL MUNSIFF & RENT CONTROL COURT, ERNAKULAM. ...... REVISION PETITIONER/APPELLANT/2ND RESPONDENT : ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- M. BASHEER, AGED48YEARS, S/O.P.P.ALI, HOTEL PARAGON, PALARIVATTOM. P.O., ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-682 024. BY ADV. SRI.N.M.MOHAMMED AYUB. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & 1ST RESPONDENT : --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. REMANI GOPALAN, AGED ABOUT58YEARS, W/O.GOPALAN, INDIA PRINTERS, SWAMI CHINMAYANANDA ROAD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-16.2. K.K. FAIZAL, AGED44YEARS, S/O.MOOSA HAJI, RESIDING AT ORION APARTM...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU W.P.No.9070 of 2008 03-02-2014 V.Ravichandra..... PETITIONER Indian Bank, rep. by its General Manager/Appellate Authority for Award Staff,HRM Department, H.O.66, Rajaji Salai,Chennai - 600 001 and others.....RESPONDENTS Counsel for the petitioner: Sri V.Ravichandra, Party in person Counsel for respondents: Sri Ambadipudi Satyanarayana : ?.Cases referred:1. (1986) 3 SCC4542. AIR1993SC11973. (1991) 3 SCC2194. (1995) 6 SCC7495. (2006) 5 SCC886. (2006) 4 SCC7137. AIR1993SC11978. (2011) 7 SCC3259. (2010) 5 SCC77510. AIR2009SC16111. (2005) 10 SCC8412. (2000) 1 SCC41613. AIR2007SC19914. (2006) 2 SCC255HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU WRIT PETITION No.9070 of 2008 ORDER: The petitioner, an employee of the respondent Bank, having been removed from service on an allegation of misconduct, laid challenge against the said dismissal in the present writ petition. The facts in brief are as follows: The petitioner, when working as a Clerk/Shroff in one...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
-1- RSA No.1557 of 1987 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH RSA No.1557 of 1987 Date of decision:15. 05.2014 Darshan Singh and others ....Appellants Versus Sukhdev Kaur @ Shiv Dev Kaur and others ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PARAMJEET SINGH1 Whether Reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?. 2) To be referred to the Reporters or not ?. 3) Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest ?. Present: - Mr. Kanwaljit Singh, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. B.B.S. Randhawa, Advocate, and Mr. Sanjeev Sharma, Advocate, for the appellants. Mr. M.S. Rakkar, Sr. Advocate, with Mr. K.G. Chaudhary, Advocate, for the respondents. ***** PARAMJEET SINGH, J.This regular second appeal by defendants is directed against the judgment and decree dated 25.03.1987 passed by learned Additional District Judge, Patiala, whereby judgment and decree dated 01.03.1983 passed by learned Sub Judge Ist Class, Rajpura, has been set aside and the suit of the plaintiff...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON - REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7717 OF2014(arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.39113 of 2013) |THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION | | |OF INDIA & OTHERS |.....APPELLANT(S) | |VERSUS | | |S. VASANTHI |.....RESPONDENT(S) | JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.Leave granted. This appeal is preferred against the final judgment and order dated June 26, 2013 in Writ Appeal No.1279 of 2010 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras whereby the Division Bench of the High Court has modified the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority of appellant No.1, i.e. Life Insurance Corporation of India (hereinafter referred to as the 'LIC') on the respondent employee in a departmental enquiry. Insofar as facts are concerned, it is sufficient to note that a charge- sheet was served upon the respondent with the allegations of tampering with the premium position and other records pertaining to 17 insurance policies, which resulted in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
INDEXAOVERVIEW3BFACTS6CISSUES, SUBMISSIONS and FINDINGS9C1Infringement10C2Passing Off33DTHE DEFENDANTS WRITTEN ARGUMENTS43EDELAY AND BALANCE OF CONVENIENCE46FFINAL ORDER AND CONCLUSION49A. OVERVIEW 1. In a narrow lane, one of three that branches off to the east from the roundabout at Maheshwari Udyan in Mumbais central area of Matunga, there stands an unassuming eatery. A few steps lead into it. The space is not large: a few tables at the entry level with the proprietor at a high seat at the counter to the right of the entrance. Opposite the entrance is the kitchen with its serving hatches. A steep staircase to the left leads to a low-ceilinged mezzanine floor. Here, the space is even more cramped. On both levels, patrons share tables: large groups or families may spread across several tables and a solitary diner may find himself rubbing elbows with a complete stranger. This is Caf Madras, the South Indian or, more accurately, Udipi cuisine specialty sit-down restaurant owned and manag...