Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-13-2009
Reported in : 2009CriLJ3002; JT2009(7)SC403; 2009(7)SCALE317; 2009AIRSCW3550; 2009(5)LHSC3020; 2009CriLJ3002; 2009AIRSCW3550; 2009(5)LHSC3020
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Appellant got married with Baby alias Sokkayyal ('the deceased') in the year 1996 at village Thallakuttaipudur. After the marriage, they were living at Village Ennamangalam. The deceased was found dead in her matrimonial home on 26.5.1999 at about 11:00 p.m. On the request of the appellant, Chinnaraj (P.W. 3) went to the village Thallakuttaipudur, which is said to be situated at a distance of 18 miles from village Ennamangalam, to inform the parents of the deceased. They arrived at about 9:00 a.m. in the next morning.The First Information Report (for short, 'FIR') was lodged in regard to the aforementioned incident at about 11:00 a.m. in Vellithiruppur police station. The FIR is based on a written report wherein it was alleged that the deceased was subjected to cruelty and/or harassment at the hands of her husband and in-laws as sufficient dowry had not been given in her marriage. It was furthermore alleged that as the demand of dowry could not be met, a blank promisso...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Aug-07-2009
Reported in : JT2009(15)SC124; 2009(11)SCALE62; (2009)10SCC564; [2009]95SCL142(SC); 2009(8)LC3954(SC):2009AIRSCW6858
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Interpretation and/or application of the provisions of the Special Court (Trial of Offences Relating to Transactions in Securities) Act, 1992, (hereinafter, for the sake of brevity, referred to as `the Special Act') is involved herein.2. It arises out of an order dated 25th July, 2008 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court at Mumbai in Misc. Petition No. 41 of 1999.HISTORICAL BACKGROUND3. The history as well as the purpose and object for which the Special Act was enacted, in view of the several decisions rendered by this Court, is now well-settled. The Reserve Bank of India in course of an investigation conducted by it, had inter alia opined that Harshad Mehta (since deceased), alongwith his other associates had diverted a huge amount of public funds belonging to Public Sector Banks and Financial Institutions for short term investments in the securities market.4. An Inquiry Committee was thereafter constituted under the Chairmanship of Shri Janakiraman. The said Co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-03-2009
Reported in : AIR2010SC313; JT2009(15)SC48; 2009(14)SCALE337; 2009(10)LC5121(SC):2009AIRSCW7395:2009(2)LHSC908
B.S. Chauhan, J.1. This appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 9.10.2002 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court passed in Civil Revision Petition No. 4289 of 2001 and CC No. 829 of 2002 by which the High Court set aside the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Additional Revenue Divisional Officer, Land Reforms Tribunal and the Appellate Tribunal to the effect that predecessor-in-interest of the appellants were protected tenants under the provisions of The Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 (hereinafter called as The Act 1950).2. The facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that predecessor-in-interest of the appellants claimed to be protected tenants and sought ownership certificates to become full owners of the suit land.3. The respondents, herein, claimed to have purchased the land from the original land holder and sought to disentitle the appellants of their rights. As per the tenancy register of 1951, the predecessor-in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Feb-17-2009
Reported in : 2009ACJ1695; AIR2009SC2049; 2009(2)AWC1220(SC); 2009(57)BLJR985; 2009(3)BomCR202; 2009BusLR184(SC); (2009)5MLJ510(SC); (2009)154PLR1; RLW2009(2)SC1094; (2009)3SCC1; 2009(2); 2009AIRSCW1807; 2009(2)LHSC806; 2009(3)KCCRSN147; 2009ACJ1695
Markandey Katju, J.1. This appeal against the judgment of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi dated 22.3.2002 has been filed under Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986.2. Heard learned Counsel for the parties and perused the record.3. The brief facts of the case are narrated below :4. In March 1991, the respondent who was suffering from chronic renal failure was referred by the Director, Health Services to the Nanavati Hospital, Mumbai for the purpose of a kidney transplant.5. On or about 24.4.1991, the respondent reached Nanavati Hospital, Bombay and was under the treatment of the appellant Doctor. At that stage, the respondent was undergoing haemodialysis twice a week on account of chronic renal failure. Investigations were underway to find a suitable donor. The respondent wanted to be operated by Dr. Sonawala alone who was out of India from 1.6.1991 to 1.7.1991.6. On 20.5.1991, the respondent approached the appellant Doctor. At the time, the res...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-06-2009
Reported in : 2009AIRSCW3540; 2009CriLJ2995; JT2009(7)SC361; 2009(5)KarLJ613; RLW2009(2)SC1523; 2009(7)SCALE482; (2009)13SCC34; 2009(5)KLJ613
S.B. Sinha, J.1. Appellants are before us aggrieved by and dissatisfied with a judgment dated 11th August, 2005 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore in Criminal Appeal No. 1254 of 2002 affirming the judgment passed by the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court and Additional Sessions Judge, Belgaum in S.C. No. 97/1996 convicting accused Nos. 1 to 6, 10 and 13 for offences punishable under Sections 143, 148, 307, 302, 504 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the `Code') and sentencing them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three months for the offence punishable under Section 143 read with Section 149 ; six months under Section 148 read with Section 149 of the Code ; rigorous imprisonment for life for the offence under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Code and six months under Section 504 read with Section 149 of the Code. All the sentences were, however, directed to run concurrently.2. The incident in questio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-14-2009
