Court : Supreme Court of India
2023 INSC935REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.8411 OF2014URBAN IMPROVEMENT TRUST, BIKANER APPELLANT Versus GORDHAN DASS (D) THROUGH LRs. & OTHERS RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT MANOJ MISRA, J.1. I had the benefit of reading the scholarly judgment of my learned Brother, Hrishikesh Roy, J., dismissing this appeal filed against the judgment and order of the High Court1 dated 12.01.2010 passed in S.B. Civil Regular Second Appeal No.114 of 2004. However, since Im of the opinion that plaintiffs suit was not maintainable in respect of the land which was acquired by a notification, the defendants appeal is entitled to be allowed. Therefore, Im recording my opinion separately.1. High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur Civil Appeal No.8411 of 2014 Page 1 of 50 Appeal 2. This is a defendants appeal against the order of the High Court dismissing his second appeal preferred against the judgment and decree of reversal passed by the first appellat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : AIR1928Bom236; (1928)30BOMLR503
Patkar, J.1. This is a second appeal against the order passed by the First Class Subordinate Judge at Ahmednagar in proceedings arising out of Suit No. 67 of 1915. The suit was brought by the plaintiff for possession of the land with mesne profits. On July 10, 1917, he obtained a decree for possession, and a preliminary decree was passed under Order XX, Rule 12, of the Civil Procedure Code, directing an inquiry into the mesne profits. There were two appeals filed by defendants Nos. 1 and 2 which were dismissed. The plaintiff obtained possession of the land; and filed applications in 1919 and 1921 for ascertainment of mesne profits which were not prosecuted. The present application No. 7 of 1923 is made for ascertainment of mesne profits against the defendants and the surety who made himself liable for the decretal amount to the extent of Rs. 800. The Subordinate Judge held that the application for a final decree for mesne profits was barred by limitation. On appeal, the learned Distric...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Reported in : (1958)60BOMLR69
Mudholkar, J.1. This order will govern Miscellaneous Petitions Nos. 512 of 1955, 75 of 1956 and 105 of 1956.2. The common question involved in all these petitions tinder Article 226 of the Constitution is whether an order made by a revenue officer rejecting an application of an ex-proprietor made under Rule 1 of the Rules for the reservation of land to ex-proprietors recorded as Bir, Chhota ghas, etc. vesting in the State, framed under Section 91(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Rights Act, 1950, is appealable before the Board of Revenue under Section 84 of the Madhya Pradesh Abolition Act.3. In Gulab Bai v. State (1955) N.L.J. 624 the Madhya Pradesh Board of Revenue took the view that no appeal lay to it on the ground that the rules aforementioned could not have been framed under Section 91(1) of the Madhya Pradesh Abolition of Proprietary Eights Act, that they have no force of law but amount only to executive instructions and that, therefore, the order made under tho...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Reported in : AIR1997AP347
ORDERS. Parvatha Rao, J. 1. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned counsel for the 1st respondent.2. The appellant is a transport company. It questions the judgment dated 2-6-1987 of a learned single Judge of this Court in C.C.C.A. No. 36 of 1979 confirming the judgment and decree dated 19-9-1978 of the learned 6th Additional Judge, City Civil Court at Hyderabad in O. S. No. 611 of 1975 filed by the respondents herein decreeing the suit and awarding a sum of Rs. 7,961.80 Ps. to the respondents to he paid by the appellant towards loss and damage caused to the goods of the 2nd respondent, which were entrusted to the appellant for transporting from Hyderabad to Madras on a finding that there was negligence on the part of the appellant carrier. The 1st respondent is the Insurance Company with which the '2nd respondent insured the goods while in transit after entrustment to the appellant for transport.3. Entrustment of 41 bales of semi tannedsleep skin to the appellant carr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1960SC457; [1960]2SCR646
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 204 of 1959. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated June 23, 1959, of the Calcutta High Court in Criminal Revision No. 640 of 1958. S. K. Acharya and Janardan Sharma, for the appellants. S. M. Bose, Advocate-General for, the State of West Bengal, K. C. Mukherjee and P. K. Bose, for the respondent. 1959. December 18. The judgment of Sinha, C. J., Gajendragadkar and Shah, JJ. was delivered by Gajendragadkar J. The judgment of Sarkar and Subba Rao, JJ. was delivered by Sarkar, J. GAJENDRAGADKAR J.-This appeal by special leave challenges the vires of S. 2(b) and the proviso to s. 4(1) of the West Bengal Tribunals of Criminal Jurisdiction Act, 1952 (W.B. Act XIV of 1952) (hereinafter called the Act). A complaint was filed against Kangsari Haldar and Jogendra Nath Guria (hereinafter called the appellants) in which it was alleged that the appellants along with some others had committed offences under s. 120B read with ss....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1956SC66; 1956CriLJ156; [1955]2SCR955
