Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-10-2023
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.3615 OF2023(ARISING OUT OF SLP(C) No.8493 OF2021 RELIANCE INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF GOA .RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.______ OF2023(ARISING OUT OF SLP(C) No.16778 OF2021 JUDGMENT DINESH MAHESHWARI, J.Table of Contents Preliminary ................................................................................................................. 2 Relevant factual aspects and background .................................................................. 3 Arbitration proceedings and award ............................................................................. 7 Challenge to the award under Section 34 of the Act .................................................. 9 The appeal under Section 37 of the Act ................................................................... 11 Rival Submissions ......................................................................................
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-16-2023
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU R DATED THIS THE16H DAY OF MARCH, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION No.12783 OF2020(GM RES) C/W WRIT PETITION No.12809 OF2020(GM RES) IN WRIT PETITION No.12783 OF2020BETWEEN: DODBALLAPUR INTEGRATED TEXTILE PARK LIMITED SW51 PHASE II, KIADB, DODBALLAPUR APPARELS PARK, DODBALLAPUR 561 203 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, MR.SUNIL S. PATIL. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI S.VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE) AND:1. MR.VINOD G. JAIN S/O MR.M.GOUTHAM CHAND, AGED ABOUT41YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.80, BHS ROAD, RANGARAO ROAD, SHANKARAPURAM, BENGALURU 560 004. 22. MR.N.N.DHARWADKAR HONBLE SOLE ARBITRATOR, IN AC532020 ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION CENTRE, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGLAURU 560 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAGHURAM CADAMBI A/W SRI SHYAM HARINDRA, ADVOCATES FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES226AND227OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE AND QUASH THE ORDER DTD.7.10.2020 AT ANEXURE...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Mar-16-2023
1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU R DATED THIS THE16H DAY OF MARCH, 2023 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M. NAGAPRASANNA WRIT PETITION No.12783 OF2020(GM RES) C/W WRIT PETITION No.12809 OF2020(GM RES) IN WRIT PETITION No.12783 OF2020BETWEEN: DODBALLAPUR INTEGRATED TEXTILE PARK LIMITED SW51 PHASE II, KIADB, DODBALLAPUR APPARELS PARK, DODBALLAPUR 561 203 REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY, MR.SUNIL S. PATIL. ... PETITIONER (BY SRI S.VIVEKANANDA, ADVOCATE) AND:1. MR.VINOD G. JAIN S/O MR.M.GOUTHAM CHAND, AGED ABOUT41YEARS, RESIDING AT NO.80, BHS ROAD, RANGARAO ROAD, SHANKARAPURAM, BENGALURU 560 004. 22. MR.N.N.DHARWADKAR HONBLE SOLE ARBITRATOR, IN AC532020 ARBITRATION AND CONCILIATION CENTRE, KHANIJA BHAVAN, RACE COURSE ROAD, BENGLAURU 560 001. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI RAGHURAM CADAMBI A/W SRI SHYAM HARINDRA, ADVOCATES FOR R1) THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES226AND227OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO SET ASIDE AND QUASH THE ORDER DTD.7.10.2020 AT ANEXURE...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jul-28-2023
R1IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE28H DAY OF JULY, 2023 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.8352 OF2022(GM-CPC) C/W WRIT PETITION No.12935 OF2022(GM-CPC) IN WP NO.8352/2022: BETWEEN:1. . MR. SHAKEEL PASHA S/O KHALAQ SHERIFF AGED ABOUT62YEARS, R/AT NO11 LEONARD LANE RICHMOND TOWN, BENGALURU-560025 (SENIOR BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED) 2 . MRS. NASREEN SHAKEEL AGED ABOUT66YEARS, W/O SHAKEEL PASHA R/AT NO11 LEONARD LANE RICHMOND TOWN, BENGALURU-560025 (SENIOR BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED) 3 . M/S WINDSOR GARDENS PVT LTD NO81 36TH CROSS, 6TH MAIN5H BLOCK, JAYANAGARA, BENGALURU-560041 REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR SRINIVAS RAO ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI.MANU K, ADVOCATE) 2 AND: M/S CITY MAX HOTELS (INDIA ) PVT LTD VIII FLOOR, DELTA BLOCK SIGMASOFT TECH PARK NO7 VARTHUR MAIN ROAD WHITE FILED BENGALURU-560066 RESPONDENT (BY SRI.MANU KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE227OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNE...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
Decided on : Jul-28-2023
R1IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE28H DAY OF JULY, 2023 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM WRIT PETITION NO.8352 OF2022(GM-CPC) C/W WRIT PETITION No.12935 OF2022(GM-CPC) IN WP NO.8352/2022: BETWEEN:1. . MR. SHAKEEL PASHA S/O KHALAQ SHERIFF AGED ABOUT62YEARS, R/AT NO11 LEONARD LANE RICHMOND TOWN, BENGALURU-560025 (SENIOR BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED) 2 . MRS. NASREEN SHAKEEL AGED ABOUT66YEARS, W/O SHAKEEL PASHA R/AT NO11 LEONARD LANE RICHMOND TOWN, BENGALURU-560025 (SENIOR BENEFIT NOT CLAIMED) 3 . M/S WINDSOR GARDENS PVT LTD NO81 36TH CROSS, 6TH MAIN5H BLOCK, JAYANAGARA, BENGALURU-560041 REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MR SRINIVAS RAO ...PETITIONERS (BY SRI.MANU K, ADVOCATE) 2 AND: M/S CITY MAX HOTELS (INDIA ) PVT LTD VIII FLOOR, DELTA BLOCK SIGMASOFT TECH PARK NO7 VARTHUR MAIN ROAD WHITE FILED BENGALURU-560066 RESPONDENT (BY SRI.MANU KULKARNI, ADVOCATE FOR C/R1) THIS WP IS FILED UNDER ARTICLE227OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO QUASHING THE IMPUGNE...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Sep-11-2023
