Court : Karnataka
R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE03D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023 PRESENT THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA AND THE HONBLE MRS. JUSTICE K.S.HEMALEKHA C.C.C. No.846/2017 (CIVIL) BETWEEN:1. SRI SOMANNA S/O. LATE NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT40YEARS, 2. KUM. MANI D/O. LATE NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT31YEARS, 3. SMT. NINGAMMANNI W/O. LATE NAGARAJU, AGED ABOUT56YEARS, COMPLAINANT NOS.1 TO3ARE R/AT MARAMMANA DEVASTHANA BEEDI, THUMMA NERALE VILLAGE, CHIKKAIAHNA CHATRA HOBLI, NANJANAGUD TALUK.4. SMT. KEMPAMMANNI W/O. SHIVANANJAPPA, D/O. LATE SANNAMMA, AGED ABOUT54YEARS, R/AT CHIKKALLI VILLAGE, VARUNA HOBLI, MYSORE TALUK. ... COMPLAINANTS (BY SMT. DIVYA KRISHNA, ADVOCATE) - 2 - AND:1. LATE T.M. MAHADEVAPPA S/O. LATE MARILINGAPPA SINCE DECEASED BY HIS LRs. (a) SMT. SUBBAMMA MAJOR, W/O. T.M. MAHADEVAPPA R/AT THUMMA NERALE VILLAGE, CHIKKAIAHNA CHATRA HOBLI, NANJANAGUD TALUK. 1(a) DELETED AS PER ORDER OF THIS HONBLE COURT DATED1807/2017) 2. PRAKASH S/O. LATE DEVARAJU, AGED ABOUT48YEARS, R/AT TH...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL/APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (C) NO.891 OF2021Anushka Rengunthwar & Ors. . Petitioner(s) Versus Union of India & Ors. . Respondent(s) WITH Writ Petition (C) No.503/2022, Writ Petition (C) No.35/2022, Writ Petition (C) No.246/2022, Writ Petition (C) No.155/2022, Writ Petition (C) No.347/2022, Writ Petition (C) No.380/2022, Writ Petition (C) No.322/2022, Writ Petition (C) No.629/2022, Writ Petition (C) No.740/2022, Writ Petition (C) No.706/2022, Writ Petition (C) No.741/2022, Civil Appeal No.812/2023 (arising out of SLP(C) No.16306/2022) Writ Petition (C) No.22/2022, Writ Petition (C) No.1070/2022, 1 Writ Petition (C) No.1230/2021, Writ Petition (C) No.1186/2021, Writ Petition (C) No.838/2022, Writ Petition (C) No.1032/2021, Writ Petition (C) No.961/2022, Writ Petition (C) No.1123/2021, Writ Petition (C) No.1128/2021, Writ Petition (C) No.1125/2021, Writ Petition (C) No.1150/2021, Writ Petition (C) No.1129/2021, Writ Petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
- 1 - RFA No.1774 of 2018 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE2D DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.1774 OF2018(DEC/INJ) BETWEEN:1. SMT. V. LALITHA, W/O. C HARISH, R/AT No.55, SLV NILAYA, 3RD MAIN ROAD, BEHIND JALAVAYU VIHARA, KACHARAKANAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560084 APPELLANT (BY SMT. SUSHEELA S. SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI.T.R. RAMESH, ADVOCATE) AND:1. K.H. PUTTASWAMY GOWDA, S/O HANUME GOWDA, AGED ABOUT63YEARS, R/AT NO.586, 4TH MAIN ROAD, MAHALAKSHMIPURAM EXTENSION, BENGALURU RESPONDENT (BY SRI. ROOPESHA B., ADVOCATE) - 2 - RFA No.1774 of 2018 THIS RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION96R/W ORDER41RULE1OF THE CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED1808.2018 PASSED IN O.S.NO.16870/2006 ON THE FILE OF THE XIII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL AND SESSIONS JUDGE MAYOHALL UNIT BANGALORE, PARTLY DECREEING THE SUIT FOR DECLARATION AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ORDE...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5393 OF2010M/S GODREJ SARA LEE LTD. APPELLANT(S) VS. THE EXCISE AND TAXATION OFFICER- CUM-ASSESSING AUTHORITY & ORS. ..RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT DIPANKAR DATTA, J.This appeal, by special leave, registers a challenge to an order dated 12th October, 2009 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (hereafter the High Court, for short) dismissing Civil Writ Petition No.9191 of 2009 presented by the appellant and relegating it to the remedy of an appeal under section 33 of the Haryana Value Added Tax Act, 2003 (hereafter the VAT Act, for short).2. Two questions emerge for decision on this appeal. First, whether the High Court was justified in declining interference on the ground of availability of an alternative remedy of appeal to the appellant under section 33 of the VAT Act, which 2 it had not pursued. Should the answer to the first question be in the negative, we would next be required...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Karnataka
- 1 - RFA No.47 of 2020 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE1T DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2023 PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR AND THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE RAMACHANDRA D. HUDDAR REGULAR FIRST APPEAL No.47 OF2020(DEC/INJ) BETWEEN:1. SRI. N B KUMARA SWAMY S/O LATE BALASUNDAR MODALIAR, AGED ABOUT72YEARS, R/AT NO108 'SREE RANGA NILAYA', 2ND CROSS, KAMALANAGAR, BENGALURU - 560079. APPELLANT (BY SHRI. SOMASHEKAR ANGADI, ADVOCATE) AND:1. RAGHAVENDRA S/O RAVI KUMAR, AGEDAOUT43YEARS, R/AT No.185, 6TH MAIN, NEAR RAVI SCHOOL, MAHALAKSHMIPURA POST,KURUBARAHALLI, BENGALURU - 560086. RESPONDENT (RESPONDENT IS SERVED AND ABSENT) - 2 - RFA No.47 of 2020 RFA IS FILED UNDER SECTION96OF CPC, AGAINST THE JUDGMENT AND DECREE DATED2111.2019 PASSED IN O.S.NO.7602/2013 ON THE FILE OF THE VII ADDITIONAL CITY CIVIL JUDGE AT BENGALURU, REJECTING THE PLAINT UNDER ORDER7RULE11b) OF CPC FOR FAILURE TO PAY COURT FEE BY THE APPELLANT HEREIN AND ALSO AGAINST THE ORDER DATED0401.2020, REJECT...