Array
(
[0] =>
[1] => ..... no.6195, 6196 & 6199 but banshilal, pyarelal s/o late har lal, hitesh verma s/o sh. pyarelal, pawan verma s/o banshilal, uma verma w/o pyarelal and their nepali domestic help raju from past 6 months are not allowing the applicant to work on her fields. all the above persons used to abuse the applicant her husband and other .....
[2] =>
[3] =>
[4] =>
[5] =>
[6] =>
[7] =>
)
Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-03-2020
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.1648 of 2019 Rajesh @ Sarkari & Anr. ...Appellants Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent JUDGMENT Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, J1The appellants Rajesh alias Sarkari and Ajay Hooda have been convicted, 1 together with a co-accused for an offence under Section 302 read with Section 2 34 of the India Penal Code and have been sentenced to imprisonment for life. 3 2 On 26 December 2006, a ruqqa was received at the Police Post, PGIMS from PGIMS, Rohtak about Sandeep Hooda, son of Azad Singh Hooda, having 1 Pehlad Singh alias Harpal 2 IPC1been brought dead there. ASI, Meha Singh met Azad Singh, the complainant, at the emergency ward in PGIMS, Rohtak. Azad Singh made a statement which 4 was reduced into writing upon which a First Information Report being FIR No.5 781 was registered under Section 154 of the Criminal Procedure Code at Police Station Sadar, Rohtak. The complainant stated that his elder s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-05-2020
..... no.6195, 6196 & 6199 but banshilal, pyarelal s/o late har lal, hitesh verma s/o sh. pyarelal, pawan verma s/o banshilal, uma verma w/o pyarelal and their nepali domestic help raju from past 6 months are not allowing the applicant to work on her fields. all the above persons used to abuse the applicant her husband and other .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-05-2020
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (C) NO.560 OF2020GURUSIMRAN SINGH NARULA ... PETITIONERS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ... RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN,J.1. This Writ petition filed in the public interest under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeks direction to forthwith ban on spraying of all kinds of disinfectants on human beings which is being done supposedly for protecting the human beings from the Novel Coronavirus disease 2019(Covid19).2. The World Health Organisation(WHO) declared novel coronavirus disease, 2019 (hereinafter referred to as 2 Covid19) as a Pandemic on 11.03.2020. All countries including India after spread of the pandemic had taken and are still taking different measures to contain the disease and protect its citizens from Covid19. On 29.03.2020, Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, Government of India, released guidelines on disinfection of common Public places including Offices. The scope as con...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-07-2020
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.160 OF2020AMISH DEVGAN ..... PETITIONER(S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ..... RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT SANJIV KHANNA, J.Applications for intervention are allowed.2. The writ petitioner, Amish Devgan, is a journalist who, it is stated, is presently the managing director of several news channels owned and operated by TV18 Broadcast Limited, including News18 Uttar Pradesh/Uttarakhand, News18 Madhya Pradesh/ Chhattisgarh and News18 Rajasthan.3. The petitioner hosts and anchors debate shows Aar Paar on News18 India and Takkar on CNBC Awaaz. On 15th June, 2020, at around 7:30 p.m., the petitioner had hosted and anchored a Writ Petition (Criminal) No.160 of 2020 Page 1 of 128 debate on the enactment1 which, while excluding Ayodhya, prohibits conversion and provides for maintenance of the religious character of places of worship as it existed on 15th August, 1947. Some Hindu priest organisatio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-08-2020
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 39763977 OF2020(arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 1338413385/2019) The Project Director, Project Implementation Unit Appellant(s) Versus P.V. Krishnamoorthy & Ors. Respondent(s) With CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 39783980 OF2020(arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 1609816100/2019) CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 39813984 OF2020(arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 1857718580/2019) CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 39853991 OF2020(arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 1916019166/2019) CIVIL APPEAL No.3992 OF2020(arising out of SLP(C) No.18586/2019) CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 39933994 OF2020(arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 17751776/2020) CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 39953998 OF2020(arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 17771780/2020) 2 CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 39994001 OF2020(arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 17811783/2020) JUDGMENT A. M. Khanwilkar, J.1. Leave granted.2. These appeals emanate from the common judgment and order1 of the High Court of Judicature at Madras2 holding the notifications issued under Section 3A(1) of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-14-2020
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2402 OF2019VIDYA DROLIA AND OTHERS ..... APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DURGA TRADING CORPORATION ..... RESPONDENT(S) W I T H SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NOS. 5605-5606 OF2019AND SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION No.11877 OF2020JUDGMENT SANJIV KHANNA, J.This judgment decides the reference to three Judges made vide order dated 28th February, 2019 in Civil Appeal No.2402 of 2019 titled Vidya Drolia and Others v. Durga Trading Corporation,1 as it doubts the legal ratio expressed in Himangni Enterprises v. Kamaljeet Singh Ahluwalia2 that landlord-tenant disputes governed by the provisions of the Transfer of Property 1 2019 SCC OnLine SC3582 (2017) 10 SCC7061 Act, 1882, are not arbitrable as this would be contrary to public policy.2. A deeper consideration of the order of reference reveals that the issues required to be answered relate to two aspects that are distinct and yet interconnected, namely: (i) meaning of non-arbitr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-17-2020
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.__4083__ OF2020(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No.11431 OF2020 ANGLO AMERICAN METALLURGICAL COAL PTY LTD. APPELLANT VERSUS MMTC LTD. RESPONDENT JUDGMENT R.F. Nariman, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal is at the instance of an Australian company, Anglo American Metallurgical Coal Pty. Ltd. [Appellant]., which produces and exports certain types of coal. By a Long Term Agreement dated 07.03.2007 [LTA]., between the Appellant and MMTC Ltd. [Respondent]., the Appellant, referred to as the seller in the LTA, agreed to supply certain quantities of freshly mined and washed "German Creek", "Isaac" (Blend of 65% Moranbah North and 35% German Creek coking coals) and "Moranbah North" coking coal to the Respondent. Clause 1 of this LTA is material and states as follows:1. CLAUSE1 MATERIAL, QUANTITY, QUALITY AND DELIVERY PERIOD: The SELLER shall sell and the PURCHASER shall buy, a) The base quantity during the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-02-2020
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.763-764 OF2016SHATRUGHNA BABAN MESHRAM Appellant VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondent JUDGMENT Uday Umesh Lalit, J.1. These appeals by Special Leave challenge the common judgment and order dated 12.10.2015 passed by the High Court1 in Criminal Appeal No.321 of 2015 and Criminal Confirmation Case No.1 of 2015 affirming the judgment and order dated 14.08.2015 passed by the Trial Court2 in Special Case (POCSO Act3) No.11 of 2013 and confirming the Death Sentence awarded to the Appellant on two counts i.e. under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC, for short) and under Section 376A of IPC. 1 The High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur. 2 The Additional Sessions Judge, Yavatmal 3 The Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012. 22. The victim in the present case was a girl of two and half years of age and the First Information Report was lodged at 09.25 p.m. on 1...
Tag this Judgment!