Bhagwati, J.1. This appeal with certificate under article 134(1)(c) of the Constitution arises out of an application under section 2 of the Contempt of Courts Act (XXXII of 1952) and section 8 of the Public Servants (Inquiries) Act (XXXVII of 1850) read with article 227 of the Constitution filed by the respondent against the appellant in the High Court of Judicature of Patna and raises an important question as to whether the Commissioner appointed under Act XXXVII of 1850 is a Court. 2. The respondent is a Member of the Bihar Civil Service (Executive Branch). The State Government received reports to the effect that the respondent had been guilty of serious misconduct and corrupt practices in the discharge of his official duties while employed as Sub-Divisional Officer at Aurangabad and they accordingly decided that an inquiry into the truth of the various charges against him should be made under the provisions of the Public Servants (Inquiries) Act, 1850 (Act XXXVII of 1850, hereinafte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1996SC1051; JT1995(9)SC380; 1996(1)SCALE101; (1996)2SCC549; [1995]Supp6SCR827
ORDERK. Ramaswamy, J.1. Leave granted.C.A. No. 12122 /95 @ SLP (C) No. 4896/932. This appeal by special leave arises from the judgment and order dated February 5, 1993 by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition No. 15377 of 1983. The appellants are owners of the lands in plot No. 16 of an extent of 5 bighas 6 biswas and 14 biswas respectively in village Bairam Nagar, Parganas, Nahtaur, Tahsil Dhampur, District Bijnore. These lands alongwith other lands were notified by publication in the State Gazette under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act 1894 (for short, 'the Act') on July 23. 1983 and the declaration under Section 6 was also published simultaneously dispensing with the inquiry under Section 5-A. The appellants challenged the validity of the notification under Section 4(1) and the exercise of the power given under Section 17(1) read with Section 17(4) dispensing the inquiry under Section 5-A. Three contentions were raised and negatived by the Division ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1969SC1335; [1969(18)FLR373]; (1969)IILLJ651SC; (1969)1SCC873; [1970]1SCR51
V. Bhargava, J.1. These four connected appeals have been filed, by special leave, by the Town Municipal Council, Athani, and are directed against a common judgment of the High Court of Mysore in four writ petitions, filed by the appellant under Art. 226 of the Constitution, dismissing the writ petitions. The circumstances in which these appeals have arisen may be briefly stated.2. Four different applications under section 33C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act No. 14 of 1947 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') were filed in the Labour Court, Hubli, by various workmen of the appellant. Application (LCH) No. 139 of 1965 was filed by eleven workmen on 28th July, 1965, seeking computation of their claim for overtime work for the period between 1st April, 1955 and 31st December, 1957, and for work done on weekly off-days for the period between 1st April, 1955 and 31st December, 1960. The amount claimed by each workman was separately indicated in the application under each head. The total ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1962SC1406; [1963]1SCR491
S.K. Das, J.1. These are three consolidated appeals which arise from the judgment and order of a Division Bench of Rajasthan High Court dated August, 9, 1957. They have been preferred to this Court on the strength of a certificate granted by the said High Court under Art. 132 of the Constitution certifying that the cases involve a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of Art. 301 and other connected articles relating to trade, commerce and intercourse within the territory of India, contained in Part XIII of the Constitution. These appeals were originally heard by a Bench of five Judges and on April 4, 1961, that Bench recorded an order to the effect that having regard to the importance of the constitutional issues involved and the views expressed in the decision of this Court in Atiabari Tea Co. Ltd. v. The State of Assam : [1961]1SCR809 , the appeals should be heard by a larger Bench. The appeals were then placed before the learned Chief Justice for necessary orders, an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Reported in : ILR1975Delhi820
Prakash Narain, J. (1) This petition for Habeas Corpus lias been filed by Smt. Manekben in respect of the detention of her husband, Sukur Naran Bakhia who has been detained by virtue of an order of the Central Government passed on December 19, 1974 under the Conservation of Foreign Exchange and Prevention of Smuggling Activities Act, 52 of 1974, hereinafter referred to as the Act 52 of 1974. Before proceeding with the petition it will be advantageous to briefly set out the historical background leading to the impugned detention of Sukar Naran Bakhia. The Maintenance of Internal Security Act, No. 26 of 1971. hereinafter referred to as the Misa, came in to force on July 21, 1971. In December, 1971 hostilities broke out between India and Pakistan. Consequent thereto the President made a Proclamation of Emergency under Article 352 of the Constitution on December 3,1971. It is alleged that the detenu. Sukur Naran Bakhia suffered a heart attack on September 4, 1974 and was hospitalised. Hhe ...
Tag this Judgment!