Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-23-2018
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION NON-REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 9382-9384 OF2017IEL SUPERVISORS' ASSOCIATION ETC. ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUS DUNCAN INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.The appellants are before this Court, aggrieved 1. by the Judgment dated 24.02.2016 passed by the High Court of judicature at Allahabad in Writ Petition No.12468 of 2002 and other connected matters, by which the High Court remitted the dispute to the Industrial Tribunal for fresh adjudication.2. It is the contention of the learned senior counsel that this is the second time the remittance is made and going by the order dated 14.09.2010 passed by this Court, the High Court could not have made a remand. The relevant portion of the order dated 14.09.2010 passed by this Court in Civil Appeal Nos. 351-355 of 2006 and other connected matters, is reproduced below :- 2 In the circumstances and keeping in view the fact that the Labour Court has taken two different ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-23-2018
* + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI OMP3972015 Reserved on:12. h January, 2018 Date of decision :23rd February, 2018 THE UNION OF INDIA Petitioner Through: Mr.Manish Mohan, Adv. Versus M/S CITY PROMOTER & BUILDWELL PVT. LTD. .... Respondent Through: Mr.M.K.Singh, Mr.Rahul Pandey, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA1 This petition under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) has been filed by the petitioner challenging the Arbitral Award dated 26th March, 2015 passed by the Sole Arbitrator in so far as it allows claim nos.1, 2, 4 and 5 of the respondent.2. The disputes between the parties are in relation to agreement No.CEDZ-36/2009-10 for provision of 72 Single Officers Accommodation Adjacent to Naval Officers Mess (Varuna) at Delhi Cantt. entered into between the parties on 5th November, 2009. Some of the terms of the said agreement that are relevant for the purpose of the present adjudication are reproduced here...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-22-2018
$~ *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 1557/2018 & CM No.6396/2018 % Date of decision :22. d February, 2018 SWAMI AGNIVESH ........ Petitioner Through : Mr. Mehmood Pracha, Mr. RHA Sikander and Mr. Prateek Gupta, Advocates alongwith Swami Agnivesh (petitioner in person) versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ........ RESPONDENTS Through : Mr. Manish Mohan, CGSC with Dr. GL Bhatia, Advocates for Union of India (respondent No.1) CORAM: HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C.HARI SHANKAR JUDGMENT GITA MITTAL, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE WP(C) No.1557/2018 1. This writ petition seeks directions to the Central Board of Film Certification, to take appropriate steps to stop glorification of the practice of Sati by deleting the relevant scenes from the film Padmaavat.2. The petition is premised on two articles, one by Ms. Charu W.P.(C)No.1557/2018 Page 1 of 17 Gupta in the Indian Express dated 31st of January 2018 captioned United in misogyny and another article written by an a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-21-2018
* % + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI Reserved on: November 10th, 2017 Decided on: February 21, 2018 IA95852017 (u/O XXXIX R12 CPC) in CS(COMM) 556/2017 UPL LIMITED Represented by: Mr. Amit Sibal, Sr. Adv. with ..... Plaintiff Ms. Rajeshwari, Mr. Aditya Gupta, Mr. Tahir A.J., Mr. Kumar Chitranshu, Advs. versus PRADEEP SHARMA & ANR ..... Defendants Represented by: Mr. J.Sai Deepak, Mr. Avinash K. Sharma, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA1 The plaintiff which is a company engaged in the manufacture and sale of insecticides, fungicides, herbicides, weedicides, fumigant, PGR and rodenticides claims that it is the owner of the patent IN20613 (in short IN130, IN19422 (in short IN225 and IN24455 (in short IN551. In the present suit, the claim of the plaintiff is infringement of its three patents and seeks an order of interim injunction in its favour pending hearing of the suit.2. IN225titled a process of preparing a chemically stable synergistic herbicidal composition is a ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-20-2018
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.15536 OF2017(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.11348 of 2013) Life Insurance Corporation of India Nandini J.Shah & Ors. :Versus: ..APPELLANT ..RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. The seminal question posed in this appeal, by special leave, is whether the order passed by the City Civil Court in exercise of power under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, as an Appellate Officer, is in the capacity of a Civil Court or persona designata?.2. When this special leave petition was listed for admission on 12.09.2017, the Court passed the following order :2. Heard Mr. Ranjit Kumar, learned Solicitor General appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Ms. Sonal, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents. As the issue was to be debated with regard to the maintainability of the Letters Patent Appeal, learned Solicitor General has placed reliance on Radhe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-19-2018
