Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC632IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.OF2024[Arising out of SLP(Criminal) No.10778 of 2024]. KALVAKUNTLA KAVITHA APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT RESPONDENT(S) WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.OF2024[Arising out of SLP(Criminal) No.10785 of 2024]. JUDGMENT B.R. GAVAI, J.1. Leave granted.2. These appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 01.07.2024 passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Bail Application Nos.1675 and 1739 of 2024, vide which the learned Single Judge has refused to grant bail to the appellant herein.3. Though the matter has been argued at length by Shri Mukul Rohatgi, learned Senior Counsel along with Shri D.S. Naidu and Shri Vikram Chaudhri, learned Senior Counsel 1 appearing on behalf of the appellant, and Shri S.V. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General of India (for short, ASG) for the respondent(s), at length; learned ASG has suggested that this Court ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC631REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7595 of 2021 BANGALORE ELECTRICITY SUPPLY COMPANY LIMITED ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS HIREHALLI SOLAR POWER PROJECT LLP & OTHERS RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.7608 OF2021WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.6386 OF2021Table of Contents Facts: .......................................................................................................................................... 2 KERCs order: . ........................................................................................................................ 5 APTELs impugned order:. .................................................................................................... 6 Submissions:. ......................................................................................................................... 10 Scope of Supreme Courts appellate jurisdiction under Section 125 of the Act:13. Analysis on merits:. ................................
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
- 1 - WA No.100006 of 2022 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE27H DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 R PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNA S.DIXIT AND THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIJAYKUMAR A.PATIL WRIT APPEAL NO.100006 OF2022GM-R/C) BETWEEN: IN WP.NO.77680/2013: PASCHIM VIBHAG SHIKSHANA MANDAL BIJAGARNI-591108 TALUK & DIST. BELGAUM TRUST REGISTERED UNDER THE BOMBAY PUBLIC TRUST ACT, 1950 REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI. TARACHAND MONAPPA JADHAV AGE. 73 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, BIJAGARNI-591108, TALUK & DISTRICT. BELGAUM. IN WP.NO.81667/2013: PASCHIM VIBHAG SHIKSHANA MANDAL BIJAGARNI, TALUK & DISTRICT: BELGAUM59000 BY ITS SECRETARY, DAMODAR DATTU MORE IN WP.NO.101972/2017: THE PASCHIM VIBHAG SHIKSHANA MANDAL BIJAGARNI, TALUK & DISTRICT: BELGAUM BY ITS SECRETARY, DAMODAR DATTU MORE, - 2 - WA No.100006 of 2022 AGE. 55 YEARS, OCC. AGRICULTURE, R/AT. BIJAGARNI, TQ. & DIST. BELGAUM. 590001. ... APPELLANTS (BY SRI. MALLIKARJUNSWAMY B. HIREMATH, ADVOCATE) AND: IN WP.NO.77680/2013:1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC625IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2622 OF2024(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL.) No.8081 OF2023 SHAJAN SKARIA APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE OF KERALA & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA, J.: For the convenience of exposition, this judgment is divided into the following parts: - A. FACTUAL MATRIX ...................................................................................2 B. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT ....................... 10 C. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE COMPLAINANT ................. 13 D. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE STATE................................... 15 E. RELEVANT STATUTORY PROVISIONS .......................................... 16 F. ISSUES FOR DETERMINATION ......................................................... 20 G. ANALYSIS ................................................................................................. 21 i. Evolution of the concept of anticipatory bail ................
