Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : 2009AIRSCW4319; JT2009(9)SC142; 2009(8)SCALE685; (2009)12SCC110
R.V. Raveendran, J.1. The appellant runs a barge repair workshop on a private land at Oudossim, Cortalim on the banks of river Zuari within the jurisdiction of Panaji Port. According to the appellant, there are two types of barge workshops: one is dry dock workshop, and the second is where the barges anchored in the river along side the workshop are repaired. Appellant's workshop falls under the second category as it undertakes repair of barges only when the barge is floating above the waterline. About 1300 sq. mtrs. of the river area adjoining the workshop is used by the anchored barge under repair. The Zuari being a tidal river, the water level therein recedes during low tide and rises back during high tide. Consequently, the barge under repair moored alongside the river bank, would settle on the riverbed during low tide and rise with the water during high tide.2. Appellant opened its workshop in the year 1983, after securing a NOC dated 25.7.1983 from the Captain of Ports, Governmen...
Tag this Judgment!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
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION TRANSFERRED CASE (CIVIL) No.245/2020 LALIT KUMAR JAIN .PETITIONER(S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ..RESPONDENT(S) WITH W.P.(C) No.117/2021, W.P.(C) No.1371/2020, W.P.(C) No.1420/2020, W.P.(C) No.1353/2020, T.P.(C) No.1252/2020, W.P.(C) No.1276/2020, W.P.(C) No.1287/2020, T.P. (C) No.1285/2020, T.P.(C) No.1325/2020, W.P.(C) No.1364/2020, T.C.(C) No.257/2020, W.P.(C) No.1434/2020, W.P.(C) No.38/2021, W.P.(C) No.1419/2020, T.P.(C) No.1202/2020, T.P.(C) No.1220/2020, T.P.(C) No.1203/2020, T.P.(C) No.1193/2020, T.P.(C) No.1196/2020, T.P.(C) No.1289/2020, T.P.(C) No.1323/2020, T.P.(C) No.1333/2020, T.P.(C) No.1292/2020, T.P.(C) No.1299/2020, T.P.(C) No.1331/2020, W.P. (C) No.1342/2020, T.P.(C) No.1339/2020, W.P.(C) No.1348/2020, W.P.(C) No.1344/2020, W.P.(C) No.1343/2020, T.C.(C) No.250/2020, T.C.(C) No.251/2020, T.C. (C) No.247/2020, T.C.(C) No.253/2020, T.C.(C) No.252/2020, T.C.(C) No.248/2020, T.C.(C) No.254/2020, T.C....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition (Civil) No.708 of 2020 Gujarat Mazdoor Sabha & Anr. The State of Gujarat ...Petitioners Versus ...Respondent JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J Index A B C D E F G H I The Notifications Grounds of challenge The power under Section 5 of the Factories Act, 1962 Precedent on public emergency and security of the state Interpreting public emergency in Section 5 Scheme and objects of the Factories Act, 1962 Social and economic value of overtime Constitutional vision of social and economic democracy Summation 1 PART A1Invoking its powers under Section 5 of the Factories Act, 19481, the State of Gujarat has exempted factories from observing some of the obligations which employers have to fulfil towards the workmen employed by them. The government justifies the action on the ground that industrial employers are faced with financial stringency in the economic downturn resulting from the outbreak of COVID -19....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
GANGULY, J. 1. This appeal at the instance of the State has been preferred from the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, dated July 27, 2005 in Criminal Appeal No. 250/1996 whereby High Court gave the appellant the benefit of doubt and acquitted him of the charges framed against him. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the respondent Dalbir Singh, a constable in 36th Battalion Central Reserve Police Force, at the relevant time was posted at Fatehabad, District Amritsar, Punjab. On April 11th, 1993, Harish Chander, the Battalion Havaldar Major (hereinafter `B.H.M.') in `Company D' of the Battalion, reported to Hari Singh, the Deputy Commandant Quarter Master (hereinafter `Deputy Commandant'), that the accused had refused to carry out the fatigue duty assigned to him. On such report being made, the Deputy Commandant directed the B.H.M. and Sub Inspector Kewal Singh to produce the accused before him. As per these directions, the accu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.889 of 2007 Arup Bhuyan .. Appellant Versus State of Assam & Anr. .. Respondents With Review Petition (Criminal) No.417/2011 In Criminal Appeal No.1383/2007 With Review Petition (Criminal) No.426/2011 In Criminal Appeal No.889/2007 With Special Leave Petition (Crl) No.5971/2019 With Special Leave Petition (Crl) No.5964/2019 With Criminal Appeal No.1383/2007 2 With SLP(Crl.)