Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1982SC149; 1981Supp(1)SCC87; [1982]2SCR365
P.N. Bhagwati, J.1. These writ petitions filed in different High Courts and transferred to this Court under Article 139 of the Constitution raise issues of great constitutional importance affecting the independence of the judiciary and they have been argued at great length before us. The arguments have occupied as many as thirty five days and they have ranged over a large number of issues comprising every imaginable aspect of the judicial institution, Voluminous written submissions have been filed before us which reflect the enormous industry and vast erudition of the learned Counsel appearing for the parties and a large number of authorities, Indian as well as foreign, have been brought to our attention. We must acknowledge with gratitude our indebtedness to the learned Counsel for the great assistance they have rendered to us in the delicate and difficult task of adjudicating upon highly sensitive issues arising in these writ petitions. We find, and this is not unusual in cases of th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1998SC1895; 1998(2)BLJR1497; (1998)2GLR1711; JT1998(3)SC184; 1998(2)SCALE745; (1998)4SCC409; [1998]2SCR795; (1998)2UPLBEC1320; 1995IBR118
Anand, J.1. In Re: Vinay Chandra Mishra, : 1995CriLJ3994 , this Court found the Contemner, an advocate, guilty of committing criminal contempt of Court for having interfered with and 'obstructing the course of justice by trying to threaten, overawe and overbear the court by using insulting, disrespectful and threatening language', While awarding punishment, keeping in view the gravity of the contumacious conduct of the contemner, the Court said:'The facts and circumstances of the present case justify our invoking the power under Article 129 read with Article 142 of the Constitution to award to the contemner a suspended sentence of imprisonment together with suspension of his practice as an advocate in the manner directed herein. We accordingly sentence the contemner for his conviction for the offence of the criminal contempt as under:(a) The contemner Vinay Chandra Mishra is hereby sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six weeks. However, in the circumstances of the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.3613 OF2016Rajendra Diwan ... Appellant versus Pradeep Kumar Ranibala & Anr. .Respondents WITH AND CA. No.10214 OF2016C.A. No.3051 OF2017JUDGMENT Indira Banerjee, J.This appeal, purportedly under Section 13(2) of the Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011, hereinafter referred to as the Rent Control Act, is against an order dated 1.12.2015 of the Rent Control Tribunal at Raipur, confirming an order dated 14.09.2015 passed by the Rent Control Authority, whereby an application filed by the respondent-landlord for eviction of the appellant tenant under Section 12 of the Rent Control Act has been allowed. 2 2. Appeal against an order of the Rent Control Section 13(2) of the Rent Control Act provides:- (1) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act, a landlord and/or tenant aggrieved by any order of the Rent Controller shall have the right to appeal in the prescribed manner within the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Myers v. United States - 272 U.S. 52 (1926) U.S. Supreme Court Myers v. United States, 272 U.S. 52 (1925) Myers v. United States No. 2 Argued December 5, 1923 Reargued April 13, 14, 1925 Decided October 25, 1926 272 U.S. 52 APPEAL FROM THE COURT OF CLAIMS Syllabus 1. A postmaster who was removed from office petitioned the President and the Senate committee on Post Offices for a hearing on any charges filed; protested to the Post Office Department; and, Page 272 U. S. 53 three months before his four-year term expired, having pursued no other occupation and derived no compensation for other service in the interval, began suit in the Court of Claims for salary since removal. No notice of the removal, nor any nomination of a successor, had been sent in the meantime to the Senate whereby his case could have been brought before that body, and the commencement of suit was within a month after the ending of its last session preceding the expiration of the four years. Held that ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Atascadero State Hosp. v. Scanlon - 473 U.S. 234 (1985) U.S. Supreme Court Atascadero State Hosp. v. Scanlon, 473 U.S. 234 (1985) Atascadero State Hosp. v. Scanlon No. 84-351 Argued March 25, 1985 Decided June 28, 1985 473 U.S. 234 CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT Syllabus Respondent, who suffers from diabetes and has no sight in one eye, brought an action in Federal District Court against petitioners, alleging that petitioner California State Hospital denied him employment because of his physical handicap, in violation of 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and seeking compensatory, injunctive, and declaratory relief. Section 504 provides that no handicapped person shall, solely by reason of his handicap, be subjected to discrimination under any program receiving federal financial assistance under the Act. Section 505(a) makes available to any person aggrieved by any act of any recipient of federal assistance under the Act the reme...