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC623IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1659-1660 OF2024M/S. KARNATAKA EMTA COAL MINES LIMITED AND ANOTHER ..APPELLANTS Versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ..RESPONDENT INDEX S. No.Details Paras No.Page No.1. A. PREFACE12 1 2. B. FACTUAL BACKDROP33.10.5 2 3. 3.1 Joint Venture Agreement 3.1.1 3.1.4 3-9 4. 3.2 Correspondence 3.2.1 3.2.3 9-13 5. 3.3 Fuel Supply Agreement 3.3.1-3.3.3 13-18 6. 3.4 Memorandum of Understanding 3.4.1 3.4.2 18-21 7. 3.5 Washability Report of the Central 3.5.1 21-22 Institute of Mining and Fuel Research, Nagpur 8. 3.6 Revised Mining Plan 3.6.1 3.6.2 22-23 9. 3.7 Information submitted by KECML to 3.7.1 3.7.2 23-25 the Coal Controller 10. 3.8 Audit Objection raised by the CAG38.1 3.8.3 25-29 11. 3.9 Preliminary Enquiry registered by 3.9.1 3.9.2 29-31 respondent CBI12 3.10 Litigation between KPCL and 3.10.1 -3.10.6 31-33 KECML13 C. SUBMISSIONS14 4. Arguments by Counsel for the 4.1 4.17 33-42 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC626REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.3114 OF2024Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. & Ors. Appellant(s) Versus State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA, J.:1. This appeal arises from the order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dated 03.04.2024 in Application No.15453 of 2023 filed by the appellant herein by which, the High Court rejected the same and thereby declined to quash and set aside the summoning order dated 28.02.2023 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khurja, Bulandshahar in Complaint Case No.547 of 2021. Criminal Appeal No.3114 of 2024 Page 1 of 312. Facts giving rise to this appeal may be summarised as under: (i) The respondent No.2 herein is the original complainant. He lodged a private complaint in the court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khurja, Bulandshahar against the appellants herein for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420 & 120...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
- 1 - NC:2024. KHC-D:12068 WP No.103856 of 2024 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE23D DAY OF AUGUST, 2024 R BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H.P.SANDESH WRIT PETITION No.103856 OF2024(GM-RES) BETWEEN KISHORE S/O. BALDEV BAJAJ, AGE:61. YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. BAJAJ VILLAH BAJAJ AVENUE, A-01-A-09, SANGOLI RAYANNA NAGAR, TQ: AND DIST: DHARWAD-580002. ...PETITIONER (BY SRI. V.M. SHEELVANT, ADVOCATE) AND:1. SRI. BASAWARAJ S/O. NAMASAYYA RAMASWAMI HIREMATH, AGE:71. YEARS, OCC: RETIRED PROFESSOR/AGRICULTURIST, R/O. HIREMATH VILLA, SANGOLLI RAYANNA NAGAR, TQ: DHARWAD-580001. SMT. SAROJA W/O. SOMASHEKAR NEELAGAR, (SINCE DECEASED HER LRS ARE ALREADY ON RECORD AS RESPONDENT NO.2 &3) 2. SHRI SOHAN S/O. SOMASHEKAR NEELAGAR, AGE:27. YEARS, OCC: BUSINESS, R/O. H.NO.504/4, VIJAYALAXMI BUILDING, 2ND MAIN ROAD, 4TH CROSS, M.B. NAGAR, KOPPADKERI, TQ: AND DIST: DHARWAD-580001.-. 2 - NC:2024. KHC-D:12068 WP No.103856 of 2024 3. SMT. SUMAN D/O. SOMASHEKAR NEELAGAR, AGE:23. YEARS, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE2024INSC629IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.858 OF2023OMKAR REALTORS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS KUSHALRAJ LAND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT PANKAJ MITHAL, J.1. This is a statutory appeal under Section 67 of the Consumer Protection Act, 20191.2. The challenge in the appeal is to the judgment and order dated 23.12.2022 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission2 in Consumer Complaint No.141 of 2020. NCDRC by the said judgment and order has partly allowed the complaint of the respondent and 1 hereinafter referred to as the Act 2 in short NCDRC 1 directed the appellant to refund within 2 months an amount of Rs.7,16,41,493/- (Rupees Seven Crore Sixteen Lakh Forty One Thousand Four Hundred and Ninety Three only) along with delay compensation @ 6% per annum from the respective dates of deposits till its payment, failing which the rate of interest payable would stand increased to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 2024 INSC620REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.9758 OF2024[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.11685 OF2021 SWATI PRIYADARSHINI APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, J.Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. We are inclined to grant leave; hence, granted.3. The present appeal has been filed against the Final Judgment and Order dated 03.02.2020 (hereinafter referred to as the Impugned Judgment) passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at 2 Jabalpur (hereinafter referred to as the High Court) in Writ Appeal No.956/2017, whereby it overruled the Judgment dated 20.06.2017 passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition No.8404/2013. FACTUAL MATRIX:4. On 15.10.2012, the sole appellant was appointed by the Respondent No.4 to the post of Assistant Project Coordinator (hereinafter referred to as APC) under the Sarv Shiksha Abhiyan (hereinafter referred to as ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC627REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 1970 OF2020DR. VIJAY DIXIT & ORS. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PAGADAL KRISHNA MOHAN & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.1. This appeal arises from an order dated 22.07.2016 in Consumer Complaint No.280 of 2015 (hereinafter the Impugned Order), wherein the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter referred to as the NCDRC) forfeited the right of the Appellant(s) to file its written statement on account of the Appellant(s) lapse in conforming to statutory period prescribed for filing its written statement, under Section 13 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (the Act).2. The facts and proceedings germane to the contextual understanding of the present lis are as follows: C.A. No.1970 of 2020 Page 1 of 82.1. The Respondent(s) filed a Consumer Complaint No.280 of 2015 before the NCDRC on 12.05.2015, claiming a total amount of INR4736,25,000 (Indian Rupees Fort...
Tag this Judgment!