Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-02-2014
THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE L.NARASIMHA REDDY AND THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE M.S.K.JAISWAL F.C.A.No.196 of 2009 02-01-2014 S.Mahender.Appellant Smt.Shalini.Respondent Counsel for appellant : Sr.G.M.Mohiuddin Counsel for respondent : Mrs.S.Vani HEAD NOTE: ?.CASES REFERRED : 1) AIR1984Delhi 139 2) 2008(4) ALD728(DB) 3) (1992) II DMC244THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE L. NARASIMHA REDDY AND THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE M.S.K.JAISWAL F.C.A.No.196 of 2009 JUDGMENT : (Per LNR,,J.The appellant is the husband of the respondent. Their marriage took place on 10.02.2005. The respondent filed F.C.O.P.No.143 of 2006 in the Family Court, Hyderabad, against the appellant, under Sections 12(1)(c) and 27 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 (for short 'the Act').for annulment of the marriage. She has also prayed for return of a sum of Rs.6,50,000/- said to have been given as dowry and Rs.5,00,000/- towards cost of gold, silver and other articles said to have been presented at the time of the marriage. The ground pleaded by the resp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Andhra Pradesh
Decided on : Jan-03-2014
THE HON'BLE Sr.JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN WRIT PETITION NO.27112 of 2013 03-01-2014 Aditya Educational Society, rep., by its Chairma, Dr. M.M.Vilekar and others.....Petitioners The Union of India rep., by its Secretary, Ministry of Medical & Health, New Delhi and others...Respondents Counsel for the petitioner: Sr.C.V.Mohan Reddy, Learned Senior Counsel for Sr.P.S.Rajasekhar, Counsel for respondent No.1: Mrs.S.Nanda, Standing Counsel; Counsel for respondent No.2: Sr.C. Gunaranjan; Counsel for respondent No.3: Sr.A. Prabhakar Rao, Standing Counsel. HEAD NOTE: ?. Citations: 1) (1998) 6 SCC1312) (2001) 10 SCC2643) (2004) 6 SCC764) 2013 (11) SCALE294= (2013) 10 SCC605) AIR1979SC7656) (1999) 7 SCC1207) (2011) 4 SCC6238) (2007) 15 SCC4359) (1996) 6 SCC66510) AIR1959SC71311) (1985) 1 SCC59112) AIR1957SC28113) (1955) 2 SCR48314) (1989) 1 SCC32115) (1944) 71 IA113 122 : AIR1944PC7116) (2008) 13 SCC18517) 1992 SUPPL.(2) SCC65118) (2004) 1 SCC57419) (1962) 2 SCR15920) AIR1965SC172821) AIR1991...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Jan-08-2014
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.161 OF2014(Arising out of SLP (C) No.23000 of 2010) Sadashiv Prasad Singh Appellant Versus Harendar Singh & Ors. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.162 OF2014(Arising out of SLP (C) No.26550 of 2010) JUDGMENT Jagdish Singh Khehar, J.1. On 11.9.1989, The Allahabad Bank (hereinafter referred to as the Bank) sanctioned a loan of Rs.12.70 lac to M/s. Amar Timber Works, a partnership firm having three partners, Jagmohan Singh, Payam Shoghi and Dev Kumar Sinha. The above loan was sanctioned to M/s. Amar Timber Works, after its partners had mortgaged certain properties to secure the loan amount. Since the loan amount was not repaid in compliance with the commitment made by M/s. Amar Timber Works, nine years later, in 1998, the Bank preferred Original Application No.107 of 1998 before the Debt Recovery Tribunal for the recovery of the Banks dues. The above Original Application was allowed on 21.11.2000. A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Allahabad
Decided on : Jan-08-2014
Ashok Bhushan, J. These two writ petitions filed by the same petitioners have been heard together and are being decided by this common judgment. Counter and rejoinder affidavits have been exchanged in Writ Petition No.48250/2013, which is being treated as leading writ petition. Brief facts giving rise to both the writ petitions are: The petitioner no.1 is a registered company under the Companies Act, 1956, and has been carrying out its activities since 1995. The petitioners' company suffered heavy losses in the financial year 2008-09 and 2009-2010. A reference under Section 15 of the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (hereinafter called the "Act, 1985") was made by the petitioners Company before the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction (hereinafter called the "BIFR") in the Month of October, 2010. The reference was registered as BIFR Case No. 53/2010. The Board proceeded with the reference and called for certain informations and in its proceedings da...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-09-2014
CRA-S-1215-SB of 2000 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRA-S-1215-SB of 2000 Date of Decision :09. 01.2014 Subhash and others .......Appellants Versus State of Haryana ..... Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.P. NAGRATH1 Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?.2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?.3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?. Present: Mr. Rahul Vats, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. Anil Kumar, DAG, Haryana. R.P. NAGRATH, J.Appellants were tried of the offences under Sections 324, 323 and 307 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code (IPC), in FIR No.34 dated 02.02.1997, Police Station Bawanikhera, District Bhiwani.2. FIR was registered on the statement of PW-7 Santosh Kumari wife of Phool Kumar, who also suffered injuries in the incident, after obtaining opinion (Ex. PJ/1) on 02.02.1997 at 9.35 p.m. of the Doctor on the application dated 02.02.1997 of local police Ex. PJ, declaring her fit t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-10-2014
..* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Judgment Pronounced on: January 10, 2014 CS(OS) 2252/2011 & I.A. No.14617/2011, I.A. No.18553/2011, I.A. No.20143/2011, I.A. No.20144/2011, I.A. No.20167/2011, I.A. No.20762/2011, I.A. No.448/2012 and I.A. No.15808/2012 INSTITUTE FOR INNER STUDIES & ORS ..... Plaintiffs Through Mr. Amit Chadha, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Karan Mehra, Mr. Lalit Jhunjhunwala, Ms. Bahaar Dhawan & Ms. Chandni Goel, Advs. versus CHARLOTTE ANDERSON & ORS ..... Defendants Through Mr. B.B. Sawhney, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Dipak Kumar Jena, Adv. & Ms. Minakshi Jena Ghosh, Adv. for D-1. Mr. Viplav Sharma, Adv. for D-2. Mr.Sandeep Sethi, Sr. Adv. with Mr. Mayank Kshirsagar, Adv. for D-3. Mr. Ajit Pudussery, Adv. with Mr. Dinesh Khurana, Adv. for D-11. Mr. Raghav Awasthi, Adv. for D-14. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN SINGH MANMOHAN SINGH, J.1. The plaintiffs, (ten in numbers) have filed the present suit seeking declaration, permanent injunction and mandatory injunction alongwith...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
Decided on : Jan-10-2014
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % + Judgment reserved on:-03.01.2014. Judgment delivered on 10.01.2014. CRL.A. 99/2007 SATISH KUMAR BHALLA Through versus ..... Appellant Mr. Kuldeep Singh, Adv. STATE Through + ..... Respondent Mr. Navin Kumar Jha, APP CRL.A. 748/2011 KAILASH NATH & ANR Through ..... Appellants Mr. Hari Nand Vashishtha and Mohd. Faisal, Advs. versus STATE Through ..... Respondent Mr. Varun Goswami, APP CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE INDERMEET KAUR INDERMEET KAUR, J.1 There are three appellants before this Court. Appellant Satish Kumar Bhalla is aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order on sentence dated 03.02.2007 and 05.02.2007 respectively wherein he had been convicted for charges under Sections 7 read with 13 (2) and 13 (1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act) and had been sentenced to undergo RI for a period of 3- years and to pay a fine of Rs. 15,000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo SI for 6 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Orissa
Decided on : Jan-10-2014
CRLMC No.1794 of 2005 22 10.01.2014 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. None appears for opposite party no.1 inspite of service of notice by paper publication. This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.has been filed challenging the order of cognizance dated 07.07.2005, passed by the learned S.D.J.M., Nayagarh, in 1.C.C.No.58 of 2005, taking cognizance of the offences under Sections 504/304-A I.P.C.and issuing process against the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is that on 25.02.2013, at about 11.00 P.M., when the petitioner was posted at the District Headquarters Hospital, Nayagarh, as ADMO, a patient, namely, Minati Pati, W/o. Gumani Pati of village/P.O.-Similisahi, P.S./Dist. Nayagarh, was admitted in the hospital for delivering a child. As the patient was No.in a fit condition to give birth to her child normally, inspite of efforts of a team of doctORS.the petitioner being the M.D.in Gynaecology, advised the patient and her attendant, w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab and Haryana
Decided on : Jan-10-2014
CR No.51 of 2014 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Civil Revision Petition No.51 of 2014 Date of Decision:10. 1.2014 Harpal Singh & Ors. ......Petitioners Versus Gram Panchayat & Ors. .....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR. Present: Mr.Y.P.Singla, Advocate for the petitioners. MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR, J.(Oral) The matrix of the facts and material, which needs a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant revision petition and emanating from the record, is that the land in dispute is Shamlat deh of Gram Panchayat of village Kona, Tehsil Kalka, District Panchkula. Petitioners-plaintiffs Harpal Singh son of Rachan Singh and others (for brevity the plaintiffs.), claiming themselves to be its owners being Khewatdar/proprietors, have instituted the civil suit (Annexure P1) for a decree of permanent injunction, restraining the defendants-respondents Gram Panchayat of village Kona, BDPO and S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Mumbai
Decided on : Jan-10-2014
Oral Judgment: By this petition filed under section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, petitioner seeks to impugn award dated 3rd July, 2008 in terms of the majority award dated 20th June, 2008 and the minority award dated 23rd June, 2008 rejecting the claims made by the petitioner. 2. Some of the relevant facts for the purpose of deciding this petition are as under: (a) The Government of India, Ministry of Commerce, issued Export and Import policy 1992-1997. Paragraph 64 of the said policy provided for advance release orders which would be issued against a duty free licence in favour of licence holder or the transferee of licence against the advance release orders, the person who would be entitled to import the amount so mentioned in the advance release orders. Under paragraph 67 of the said policy, it was provided that the value based advance licence of the materials imported against it may be freely transferable after the export obligation is fulfilled and the bank gu...
Tag this Judgment!