Court : Kerala
Decided on : Feb-12-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE12H DAY OF FEBRUARY201423RD MAGHA, 1935 Bail Appl..No. 873 of 2014 () ------------------------------ CRIME NO. 215/2014 OF CHAVAKKAD POLICE STATION , TRISSUR PETITIONERS/ACCUSED1TO5 --------------------------- 1. HAMEED AGED28YEARS S/O.SULAIMAN, KURIKKALAKATH HOUSE, EDAKKAZHIYOOR P.O. 680 515, THRISSUR DISTRICT.2. SHAFI AGED32YEARS S/O.MOIDUNNI, KARUTHAAKA HOUSE, EDAKKAZHIYOOR P.O. 680 515, THRISSUR DISTRICT.3. NOUFAL AGED30YEARS S/O.SULAIMAN, KURIKKALAKATH HOUSE, EDAKKAZHIYOOR P.O. 680 515, THRISSUR DISTRICT.4. SHAHIR AGED20YEARS S/O.MOIDUNNI, KARUTHAAKA HOUSE, EDAKKAZHIYOOR P.O. 680 515, THRISSUR DISTRICT5 ASHRAF AGED32YEARS S/O.SULAIMAN, KURIKKALAKATH HOUSE, EDAKKAZHIYOOR P.O. 680 515, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMACHANDRAN RESPONDENT/COMPLAINANT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM-6832 031...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Feb-12-2014
CWP No.2632 of 2014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No.2632 of 2014 Date of decision: 12.02.2014 Smt. Kamlesh Kumari ...Petitioner(s) Versus The Presiding Officer, Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Panipat and another ...Respondent(s) CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE G.S.SANDHAWALIA Present: Mr.Pawan Kumar Hooda, Advocate, for the petitioner. G.S.SANDHAWALIA, J. The present writ petition has been filed challenging the award dated 05.07.2013 (Annexure P-1).whereby, the Labour Court, Panipat has declined the reference of the petitioner-worklady on the ground that she had left her service out of her own sweet will and did not report for duty despite issuance of several letteRs.Accordingly, it was held that the management has been able to prove that the worklady had remained absent from duty and left the job on her own will. A perusal of the award would go on to show that the grievance of the petitioner-worklady was that she had joined duty as Operator Assembly on ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Feb-12-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE WEDNESDAY, THE12H DAY OF FEBRUARY201423RD MAGHA, 1935 WA.No. 101 of 2014 () IN WP(C).27566/2013 ---------------------------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 27566/2013 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED1111-2013 APPELLANT(S)/2ND RESPONDENT: ---------------------------------------------------- KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPROT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM695023. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA,SC,KSRTC RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER & 1ST RESPONDENT: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. P.MOHAMED RAFEEK, EMPANELLED CONDUCTOR, KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, PONNANI DEPOT, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN679577.2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARI...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai Aurangabad
Decided on : Feb-12-2014
Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally with the consent of parties. 2. In the present petition the petitioner, a widow, has prayed for quashing of the process of appointment of Anganwadi Karyakarti/Sevika for mauja Ardhapur, District Nanded, initiated by the respondents vide notice dated 19.7.2012. The petitioner has also prayed for ancillary reliefs like that of consequential appointment on the post of Anganwadi Karyakarti/Sevika. The petitioner has prayed for interim relief for stoppage of the recruitment process. 3. This petition came to be filed on 4.9.2012 and this Court on 24.9.2012 has granted time upto 22.10.2012 to respondents no.1 to 3 for filing reply. The matter was adjourned from time to time and as affidavit in the petition was not filed, on 19.12.2012, the Court has passed following order: "Respondents shall file affidavit-in-reply within four weeks. Stand over to 18.1.2013. The appointment to the post of Anganwadi Karyakarti/Sevika, if any, in the interveni...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-11-2014
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1970 OF2014(@ out of SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.20625/2010) Dr. Suhas H. Pophale Appellant Versus Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. and Its Estate Officer Respondents JUDGMENT H.L. Gokhale J.Leave granted.2. This appeal by special leave raises the question as to whether the rights of an occupant/licensee/ tenant protected under a State Rent Control Act (Bombay Rent Act, 1947 and its successor the Maharashtra Rent Control Act, 1999, in the instant case), could be adversely affected by application of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971 (Public Premises Act for short)?. This question arises in the context of the eviction order dated 28.5.1993 passed by the respondent No.2, Estate Officer of the first respondent, invoking the provisions of the Public Premises Act with respect to the premises occupied by the appellant since 20.12.1972. The eviction order has been upheld by...