Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-13-2023
..... engaged in business were subjected to tax irrespective of their origin. therefore, there was no difference made out between the original inhabitants of sikkim, namely, the bhutia-lepchas and the persons of foreign origin settled in sikkim like the nepalis or persons of indian origin who had settled down in sikkim generations back. it is averred that under the sitm, income tax was paid by all without any discrimination on the ground of place of birth, race or ethnicity. (b) in ..... scheduled tribes order 1978' 33 (ii) 'sikkimese lepcha' - meaning persons who could be from the aboriginal lepcha community which got recognised and notified as the scheduled tribes by 'the constitution (sikkim) scheduled tribes order, 1978'. (iii) 'sikkimese nepali' - meaning persons who could be from among the castes or classes that included the following: (a) the 'damai', 'kami'/'lahar', 'majhi', and 'sarki' communities which got recognised as the scheduled castes by the constitution (sikkim) scheduled castes order, 1978; (b) the ' ..... holding the sikkim subjects certificate and their descendants and were made indian citizens vide the sikkim citizenship amendment order, 1989. it appears that these two categories essentially consisted of the bhutia lepchas, sherpas and the nepalis who constituted together about 94.6% of the total population. discussions were held for four long years to secure exemptions to sikkim subjects certificate holders and the people made citizens of india vide the government of india .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-08-2023
..... of the judgment of b.v. nagarathna,j.by making the following corrections - 1. in para 10 (a), the sentence, therefore, there was no difference made out between the original inhabitants of sikkim, namely, the bhutia-lepchas and the persons of foreign origin settled in sikkim like the nepalis or persons of indian origin who had settled down in sikkim generations back stands deleted.2. it is further submitted that since this court has held that the explanation to section 10(26aaa) of the income tax act, 1961 is discriminatory against persons .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi
Decided on : Dec-21-2023
- 1 - NC:2023. KHC-K:9395 WP No.202928 of 2023 C/W WP No.203032 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, R KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE21T DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO.202928 OF2023(GM-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO.203032 OF2023(GM-RES) IN WP No.202928/2023: BETWEEN: SHANTREDDY S/O.SHARANAPPA MALIPATIL AGED ABOUT57YEARS OCC:ADVOCATE & GOVERNMENT PLEADER R/AT HOSAHALLI VILLAGE TALUK & DISTRICT YADGIR585202 PETITIONER (BY SRI SHIVANAND PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND:1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 2. THE DEPARTMENT OF LAW AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY/ UNDER SECRETARY - 2 - NC:2023. KHC-K:9395 WP No.202928 of 2023 C/W WP No.203032 of 2023 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER YADAGIR-585 201 4. SIDDANOOR NINGAPPA AGED ABOUT45YEARS OCC: ADVOCATE R/AT BANDALLI VILLAGE TALUK & DISTRICT YADGIR - 585 202 RESPONDENTS (BY SRI G...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Kalaburagi
Decided on : Dec-21-2023
- 1 - NC:2023. KHC-K:9395 WP No.202928 of 2023 C/W WP No.203032 of 2023 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, R KALABURAGI BENCH DATED THIS THE21T DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP SINGH YERUR WRIT PETITION NO.202928 OF2023(GM-RES) C/W WRIT PETITION NO.203032 OF2023(GM-RES) IN WP No.202928/2023: BETWEEN: SHANTREDDY S/O.SHARANAPPA MALIPATIL AGED ABOUT57YEARS OCC:ADVOCATE & GOVERNMENT PLEADER R/AT HOSAHALLI VILLAGE TALUK & DISTRICT YADGIR585202 PETITIONER (BY SRI SHIVANAND PATIL, ADVOCATE) AND:1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 2. THE DEPARTMENT OF LAW AND PARLIAMENTARY AFFAIRS VIDHANA SOUDHA BENGALURU-560 001 BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY/ UNDER SECRETARY - 2 - NC:2023. KHC-K:9395 WP No.202928 of 2023 C/W WP No.203032 of 2023 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER YADAGIR-585 201 4. SIDDANOOR NINGAPPA AGED ABOUT45YEARS OCC: ADVOCATE R/AT BANDALLI VILLAGE TALUK & DISTRICT YADGIR - 585 202 RESPONDENTS (BY SRI G...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Dec-20-2023
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE20H DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION No.15979 OF2022(GM-FC) BETWEEN: SMT. PUSHPA, W/O LATE RAMESH BABU. R, C/O B.HEMAVATHI, AGED ABOUT44YEARS, NO.42/1, 8TH CROSS, MAGADI ROAD, BENGALURU 560 023. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI MADHUKAR NADIG, ADVOCATE) AND:1. . SMT. Y.JANSI RANI, W/O LATE RAMESH BABU R., AGED ABOUT48YEARS. 2 . MS. MONICA, D/O LATE RAMESH BABU R., AGED ABOUT26YEARS. 3 . R.SANJAY, S/O LATE RAMESH BABU R., AGED ABOUT15YEARS, SINCE MINOR REPRESENTED2NATURAL GUARDIAN HIS MOTHER SMT. Y. JANSI RANI, ALL ARE RESIDING AT NO.335/A RAILWAY QUARTERS, M.G.COLONY, BENGALURU 560 023. 4 . THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONAL OFFICER, BENGALURU DIVISION, SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY, BENGALURU - 560 023. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI MD. MUJASSIM, ADVOCATE FOR R1 TO R3; SRI A.CHANDRA CHUD, ADVOCATE FOR R4) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE226OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASH THE IM...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on : Dec-18-2023