...CRLMP No.16637/2014 With Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.5643/2019 With Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.6270/2019 JUDGMENT M. R. Shah, J.1. Present reference to the larger Bench is made against the judgment and order in the case of Arup Bhuyan vs. Union of India, (2011) 3 SCC377as well as State of Kerala vs. Raneef, (2011) 1 SCC784 pursuant to the order passed by this Court dated 26.08.2014, reported as (2015) 12 SCC702 Background of the Reference 2. That the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Raneef (supra) wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.3224 of 2020 Ebix Singapore Private Limited .... Appellant Versus Committee of Creditors of Educomp .... Respondents Solutions Limited & Anr. With Civil Appeal No.3560 of 2020 Kundan Care Products Limited .... Appellant Versus Mr Amit Gupta and Ors. .... Respondents With Civil Appeal No.295 of 2021 Seroco Lighting Industries Private Limited .... Appellant Versus Ravi Kapoor RP for Arya Filaments .... Respondents Private Limtied & Ors. 1 JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J This judgment has been divided into sections to facilitate analysis. Further, a Glossary of defined terms which have been used throughout the judgment has also been provided. The sections in the judgment are as follows: Glossary ............................................................................................................ 5 A Civil Appeal No 3224 of 2020 the Ebix Appeal ...................................... 11 A.1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.37 OF1992ABHIRAM SINGH .APPELLANT VERSUS C.D. COMMACHEN (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS. .RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.8339 OF1995NARAYAN SINGH .APPELLANT VERSUS SUNDERLAL PATWA & ORS. .RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT Madan B. Lokur, J.1. The foundation for this reference relating to the interpretation of Section 123(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 to a Bench of seven judges has its origins in three decisions of this Court.2. In Abhiram Singh v. C.D. Commachen[1]. the election in 1990 of Abhiram Singh to the No.40, Santa Cruz Legislative Assembly Constituency for the Maharashtra State Assembly was successfully challenged by Commachen in the Bombay High Court. While hearing the appeal against the decision of the Bombay High Court, a Bench of three learned Judges expressed the view that the content, scope and what constitutes a corrupt practice under sub- sections (3) or (3A) of Section 123 of the Repres...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)3SCC24; [1983]1SCR145a
R.S. Sarkaria, J.1. This reference to the Constitution Bench raises a question in regard to the constitutional validity of death penalty for murder provided in Section 302, Penal Code, and the sentencing procedure embodied in Sub-section (3) of Section 354 of the CrPC, 1973.2. The reference has arisen in these circumstances :Bachan Singh, appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 273 of 1979, was tried and convicted and sentenced to death under Section 302, Indian Penal Code for the murders of Desa Singh, Durga Bai and Veeran Bai by the Sessions Judge. The High Court confirmed his death sentence and dismissed his appeal.3. Bachan Singh's appeal by special leave, came up for hearing before a Bench of this Court (consisting of Sarkaria and Kailasam, JJ.). The only question for consideration in the appeal was, whether the facts found by the Courts below would be 'special reasons' for awarding the death sentence as required under Section 354(3) of the CrPC 1973.4. Shri H.K. Puri, appearing as Amicu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (1982)3SCC24; 19831SCR145;
1. This reference to the Constitution Bench raises a question in regard to the constitutional validity of death penalty for murder provided in Section 302, Penal Code, and the sentencing procedure embodied in Sub-section (3) of Section 354 of the CrPC, 1973.2. The reference has arisen in these circumstances :Bachan Singh, appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 273 of 1979, was tried and convicted and sentenced to death under Section 302, Indian Penal Code for the murders of Desa Singh, Durga Bai and Veeran Bai by the Sessions Judge. The High Court confirmed his death sentence and dismissed his appeal.3. Bachan Singh's appeal by special leave, came up for hearing before a Bench of this Court (consisting of Sarkaria and Kailasam, JJ.). The only question for consideration in the appeal was, whether the facts found by the Courts below would be "special reasons" for awarding the death sentence as required under Section 354(3) of the CrPC 1973.4. Shri H.K. Puri, appearing as Amicus Curiae on behal...
Tag this Judgment!