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Oral Judgment: 1. By this petition filed under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short the Act), the petitioner has impugned the arbitral award dated 05.08.2013, granting various claims made by the respondents. The petitioner was the original petitioner before the learned arbitrator. The respondents herein were the original claimants. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding the present petition are as under: 2. It is the case of the petitioner that she is an illiterate lady, who was born and brought up in a village known as Gadh, district Banaskata, State of Gujarat and had never attended any school. She was married to Shankarlal K. Patel , who was also resident of the adjoining village known as Vendancha, District Banskata, State of Gujarat. The petitioner does not know to write or read English, Gujarati, Hindi language or any other language. She also does not even know to subscribe her signature except for affixing her thumb impression. The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Anoop V. Mohta, J. 1. Both these Appeals, under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, the Arbitration Act ) (Appeal and Counter-Appeal), filed by both the contesting parties (Claimant and Respondent No.1), against Judgment and order dated 16 November 2005, passed by the learned Single Judge on a Petition under Section 34 of the Arbitration Act in Arbitration Petition No. 449 of 2003 whereby, the award passed by the learned Arbitrator ( the Arbitrator ) dated 4 July 2003, has been substantially set aside and partly maintained. 2. The Appellant(Original Claimant)Larsen and Toubro Limited ( LandT ) in Appeal No. 26 of 2006, which is a company registered under the provisions of the Companies Act, has preferred the Appeal, as the learned Single Judge has set aside the award qua Claim Nos. 1, 2, 4, 9, 15, 16, 21 (i), 21(iii) and 21(iv) awarded by the Arbitrator. In the other Appeal, the Appellant is Respondent No.1-Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd. ( HPCL ),...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:25. 04.2016 Pronounced on:23. 12.2016 FAO (OS) 371/2012 FAO (OS) 372/2012 NATIONAL THERMAL POWER CORPORATION LTD. ..... Appellant Through: Dr. Ashwani Kumar, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Ruchi Gour Narula and Ms. Smitakshi Talukdar, Advocates, for appellant. versus SIEMENS ATIENGESELLSCHAFT Through: ..... Respondent Sh. Parag. P. Tripathi, Sr. Advocate with Sh. Anil Bhatnagar, Sh. Amit Dhindra, Sh. Aman Leekha, Sh. Amandeep Bawa and Sh. Shikhar Khare, Advocates, for respondent. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE DEEPA SHARMA MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT % 1. These two appeals under Section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996 ('Act')impugn a common judgment, dismissing two petitions (O.M.P. Nos. 229 and 230/ 2009) under Section 34 of the Act. The appellant, National Thermal Power Corporation Limited('NTPC' hereafter) challenged the partial Award dated 31st July 2002 and the finalAward dated 6th Ja...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + % AJAY KUMAR FAO No.39/2007 5th July, 2017 ..... Appellant Mr. Atul Bandhu, Advocate. Through: versus THE STATE AND ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, Adv. with R-2. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. YES VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This first appeal under Section 299 of the India Succession Act, 1925 is filed challenging the impugned judgment dated 28.10.2006 dismissing the probate petition filed by the present appellant.2. The facts of the case are that the appellant filed the subject petition for grant of probate of the Will dated 17.8.1999 of Sh. Amar Singh in his favour. The appellant/petitioner is the grand-son of Sh. Amar Singh who expired on 6.12.2000. Late Sh. Amar Singh is said to have left behind his Will dated 17.8.1999 and which was duly registered in the office of the Sub-Registrar, Seelampur, Delhi vide FAO No.39/2007 Page 1 of 10 document No.24491 in Ad...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on:13. h September, 2017 Pronounced on:27th September, 2017 + FAO3681999 SANJEEV JUNEJA ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Jyoti Singh, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Avadh Kaushik & Mr. Devashish Maharishi, Advs. versus STATE & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr. Akhil Sibal, Sr. Advocate with Mr. Anshul Narayan, Adv. for R-4. Mr. Rakesh Sachdeva, Adv. for R-5. Mr. Sanjay Vashishtha with Mr. L.A. Vashistha, Advs. for R-6. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA JUDGMENT1 The appellant is one of the sons of Jaswant Lal Juneja who had passed away on 15.02.1991, statedly leaving behind his Will and testament executed and registered on 19.10.1990. The appellant had moved the Court of District Judge, Delhi by petition under Section 264 of Indian Succession Act, 1925 praying for grant of probate in respect of the said Will, the petition presented on 31.08.1991 having been registered as probate case No.216/1991 (later re-numbered as 619/1994). Since the pet...
Tag this Judgment!