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Feb-11-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 11.02.2014 1. Civil Writ Petition No.9823 of 2002 Chidambram and otheRs...Petitioners Versus Union Territory, Chd. and others ..Respondents 2. Civil Writ Petition No.9931 of 2002 Raju ..Petitioner Versus Union Territory, Chd. and others ..Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, CHIEF JUSTICE. HON'BLE Mr.JUSTICE ARUN PALLI1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. 2. Whether to be referred to the Reporters or not ?. 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. Present : Mr.Ashok Kumar Nabhewala, Advocate, for the petitioneRs.Ms.Liza Gill, Advocate, for U.T.Administration, Chd. In CWP No.9823 of 2002. Ms.Alka Chatrath, Advocate for U.T.Administration, Chd. In CWP No.9931 of 2002. **** SANJAY KISHAN KAUL C.J.(Oral) There are six petitions which raise a common question being the present two petitions and Civil Writ Petitions No.4739, 4799, 4772 and 4773 of 200...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-10-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CRL. L.P. NO.367/2012 STATE Through: ..... Petitioner Mr. Narender Kumar Choudhry, APP. versus NARESH & ORS Through: ..... Respondents Mr. B.S. Rana and Mr. Vijender Bhardwaj, Advocates. % Date of Decision : February 10, 2014 CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE REVA KHETRAPAL HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI JUDGMENT : REVA KHETRAPAL, J.CRL. L.P. NO.367/2012 1. Leave granted.2. Registry shall register and number the Appeal. Crl. A. No._______/2013 1. This Appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge dated 17.12.2011 in Sessions Case No.82A/2011 acquitting the Respondents Naresh, Suresh, Nirmala, Niyadher Singh and Harnandi for the offences punishable under Section 498A IPC and 304B read with Section 34 IPC. Aggrieved by the aforesaid judgment, the State has preferred the present Appeal.2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to the Appeal are that on 28.5.2005, on receipt of DD No.14A, ASI Ishwar Dutt (PW11) reached...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-10-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + RSA No.199/2012 & CM No.21160/2012 (Stay) 10th February, 2014 % NAWAL KISHORE MEHTA @ NAWAL MEHTA ......Appellant Through: Mr. A.C.Bhasin and Mr. Amit Bhasin, Advocates. VERSUS SHASHI BANSAL @ BABLI Through: ...... Respondent None. CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE VALMIKI J.MEHTA To be referred to the Reporter or not?. VALMIKI J.MEHTA, J (ORAL) 1. This regular second appeal is filed by the appellant against the judgment of the first appellate court dated 1.2.2011 whereby the suit of the appellant-plaintiff has been dismissed as being barred by limitation.2. The following substantial question of law was framed by this Court on 21.2.2013:Whether the findings arrived at by the trial court are perverse, if so, to what effect?.3. Appellant-plaintiff filed a suit for declaration, injunction, recovery of arrears of rent of Rs.93,960/- etc on the ground that the original owner of the property being Flat No.BH-610C, Shalimar Bagh, Delhi was one Sh. Ram Sarup...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kerala
Decided on : Feb-10-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE MONDAY, THE10H DAY OF FEBRUARY201421ST MAGHA, 1935 OP(KAT).No. 49 of 2014 (Z) --------------------------- OA NO.85/2014 of KERALA ADMINISTRATIVETRIBUNAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED1701-2014 ..... PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- A.K.JAWAHARLAL, SUB REGISTRR, AYYANTHOLE SUB REGISTRAR'S OFFICE, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR - 680 003. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARYTO GOVERNMENT, TAXES (E) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, STATUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.2. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 035.3. DIRECTOR, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695 033. R1 TO R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.NOBLE MATHEW THIS OP KERALA ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HAVING COME UP ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Aurangabad
Decided on : Feb-10-2014
Uma S. Bora, Member: 1. ICICI Bank Ltd through its power of attorney holder Mr.Vishal Umeshchandra Shrivastava, Aurangabad challenges in this appeal the judgment and order passed by District Consumer Forum,Ahmednagar on 8.3.2007 while deciding consumer complaint No.515/2006. 2. Facts giving rise to this appeal are as under. Complainant Vasant Nawale resident of Bhende Tq.Newasa, Dist.Ahmednagar had purchased tractor of John Deer of L and T company on 30.5.2005. The said tractor was purchased from Matruchhaya Sales and Service bearing No.MH-17D-1137. For purchasing said tractor complainant had availed loan of Rs.5 Lakhs from the appellant. Said loan was to be repaid by six monthly instalment of Rs.28750/-. It is alleged by the complainant that first instalment was due in January 2006 but due to some financial constrain he could not deposit said instalment. Accordingly, he informed the appellant about his inability to deposit first instalment. Even then on 18.5.2006 some musclemen accomp...
Tag this Judgment!