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Page 1 of 17 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOOF2023ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) No.15793 OF2019AJAY DABRA Appellant(s) Versus PYARE RAM & ORS. Respondent(s) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOOF2023ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) No.15848 OF2019AJAY DABRA Appellant(s) Versus SUNDER SINGH & ANR. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT SUDHANSHU DHULIA, J.Leave granted.2. Both these Appeals before this Court are by the plaintiff who had filed a suit for specific performance, which was dismissed and later his First Appeal before the High Court was dismissed on the grounds of delay. We may state here that the Plaintiff/Appellant was not a party to the contract of which a Page 2 of 17 specific performance was sought. The contract was executed between the defendant and a company called M/s Himalayan Ski Village Pvt. Ltd. which was for sale of an agricultural land in Himachal Pradesh. There were two plots of land for which two different agreements of sale were executed, and hence two ci...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.of 2022 Arising out of SLP (Crl.) 5866 of 2022 Usha Chakraborty & Anr. Appellants Versus State of West Bengal & Anr. Respondents JUDGMENT C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.Leave granted.1. We have heard the learned counsel on both sides. This appeal by special leave is directed against the final judgment and order dated 17.05.2022 in C.R.R. No.2615/2017 passed by the Calcutta High Court at Calcutta. The appellants herein approached the High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking quashment of F.I.R. No.189/2017 dated 11.04.2017, registered against them and two others, at Page 1 of 29 Madhyamgram Police Station under Sections 323, 384, 406, 423, 467, 468, 420 and 120B of Indian Penal Code (I.P.C.) raising various grounds. The High Court declined to exercise the jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. holding that perusal of the case diary as also the materials appeari...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.521-522 OF2023(Arising out of SLP(C)Nos.14948-14949 of 2017) ELUMALAI @ VENKATESAN & ANR APPELLANT (S) VERSUS M. KAMALA AND ORS. & ETC. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT K.M. JOSEPH, J.1. Leave granted.2. One Shri Sengalani Chettiar was married to one Rukmini. The said marriage produced a son, namely, Shri Chandran. The appellants are the sons of Shri Chandran. Sengalani Chettiar married again this time with one Smt. Kuppammal. From the second marriage Sengalani Chettiar had 5 daughters and a son. The controversy in this case relates to A-Schedule property in the suit 1 for partition filed by two children out of the 6 children born to Sengelani Chettiar from his second marriage. The property in dispute was the self-acquired property of Shri Sengalani Chettiar. In regard to the said property, Chandran,the father of the appellants had executed a Release Deed. The terms of the Release Deed dated 12.11.1975, are as...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. OF2023(@ SLP(C) Nos. 32592-32593 of 2015) BAHARUL ISLAM & ORS. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S) WITH TC (C) No.25 OF2018TC (C) No.24 OF2018JUDGMENT NAGARATHNA, J.I N D E X Sl. Particulars Page No.No.(s) 1. Brief facts of the case 2-8 2. Birds Eye View of the controversy 8 3. Submissions on behalf of the appellants 8-14 4. Arguments on behalf of R-1 14-19 5. Arguments on behalf of R-7 19-24 6. Submissions on behalf of the State of Assam 24-29 7. Points for consideration 30 8. Constitutional Scheme 30-39 9. Contentions on behalf of the UOI3941 10. Interplay between Entry 66 of List 1 and Entry 25 of 42-68 List III11 Relevant provisions of Indian Medical Council Act, 68-80 1956 12. Relevant provisions of Assam Rural Health 80-92 Regulatory Authority Act, 2004 13. A comparative table and analysis of the provisions 92-106 of the IMC Act, 1956 and the Assam Act 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.8442 OF2021FISHERMAN CARE, REGISTERED ASSOCIATION ...PETITIONER VERSUS THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, DAIRYING AND FISHERIES REP. BY ITS SECRETARY & ORS. .RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.262 OF2022WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.710 OF2022WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.1039 OF2022ORDER We have before this Court a Special Leave Petition, and three Writ Petitions, where the common issue is the use of a fishing method called Purse Seine Fishing. The Fisheries Department, Government of Tamil Nadu vide its Order dated 25th March, 2000 had banned, inter alia, the use of Purse Seine Fishing nets within its territorial waters i.e. within 12 nautical miles (22 KMs from the Coast Line). By an Order dated 5th February, 2019 passed by the Madras High Court, the Page 1 of 9 challenge made to the above Order was also dismissed. Thereafter, another writ petition was filed before the Mad...
Tag this Judgment!