Court : Supreme Court of India
non reportable in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal nos. 5401 5404 of2017karnataka power corporation appellant limited versus emta coal limited & anr. respondents judgment n. v. ramana, cji1the present civil appeals, by way of special leave, arise out of the impugned common judgment dated 24.03.2016 passed by the high court of karnataka, at bengaluru, whereby the high court allowed the writ petitions filed by the respondents herein. by way of the writ petitions, the respondents had challenged the adverse decisions taken by the appellant with respect to the arrangement regarding coal procurement entered into by the parties for the purposes of the appellant s thermal power projects in the state of karnataka. 2 a conspectus of the facts necessary for the disposal of the 1 present appeal is as follows: the appellant was allotted coal mines by the union of india for captive consumption for their thermal power projects in the state of karnataka. in 2002, m/s emta coal limited (hereinafter, emta ) was selected to form a joint venture with the appellant for the development of the mines, and the supply of coal to the said power projects. after setting up of the joint venture karnataka emta coal mines limited (in short, kemta ) by the appellant and emta, all three companies entered into various contracts for development of the coal mines and supply and delivery of coal. 3 the above arrangement progressed without any dispute, until the comptroller and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
reportable in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal nos.4178 4197 of2022[arising out of special leave petition (civil) nos.10015 10034 of 2020]. yamuna expressway industrial development authority etc. ...appellant(s) versus shakuntla education and welfare society & ors. etc. ...respondent(s) with civil appeal nos.4198 4217 of2022[arising out of special leave petition (civil) nos.9891 9910 of 2020]. civil appeal no.4218 of2022[arising out of special leave petition (civil) no.14141 of 2020]. civil appeal no.4219 of2022[arising out of special leave petition (civil) no.300 of 2022]. 1 judgment b.r. gavai, j.1. leave granted.2. this batch of appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 28th may, 2020, passed by the allahabad high court in various writ petitions filed by the allottees of plots of land. the writ petitions were filed challenging the demand of additional amount made by the appellant herein yamuna expressway industrial development authority (hereinafter referred to as yeida ) in respect of plots of land leased out to the allottees; the resolution of the board of yeida dated 15th september, 2014, and the government order dated 29th august, 2014, vide which the state government had permitted yeida to recover the additional amount from the allottees.3. the facts in the present case are not in dispute. for the sake of convenience, we will refer to the factual details as are found in writ petition no.28968 of 2018, filed before the high 2 .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
reportable in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal no.1390 of 2022 union of india & anr. ....appellants versus m/s mohit minerals pvt. ltd. through director .... respondent with c.a. no.1390/2022 with c.a. no.1394/2022 with c.a. no.1417/2022 with c.a. no.1419/2022 with c.a. no.1445/2022 with c.a. no.1414/2022 with c.a. no.1402/2022 with c.a. no.1412/2022 with c.a. no.1411/2022 with 1 c.a. no.1413/2022 with c.a. no.1415/2022 with c.a. no.1418/2022 with c.a. no.1420/2022 with c.a. no.1446/2022 with c.a. no.1447/2022 with c.a. no.1409/2022 with c.a. no.1416/2022 with c.a. no.1395/2022 with c.a. no.1407/2022 with c.a. no.1406/2022 with c.a. no.1398/2022 with c.a. no.1401/2022 with c.a. no.1391/2022 with c.a. no.1403/2022 with c.a. no.1393/2022 with c.a. no.1410/2022 with c.a. no.1405/2022 with c.a. no.1397/2022 with c.a. no.1404/2022 with c.a. no.1400/2022 with c.a. no.1396/2022 2 with c.a. no.1408/2022 with c.a. no.1399/2022 and with c.a. no.1392/2022 3 judgment dr dhananjaya y chandrachud, j a introduction ...........................................................................................................5 b submissions .......................................................................................................1 2 b.1 union of india ...............................................................................................1 2 b.2 respondent-assessees .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... kalliyanikutty and another, (1999) 3 scc657relying on halsbury s laws of england, 4th edn. ..... 28, para 605; halsbury s laws of england, vol. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... . rajdewan dubey [(1962) 2 scr558: air1962sc83 this court while pointing out the procedure to be followed when conflicting decisions are placed before a bench extracted a passage from halsbury's laws of england incorporating one of the exceptions when the decision of an appellate court is not binding.41 ..... . in england, the court of appeal has imposed upon its power of review of earlier precedents a limitation, subject to certain exceptions .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... of experts in the field of health, including that of the world health organization (who), the united nations international children s emergency fund (unicef) and the oxford vaccine group, as well as scientific studies published in the new england journal of medicine, the lancet and the international journal of scientific studies, it was submitted on behalf of the state of tamil nadu that vaccination prevents severe disease and significantly reduces hospitalisation and mortality and that .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... in (1976) 3 all england law reports 611, lord simon of glaisdale, in the case of suthendran v. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
non-reportable in the supreme court of india civil appellate jurisdiction civil appeal no.8037 of2011[arising out of slp(civil) no.3264 of2010 satnam singh ..... appellant(s) versus satnam singh ..... respondent(s) judgment bela m. trivedi, j.1) the appellant (original defendant) sh. satnam singh s/o sh. mehnga ram has filed the present appeal challenging the legality and validity of the impugned judgement and decree dated 27.09.2008 passed by the high court of punjab and haryana at chandigarh, in regular second appeal no.3174 of 2008, whereby the high court while dismissing the second appeal had confirmed the judgement and decree dated 06.08.2008 passed by the addl. district judge, nawanshahr (the appellate court) in regular civil appeal no.49 of 2007. the appellate court had confirmed the judgement and decree dated 14.02.2007 passed by the addl. civil judge (sd) nawanshahr (the trial 1 court) in civil suit no.295 of 2006, by which the suit of the respondent (original plaintiff) sh. satnam singh s/o inder singh seeking specific performance of the agreement to sell dated 09.06.2000 in respect of the suit land and possession thereof was decreed.2) the suit was filed by the respondent-plaintiff seeking specific performance of the agreement dated 09.06.2000 against the appellant-defendant alleging inter-alia that an agreement was executed by the defendant on 09.06.2000 in respect of the suit land measuring 11 kanals 7 marlas as described in the plaint, for consideration of rs. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
..... had the division bench issued a writ of mandamus giving the directions which it did, if circumstances of the case justified such directions, the high court would have been entitled in law to do so for even the courts in england could have issued a writ of mandamus giving such directions. ..... in halsbury's laws of england, 4th edn. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
r1in the high court of karnataka at dharwad bench dated this the11h day of april, 2022 present the hon'ble mr.justice s. sunil dutt yadav and the hon'ble mrs. justice k.s. hemalekha writ appeal no.100226/2021 between: dr. sridevi p.g., aged about 41 years assistant professor in english karnataka university dharwad c/o n.b. kajjari, no.26, ramanagar, near sangam theatre, dharwad -580 001. appellant (by sri prof. ravivarma kumar, senior counsel for sri raja raghavendra v. naik, advocate) and:1. karnataka university dharwad rep. by its registrar pavate nagar dharwad - 580 003. 22. manjunath mallinath hiremath s/o mallinath hiremath aged about 46 years r/o beside khoday hostel sirur park, 1st stage, hubballi tq., dharwad district, dharwad - 580 001. respondents (by sri mallikarjun s. hiremath, advocate for r1; sri aditya sondhi, senior counsel for sri avinash m. angadi, advocate for r2) this writ appeal is filed under section 4 of the karnataka high court act 1961, praying to set aside the order dated 26.08.2021 passed in writ petition no.100859/2016 (s-res) and restore the appointment order of the appellant as in same cadre in the interest of justice and equity. this writ appeal having been heard and reserved on 17.03.2022 and coming on for pronouncement of judgment this day, s. sunil dutt yadav j., delivered the following:3. judgment s. sunil dutt yadav. j this judgment has been divided into the following sections to facilitate analysis: i preamble 4 ii analysis:10. (i) .....
Tag this Judgment!