Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Aug-08-2014
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Writ Petition No.7380 of 2012(O&M) Date of decision:08.08.2014 Raj Kumari wife of Shri Om Parkash, House No.387, Sector 14, Sonepat (Haryana). ... Petitioner versus Indian Oil Corporation Limited, Panipat Divisional Office, Panipat Marketing Complex, Village Baholi, Post Office Panipat Refinery, District Panipat, through its Managing Director, and others. .... Respondents CORAM: HONBLE MR. JUSTICE K. KANNAN ---- Present: Mr. Arun Nehra, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Ashish Kapoor, Advocate, for respondents 1 and 2. Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Advocate, for respondent No.3. ---- 1. Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?. Yes.2. To be referred to the reporters or not ?. Yes.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the digest ?. Yes. ---- K.Kannan, J.(Oral) 1. The petitioner seeks for quashing of letter of intent and allotment of retail outlet dealership for the location at Village Karhans, District...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Sep-25-2014
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL/APPELLATE JURISDICTION TRANSFERRED CASE (C) No.150 OF2006Madras Bar Association Petitioner(s) versus Union of India and another Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.3850 OF2006CIVIL APPEAL No.3862 OF2006CIVIL APPEAL No.3881 OF2006CIVIL APPEAL No.3882 OF2006CIVIL APPEAL No.4051 OF2006CIVIL APPEAL No.4052 OF2006WRIT PETITION (C) NO.621 OF2007TRANSFERRED CASE (C) NO.116 OF2006TRANSFERRED CASE (C) NO.117 OF2006TRANSFERRED CASE (C) NO.118 OF2006WRIT PETITION (C) NO.697 OF2007JUDGMENT Jagdish Singh Khehar, J.The Controversy:1. All the above cases are being disposed of by this common judgment. The issue which arises for consideration before us, in the present bunch of cases, pertains to the constitutional validity of the National Tax Tribunal Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as, the NTT Act). Simultaneously, the constitutional validity of the Constitution (Forty-second Amendment) Act, 1976 has been assailed, by asserting, that the same vio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-09-2014
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 8072-8073 OF2009GENERAL MOTORS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED ..... APPELLANT VERSUS ASHOK RAMNIK LAL TOLAT & ANR. ..... RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.1. These appeals have been preferred against the order dated 16th December, 2008 of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (for short the National Commission) in Revision Petition Nos.3349 of 2006 and 2858 of 2008.2. The main question raised in these appeals is whether in the absence of any prayer made in the complaint and without evidence of any loss suffered, the award of punitive damages was permissible. Apart from the said main question, the appellant has also called in question the refund ordered and other relief granted in favour of the respondent-complainant.3. In the complaint, filed before the District Forum, Ahmedabad (Rural) (for short the District Forum), the prayer of the respondent-complainant was as follows :The co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Kolkata
Decided on : Oct-31-2014
EC No.526 of 2014 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Ordinary Original Civil Jurisdiction SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LTD.Versus A .B.ASSOCIATES & ORS.BEFORE: The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMEN SEN Date : 31st October, 2014. Mr.Satarup Banerjee, Adv.appears The Court : The offers received by the Receiver have been duly communicated to some of the judgment-debtORS.The principal judgment- debtor appears to be the judgment-debtor no.1. He has received the notice and the offers received by the Receiver. The offers are placed before this Court. Since no other offers save and except the offers stated in the report have been received and there is no other intending purchaser offering a higher price than what is stated in the report, the sale is confirmed as follows: Sl. No.Engine Number Name of the Purchaser Offer Value (Rs.) 1. B5.91803101L6295 4664 B5.91803101L6295 3878 Sanjay Kumar Padhy of Nayapalli, Bhubaneswar; EMD of Rs.1 Lakh 14 Lakh 3. B5.91803101L6295 4725 Narinder Singh of Jagnath Vihar, Barmunda; R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
Decided on : Jun-19-2014
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT DATED:19. 06.2014 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN and THE HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE V.M.VELUMANI Writ Petition (MD) No.15524 of 2012 and Civil Revision Petitions (PD) (MD)Nos. 2461, 2262, 2296, 2567, 2631, 2666 of 2012 and 236 and 73 of 2013 Writ Petition (MD) No.15524 of 2012 K.S.Sharfudeen ... Petitioner Vs. 1.Union of India, Rep by its Secretary to Government, Ministry of Law & Justice, 4th Floor, A Wing, New Delhi. 2.The State of Tamil Nadu, Rep by its Secretary to Government, Backward Classes and Most Backward Classes, Minority Welfare Department, Fort St., George, Chennai 600 009. 3.The Tamil Nadu Wakf Board, Rep by its Chairman, No.1 Jaffer Sirong Street, Vallal Seethakathi Nagar, Chennai 600 001. ... Respondents In C.R.P.(PD)(MD)No.2461 of 2012 S.Mohamed Aslam ... Petitioner Vs. 1.M.K.N Madarasa Trust, Adirampattinam Rep by its Secretary, Adirampattinam. 2.S.J.Abdul Jaleel 3.M.Mohamed Mohideen 4.Naina Mohamed Abubu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-17-2014
HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.157 OF201417-01-2014 Tahmeena Kaleem and others....Petitioners State of A.P.rep.by Public Prosecutor...Respondent Counsel for the Petitioner:Nageshwara Rao Pappu Counsel for the Respondents:Public Prosecutor : ?.Cases Referred: 1.(2010) 7 SCC6672. AIR2000SC23241) 3. 2005(2) ALD (Crl.) 633(SC) 4. (2013) 5 SCC226HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE B. CHANDRA KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION NO.157 OF2014ORDER:- The petitioners A9 to A12 are seeking anticipatory bail for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 498-A IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act read with 34 IPC. The de facto complainant MRS.Syeda Saba was married to Mohammed Bin Issaq A1 on 05.09.2011. She alleges that at the time of her marriage, her father gave 40 tulas of gold and Rs.10.00 lakhs as dowry. After the marriage, her husband and in-laws treated her well for few days and thereafter started harassing her demanding to bring additional dowry. It is also her case that she ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Nov-17-2014
$~9 * + IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI FAO2672014 Decided on 17th November, 2014 SMT. SANTOSHI & ORS Through: versus ..... Appellants Mr. S.N. Parashar, Adv. UNION OF INDIA Through: ..... Respondent Mr. V.K. Jain, Adv. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK A.K.PATHAK, J.(ORAL) 1. Appellants are legal heirs of Late Shri Ram Nath. They filed a claim application before the Railway Claims Tribunal, Principal Bench, Delhi seeking compensation of `4 lacs in respect of death of Shri Ram Nath in relation to Firozpur Janta Express train. She alleged that on 8th October, 2012 deceased-Ram Nath was travelling from Tuglakabad Station to New Delhi Railway Station by Firozpur Janta Express when he accidentally fell down from the crowded compartment of the running train near Shivaji Bridge, Delhi due to heavy rush and sudden jerk. Deceased was rushed to RML Hospital where he died on 10:50 pm on the same day.2. Respondent alleged that deceased did not die in an untoward incident within the m...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Guwahati
Decided on : Mar-24-2014
Katakey, J. 1. This appeal, by the convict, is directed against the judgment of conviction dated 09.02.2011 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge (FTC) No.1, Kamrup at Guwahati, in Sessions Case No.161(K)/2004, convicting the appellant under Section 302 IPC and sentencing him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 1(one) year. 2. The prosecution story in brief is that on 14.08.2000 at about 12.30 P.M. accused Kanak Boro being armed with deadly weapon, like dagger, entered into the courtyard of the informant, namely, Mukuta Boro (not examined) and assaulted his father Golok Boro resulting in his death on the spot. A G.D. entry was also made based on the information furnished by one Ranjit Boro (who has not been examined). A written F.I.R. was thereafter lodged by Mukuta Boro (not examined) on 14.08.2000 with the Officer-in-Charge of Hajo Police Station, based on which Hajo P.S. Case No.1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka Dharwad
Decided on : Jun-04-2014
(Prayer: This Criminal Petition Is Filed U/S 482 Of Cr.P.C Seeking To Quash The P.C.No. 142/2013 Now Numbered As C.C.N0.858/2013 Pending On The File Of The J Mfc Ii-Court, Hubli.) 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No. 1 - State and learned counsel for respondent No.2. Perused the records. 2. The petitioners herein have approached this Court for quashing of the proceedings in P.C. No. 142/2013, which was later registered as C.C. No.858/2013. The private complaint was filed against the petitioners for the offences punishable under. Sections 494, 109 and 114 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'I.P.C.' for brevity). 3. The learned counsel for petitioners strenuously contended that the private complaint filed by complainant Smt. Rajeshwari does not disclose any specific allegations against the petitioner Nos.2 to 4. The omni bus allegations have been made against petitioners with r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Dec-18-2014
(Prayer: This Criminal Petition Is Filed U/S 482 Of Cr.P.C. By The Petitioner To Set Aside The Order Dated 25.10.2013 Passed By The Rt.C., Tumkur In Crl. R.P. No. 149/2012 And Confirm The Order Dated 17.04.2012 Passed By The Ii Addl. C.J. And J.M.F.C., Tumkur Ii! C. Misc. No.455/2007 At Annexure-A And B and Etc.) 1. I, feel it is just and appropriate to start this judgment by quoting a great universal verse, in Manusmrithi which often referred with regard to the protection of the women, which is being admired with great respects, irrespective of caste, creed, colour and religion; "Pita rakshathi kaumare, bhartha rakshathi youvane, Putrah rakshathi vrudhapye, na stree swatantryam arhathi" (original is in Sanskrit) Means - a women is protected by father in her childhood, her husband protects her in youth, and in old age she should be protected by her son. At no stage in her life should a woman be left alone and destitute. She deserves protection by man at every stage of her life. 2. In t...
Tag this Judgment!