1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE18H DAY OF DECEMBER, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION No.105363 OF2023(GM-CPC) BETWEEN: CHANNABASAPPA S/O SHIVAPPA HOSAMANI AGE53YEARS OCC: AGRICUTLURIST R/O: DANDAPUR, TQ: NARAGUND DIST GADAG-582207 R/BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SRI RAJU S/O CHANNABASAPPPA HADIMANI AGE21YEARS OCC: AGRICULTURIST, R/O DANDAPUR TQ NARAGUND, DIST: GADAG-582207 ...PETITIONER (BY SRI.S L MATTI, ADVOCATE) AND:1. . SMT PARVATEVVA ALIAS KASTUREVVA W/O CHANDRASHEKHAR HADIMANI AGE61YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O RAMAPUR SITE, GURLHOSUR NEAR BASAVESHWAR TEMPLE TQ SAUNDATTI DIST BELAGAVI59112 2 2 . SMT GIRIJA W/O MAHANTESH KALASAPPANAVAR AGE53YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK AND SDC IRRIGATION DEPT R/O RAMAPUR SITE, GURLHOSUR NEAR BASAVESHWAR TEMPLE TQ SAUNDATTI, DIST BELAGAVI-591126 3 . IRAPPA RACHAPPA HOSAMANI SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRS SMT SHIVAGANGAVVA W/O IRAPPA HOSAMANI AGE74YEARS OCC: HOUSEHOLD WORK R/O DANDAPU...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-09-2023
REPORTABLE2023INSC990IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1381-1382 OF2017MADAN APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH RESPONDENT(S) WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1790 OF2017JUDGMENT B.R. GAVAI, J.1. These appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 22nd February 2017, passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Capital Case Nos. 3359 and 3520 of 2015 with Reference No.9 of 2015 and Criminal Appeal No.3519 of 2015, thereby dismissing the appeals filed by appellant Madan and another accused Ishwar; whereas, it allowed in part, the appeal filed by appellant Sudesh Pal. By the said judgment, the High Court confirmed the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 31st 1 July 2015 passed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.3, Muzzaffarnagar (hereinafter referred to as trial court) in Sessions Case No.09/2005 with Sessions Case No.838 of 2005 and 10/2005, in respect of appellant Madan, w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-17-2023
Reportable 2023 INSC920IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition (Civil) No.1011 of 2022 Supriyo @ Supriya Chakraborty & Anr. Petitioners Versus Union of India Respondent With Writ Petition (Civil) No.93 of 2023 With T. C. (Civil) No.5 of 2023 With T. C. (Civil) No.8 of 2023 With T. C. (Civil) No.9 of 2023 With T. C. (Civil) No.11 of 2023 With T. C. (Civil) No.12 of 2023 With Writ Petition (Civil) No.1020 of 2022 With Writ Petition (Civil) No.1105 of 2022 With Writ Petition (Civil) No.1141 of 2022 1 With Writ Petition (Civil) No.1142 of 2022 With Writ Petition (Civil) No.1150 of 2022 With Writ Petition (Civil) No.159 of 2023 With Writ Petition (Civil) No.129 of 2023 With Writ Petition (Civil) No.260 of 2023 With T. C. (Civil) No.6 of 2023 With Writ Petition (Civil) No.319 of 2023 With T. C. (Civil) No.7 of 2023 With T. C. (Civil) No.10 of 2023 With T. C. (Civil) No.13 of 2023 And with Writ Petition (Civil) No.478 of 2023 2 JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-09-2023
2023INSC883 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO._2425 OF2023NABHA POWER LIMITED Appellant Versus PUNJAB STATE POWER CORPORATION LIMITED Respondent WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO._2426 OF2023JUDGMENT SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.1. The dispute, pertaining to recovery of deductions of monthly tariff by the respondent, gave rise to proceedings under the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act), which travelled from the Regulatory Commission to the Appellate Tribunal and finally to this Court. The Supreme Court dealt with the matter in terms of the judgment in Nabha Power Limited (NPL) v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited (PSPCL) and Anr. (2018) 11 SCC508 CIVIL APPEAL NO.2425 OF2023Page 1 of 122. The limited aspect, on which relief was granted by this Court qua part of the amount, can be summarized as under: i. The Appellant is held entitled to the washing cost of coal, the transportation from the mine site via washing of coal t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-09-2023
1 2023INSC888 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF2023(@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.12802 of 2022) Rajesh Jain . Appellant Versus Ajay Singh . Respondent JUDGMENT Aravind Kumar, J.1. Leave Granted.2. The respondent-accused was tried for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (for short NI Act). The Trial Court acquitted1 him. The High Court dismissed the appellants- complainant's appeal and upheld the order of acquittal2. Challenging the 1 Judgment and Order dated 17.12.2019 in Crl. Complaint No.221 of 2017 2 Criminal Appeal No.148 of 2020 was dismissed by Honble High Court of Gujarat by Judgment and Order dated 01.02.2021. 2 concurrent findings passed by the Courts below, the complainant has preferred this appeal. Case of the Complainant 3. Mr. Ajay Singh (respondent-accused), along with his wife, is said to have approached the appellant-complainant (Mr. Rajesh Jain) on 01.03.2014 with a re...
Tag this Judgment!