Reported in : 2010ACJ38; 2009(3)AWC2151(1)(SC); 2009(57)BLJR2053; 2009CriLJ3012; JT2009(6)SC651; RLW2009(4)SC3448; 2009(7)SCALE407; (2009)6SCC1; 2009(6)LC2996(SC)
Harjit Singh Bedi J.1. This judgment will dispose of Civil Appeal No 4119 of 1999 and Civil Appeal No. 3126 of 2000 filed by the complainant, Prasanth S. Dhananka . The facts are as under:2. The respondent Prasant S. Dhananka ( hereinafter called the 'complainant'), then 20 years of age and a student of Engineering, complaining of recurring fever was examined in the hospital run by the Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited as his father was employed with that Organisation. As the cause of the fever could not be identified, he visited the appellant - Nizam Institute of Medical Sciences (NIMS) on 9th September, 1990 in the evening OPD. He was examined by one Dr. Ashish Boghani, a Chest and Tuberculosis Specialist and was advised to undergo on ultrasound guided biopsy for Neurofibroma, an innocent tumour, after an X-ray revealed a mass in the left hemithorax with posterior mediastinal erosion of the left 2nd, 3rd and 4th ribs. As several attempts at Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology (FNAC) under...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-24-2009
Reported in : AIR2009SC2330; 2009(3)AWC2220(SC); 2009(4)SCALE318; (2009)5SCC665:2009AIRSCW3135:2009(3)LHSC1460
R.V. Raveendran, J.1. The Food Corporation of India (`FCI' for short) challenges the order dated 6.3.2006 of the Allahabad High Court, rejecting its appeal against the order dated 15.12.2004 passed by the Additional District Judge (Special judge EC), Jhansi ordering attachment of its properties under Order 39 Rule 2A of the Code of Civil Procedure (Code for short) to an extent of Rs. 1,12,24,792.99.Facts of the case:2. In the year 1976, the respondent (Sukh Deo Prasad) offered to construct and let out godowns to FCI. For that purpose, the respondent and his brother V.K. Shukla obtained a term loan of Rs. 10 lakhs from the State Bank of India, Jhansi Branch (for short `the bank') on 31.8.1977 and as security therefor mortgaged their land (in Khard village) and house property (at Jhansi) in favour of the Bank by deposit of title deeds. The repayment of the said loan was also guaranteed by one Raj Narain Khare and Shri Kishan on 6.10.1977. In addition, another sum of Rs. 5 lacs was sancti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-08-2009
Reported in : AIR2010SC868; 2010(1)BomCR255; 2009(111)BomLR4483; JT2009(13)SC106; (2010)ILLJ644SC; (2009)8MLJ758(SC); 2009(13)SCALE280; (2009)10SCC123; 2009(10)LC4574(SC)
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. Leave granted.2. Whether the sugar bags pledged by Kannad Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. and Gangapur Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. in favour of the appellant-bank as security for repayment of the loan together with interest could be attached and sold for realization of the dues of provident funds etc. payable by the employer i.e., the management of the Sugar Mills under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short `the Act') is the question which arises for determination in these appeals filed against order dated 29.6.2007 passed by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Civil Application Nos. 1680 and 1681 of 2007 in Writ Petition No. 6824/2005 and order dated 19.7.2007 passed in Civil Application No. 245/2007 in Letters Patent Appeal No. 28/2004.3. We shall first notice the facts from the record of the appeal arising out of S.L.P.(C) No. 15243/2007.4. During crushing season 2000-2001, the appellant advanced loan of Rs. 40...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-08-2009
Reported in : 2009(8)MLJ758; 2009(10)SCC123; 2010(1)SCJ408; AIR2009SCW6784; AIR2010(2)(Bom)R272; AIR2010SC868; 2009(2)SCC(L&S)743
G.S. Singhvi, J.1. Leave granted.2. Whether the sugar bags pledged by Kannad Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. and Gangapur Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. in favour of the appellant-bank as security for repayment of the loan together with interest could be attached and sold for realization of the dues of provident funds etc. payable by the employer i.e., the management of the Sugar Mills under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short `the Act') is the question which arises for determination in these appeals filed against order dated 29.6.2007 passed by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Civil Application Nos.1680 and 1681 of 2007 in Writ Petition No.6824/2005 and order dated 19.7.2007 passed in Civil Application No.245/2007 in Letters Patent Appeal No.28/2004.3. We shall first notice the facts from the record of the appeal arising out of S.L.P.(C ) No.15243/2007.4. During crushing season 2000-2001, the appellant advanced loan of Rs.4000 la...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Oct-08-2009
Reported in : 2009AIRSCW6784
1. Leave granted.2. Whether the sugar bags pledged by Kannad Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. and Gangapur Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. in favour of the appellant-bank as security for repayment of the loan together with interest could be attached and sold for realization of the dues of provident funds etc. payable by the employer i.e., the management of the Sugar Mills under the Employees' Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 (for short `the Act') is the question which arises for determination in these appeals filed against order dated 29.6.2007 passed by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Civil Application Nos.1680 and 1681 of 2007 in Writ Petition No.6824/2005 and order dated 19.7.2007 passed in Civil Application No.245/2007 in Letters Patent Appeal No.28/2004.3. We shall first notice the facts from the record of the appeal arising out of S.L.P.(C ) No.15243/2007.4. During crushing season 2000-2001, the appellant advanced loan of Rs.4000 lacs to Kannad Sah...
Tag this Judgment!