$~ * + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 12/2013 Reserved on: January 16, 2018 Decided on: February 19, 2018 NAVAL KISHORE @ NAVAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Raj Pal Singh, Advocate. STATE versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru and Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APPs Inspector Sunil Kumar, PS Anand Parbat. AND CRL. A. 184/2013 & CRL.MA. 6795/2017 DEVENDER @ PAPPU & ANR Through: Mr. K. Singhal, Advocate. ..... Appellants STATE versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru and Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APPs Inspector Sunil Kumar, PS Anand Parbat. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA % JUDGMENT Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. These appeals are against the impugned judgment dated 9th October 2012 Crl.A. 12/2013 & Crl.A. 184/2013 Page 1 of 28 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-01, Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Sessions Case No.11/2011 arising out of FIR No.03/2011 registered at PS Anand Parbat convicting the Appellants for the offence under Section 3...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-19-2018
$~ * + + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 12/2013 Reserved on: January 16, 2018 Decided on: February 19, 2018 NAVAL KISHORE @ NAVAL ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Raj Pal Singh, Advocate. STATE versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru and Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APPs Inspector Sunil Kumar, PS Anand Parbat. AND CRL. A. 184/2013 & CRL.MA. 6795/2017 DEVENDER @ PAPPU & ANR Through: Mr. K. Singhal, Advocate. ..... Appellants STATE versus ..... Respondent Through: Ms. Radhika Kolluru and Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APPs Inspector Sunil Kumar, PS Anand Parbat. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE I.S. MEHTA % JUDGMENT Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. These appeals are against the impugned judgment dated 9th October 2012 Crl.A. 12/2013 & Crl.A. 184/2013 Page 1 of 28 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-01, Central, Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi in Sessions Case No.11/2011 arising out of FIR No.03/2011 registered at PS Anand Parbat convicting the Appellants for the offence under Section 3...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-19-2018
$~5 * + W.P.(C) 2916/2017 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI DAVENDER KUMAR ........ Petitioner Through: Mr.H.S.Dahiya, Advocate. versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS ........ RESPONDENTS Through: Mr.A.P.Sahay, CGSC with Ms.J.Priyadarshini, Advocate for UOI. CORAM: HONBLE MS. JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI HONBLE MS. JUSTICE PRATIBHA RANI ORDER1902.2018 The petitioner lays a challenge to the order dated 11.10.2014, % 1. passed by the Appointing Authority i.e. the Commandant, CISF Unit, NLC Neyveli whereby his services have been terminated on account of suppression of facts in the Attestation Form about the registration of a criminal case against him. Challenge has also been laid to the order dated 02.01.2015, whereby the representation filed by the petitioner, assailing the order of the Appointing Authority, has been rejected by the Competent Authority i.e. Inspector General, CISF South Sector HQrs,, ChPT Campus, Chennai.2. In brief, the case of the petitioner is that in the year 2013, after participa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Feb-19-2018
$~ * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI CRL.A. 182/2002 SURESH KUMAR Reserved on: February 05, 2018 Decided on: February 19, 2018 ..... Appellant Through: Ms. Saahila Lamba, Amicus Curiae and Mr. Rajeev Gaur Naseem, Advocate. versus STATE OF DELHI CORAM: JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR Through: Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP. ..... Respondent JUSTICE I. S. MEHTA JUDGMENT Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.:1. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 28th February 2002 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Delhi in Sessions Case No.13 of 1999 in FIR No.433/1998 registered at Police Station (P.S.) Moti Nagar convicting the Appellant for the offence of the murder of his wife, Mamta (deceased), punishable under Section 302 IPC and the order on sentence of the same date sentencing him to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment (RI) for one year. Case of the prosecution 2. The prosecution case began with Head Constable (HC) ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-19-2018
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.9118-9119 OF2010Surat Singh (Dead) .Appellant(s) VERSUS Siri Bhagwan & Ors. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. These appeals are directed against the final judgment and order dated 13.12.2006 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Regular Second Appeal No.382 of 1992 whereby the High Court allowed the appeal filed by respondent No.1 herein, set aside the judgment dated 13.11.1986 of the District Judge, Narnaul in Civil Appeal No.83 of 1984 and reversed the judgment dated 16.05.1984 of the Trial Court in 1 Civil Suit No.315 of 1981. By order dated 22.01.2007, the High Court also dismissed the application (C.M. No.448-C of 2007 in RSA No.382/1992) filed by the appellant herein for recalling the judgment dated 13.12.2006.2. In order to appreciate the short issue involved in the appeals, few relevant facts need mention infra.3. One Murti Devi (since dead) and he...
Tag this Judgment!