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Marbury v. Madison - 5 U.S. 137 (1803) U.S. Supreme Court Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 1 Cranch 137 137 (1803) Marbury v. Madison 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 Syllabus The clerks of the Department of State of the United States may be called upon to give evidence of transactions in the Department which are not of a confidential character. The Secretary of State cannot be called upon as a witness to state transactions of a confidential nature which may have occurred in his Department. But he may be called upon to give testimony of circumstances which were not of that character. Clerks in the Department of State were directed to be sworn, subject to objections to questions upon confidential matters. Some point of time must be taken when the power of the Executive over an officer, not removable at his will, must cease. That point of time must be when the constitutional power of appointment has been exercised. And the power has been exercised when the last act required from the person poss...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Fletcher v. Peck - 10 U.S. 87 (1810) U.S. Supreme Court Fletcher v. Peck, 10 U.S. 6 Cranch 87 87 (1810) Fletcher v. Peck 10 U.S. (6 Cranch) 87 ERROR TO THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Syllabus If the breach of covenant assigned be that the State had no authority to sell and dispose of the land, it is not a good plea in bar to say that the Governor was legally empowered to sell and convey the premises, although the facts stated in the plea as inducement are sufficient to justify a direct negative of the breach assigned. It is not necessary that a breach of covenant be assigned in the very words of the covenant. It is sufficient if it show a substantial breach. The Court will not declare a law to be unconstitutional unless the opposition between the Constitution and the law be clear and plain. The Legislature of Georgia, in 1795, had the power of disposing of the unappropriated lands within its own limits. In a contest between two individuals claiming und...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Brown v. United States - 12 U.S. 110 (1814) U.S. Supreme Court Brown v. United States, 12 U.S. 8 Cranch 110 110 (1814) Brown v. United States 12 U.S. (8 Cranch) 110 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS Syllabus British property found in the United States on land at the commencement of hostilities with Great Britain cannot be condemned as enemy's property without a legislative act authorizing its confiscation. The act of the legislature declaring war is not such an act. Timber, floated into a salt water creek, where the tide ebbs and flows, leaving the ends of the timber resting on the mud at low water and prevented from floating away at high water by booms, is to be considered as landed. In this country, from the structure of our government, proceedings to condemn the property of an enemy found within our territory at the declaration of war can be sustained only upon the principle that they are commenced in execution of some existing law. In Englan...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Inglis v. Trustees of Sailor's Snug Harbor - 28 U.S. 99 (1830) U.S. Supreme Court Inglis v. Trustees of Sailor's Snug Harbor, 28 U.S. 3 Pet. 99 99 (1830) Inglis v. Trustees of Sailor's Snug Harbor 28 U.S. (3 Pet.) 99 ON POINTS OF DISAGREEMENT CERTIFIED BY JUDGES OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Syllabus The testator gave all the rest and residue and remainder of his estate, real and personal, comprehending a large real estate in the City of New York, to the Chancellor of the State of New York and Recorder of the City of New York, &c.; (naming several other persons by their official description), to have and to hold the same unto them and their respective successors in office to the uses and trusts, subject to the conditions and appointments declared in the will, which were, out of the rents, issues, and profits thereof to erect and build upon the land upon which he resided, which was given by the will, an asylum or marine hospital...
Tag this Judgment!Court : US Supreme Court
Boone v. Chiles - 35 U.S. 177 (1835) U.S. Supreme Court Boone v. Chiles, 35 U.S. 10 Pet. 177 177 (1835) Boone v. Chiles 35 U.S. (10 Pet.) 177 APPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR THE DISTRICT OF KENTUCKY Syllabus The complainants filed a bill in the Circuit Court of Kentucky, claiming a conveyance of the legal title and an account of rents and profits of a tract of land the legal title to which was derived in virtue of the law of Virginia, under a settlement and a preemption right held by Reuben Searcy. Searcy gave his bond to Hoy to make a deed of one-half of the land to which he was thus entitled, the other half having been given by him to one Martin to obtain the location and patenting. He afterwards gave the plats and surveys to Hoy, who in 1785 obtained a patent for the land, which he was to have a deed for. Hoy, in 1781, assigned the bond of Searcy to George Boone, and made himself surety for its performance, and George Boone assigned the bond to Thomas...
Tag this Judgment!