REPORTABLE2023NSC817 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.377 OF2007CBI APPELLANT(S) VERSUS R.R. KISHORE RESPONDENT(S) WITH CRL. APPEAL No.2763/2023 (Arising out of SLP(CRL.) NO.4364 OF2011 JUDGMENT VIKRAM NATH, J.Crl. Appeal No.377/2007.1. This Constitution Bench has been constituted to consider whether the declaration made by a Constitution Bench of this Court, in the case of Subramanian Swamy vs. Director, Central Bureau of Investigation and another , that 1 Section 6A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 194 being 2 unconstitutional, can be applied retrospectively in context with Article 20 of the Constitution. 1 (2014) 8 SCC6822 In short DSPE Act Crl. Appeal No.377 of 2007 Page 1 of 1062. Necessary facts relevant for the purposes of this case are stated hereunder:2. 1 The appellant-Central Bureau of Investigation 3 after registering the First Information Report at 02:00 pm on 16.12.2004 for offences under the Prevention of Corr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Mar-29-2023
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2913-2915 OF2018PRASANTA KUMAR SAHOO & ORS. .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS CHARULATA SAHU & ORS. .RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA, J.1. Since the issues involved in both the captioned appeals are interrelated; the parties are also same and the challenge is also to the self-same judgment and decree passed by the High Court of Orissa, those were taken up for hearing analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.2. Both the captioned appeals are at the instance of the legal representatives and heirs of the original defendant No.1 (Late Shri Prafulla Sahoo S/o Kumar Sahoo) and are directed against the judgment, order and decree passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack dated 5.05.2011 in AHO No.133 of 2000 by which the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the Letters Patent Appeal filed by the appellants herein thereby affirming the judgment and decree...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Dec-14-2023
REPORTABLE2023INSC1075IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.________OF2023(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil)No.14445 of 2021) MOHAMMED ABDUL WAHID APPELLANT(S) Versus NILOFER & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT SANJAY KAROL, J.Leave Granted.2. In adjudicating this appeal, the thought to be borne foremost in mind is that every trial is a search of truth. This purpose is succinctly captured in the following terms in American Jurisprudence, Second Edition, 2007: The purpose of trial is to determine the validity of the allegations. The objective is to secure a fair and impartial administration of justice between the parties to the litigation and not the achievement of a hearing wholly free from errors. Once a civil action has been instituted and issue is joined upon the pleadings, there must be a trial on the issue before a judgment may be rendered. Trial is not a contest between lawyers but a presentation of facts to which the law may be applied ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : May-19-2023
..... section 10 of the act since the business was transferred before the amending act came into force. the ratio of the case is neither helpful nor applicable in the instant case, since this court was dealing with the specific provisions of the madras general sales tax act 1939.112. the provisions of the statute and statutory conditions of supply need to be examined to determine whether the conditions of supply provide for the creation of a charge in terms of section 100 of the transfer of property act, 1882. once it 67 ..... basis ..140. in srigdhaa beverages (supra), this court was considering an auction sale under the securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interest act 2002.67 the court analysed clauses 24 and 26 of the auction notice, which stipulated an as is where is sale with respect to all statutory dues and ..... of respondent. however, jmipl filed a petition under article 226, which was allowed by a single judge of the high court. the appellant filed a letters patent appeal, which was dismissed by the division bench of the high court by a judgment dated 04 april 2014 on the ground of limitation. the ombudsman, in its ..... both the right and the corresponding duty are imposed by the statute. the owner or occupier of the premises has to submit an application to avail of the supply of electricity.32. in brihanmumbai electric supply & transport undertaking v. maharashtra electricity regulatory commission,23 a two-judge bench of this court observed .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Decided on : Nov-10-2023
Reportable 2023 INSC1017IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Writ Petition (Civil) No 1224 of 2023 State of Punjab Petitioner Versus Principal Secretary to the Governor Respondents of Punjab and Another 1 JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI Table of Contents I. Factual background ................................................................................................... 3 II. Submissions .............................................................................................................. 7 III. Analysis .................................................................................................................... 9 A. The Governor is a symbolic head and cannot withhold action on Bills passed by the State Legislature ............................................................................................ 9 B. Reconvening a sitting of the Vidhan Sabha which has not been prorogued is permissible in law and is within the exclusive domain...
Tag this Judgment!