Court : Andhra Pradesh
THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE RAMESH RANGANATHAN AND THE HONBLE Sr.JUSTICE M.SATYANARAYANA MURTHY WRIT PETITION Nos.27335 of 2012 and batch 30-10-2014 M/s.Sr.Bhargavi Agro Tech, Gayathri House, 5-1-53, Adivipolam, Yanam 533 464. Union Territory of Pondicherry India, rep., by its Managing Partner M. Durga Prasad Chowdary..Petitioner Assistant Commissioner (CT).Kakinada, East Godavari and another. Respondents Counsel for the petitioneRs.Sr.S.R.Ashok, Learned Senior Counsel for Sr.Vivek Chandra Sekhar S; Dr.S.R.R.Viswanath, and Sr.V.Bhaskar Reddy, Learned Counsel. Counsel for respondents: Sr.P. Balaji Varma, Learned Special Standing Counsel for Commercial Taxes; Sr.D.Srinivas, Learned Standing Counsel for FCI, HEAD NOTE: ?.Citations: 1) (2006) 42 APSTJ522) (2004) 7 SCC1663) (2007) 6 SCC1204) (1988) 68 STC187(AP) 5) (1961) 1 SCR8096) AIR1955SC6617) AIR1953SC2528) [1954].S.C.R.1117 9) AIR1958SC45210) AIR1955SC76511) (2002) 5 SCC20312) AIR1986SC214613) 1962 Supp (3) SCR114) AIR1963SC90615) AIR1963SC...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3123 of 2020 DR. JAISHRI LAXMANRAO PATIL ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE CHIEF MINISTER & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3124 of 2020 SANJEET SHUKLA ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3133 of 2020 KRISHNAJI DATTATRAYA MORE ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DR. JAISHRI LAXMANRAO & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3134 of 2020 MADHUSHRI NANDKISHOR JETHLIYA & ORS. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) 2 WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3131 of 2020 DEVENDRA ROOPCHAND JAIN & ORS. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3129 of 2020 KAMALAKAR SUKHDEO DARODE @ DARWADE ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH WRIT PETITION (C) NO.915 of 2020 DESHMUKH ESHA GIRISH ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S)...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.4634 OF2014VIJAY MADANLAL CHOUDHARY & ORS. ...PETITIONER(S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No.28394 OF2011SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No.28922 OF2011SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No.29273 OF2011SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.............OF2022(@ DIARY No.41063 OF2015 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.9987 OF2015SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.10018 OF2015SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.10019 OF20152 SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.993 OF2016TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.150 OF2016TRANSFER PETITION (CRIMINAL) NOS.151-157 OF2016WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.152 OF2016SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.11839 OF2019SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.2890 OF2017SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) No.5487 OF2017CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1269 OF2017CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1270 OF2017CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1271-1272 O...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3383 OF2004THE GREAT EASTERN SHIPPING CO. LTD. APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT ARUN MISHRA, J.1. The question involved in the appeal is whether it is open to the State of Karnataka to levy Sales Tax in view of the Time Charter Agreement dated 8.1.1998 and whether it amounts to transfer of the right to use goods within the meaning of section 5C of the Karnataka Sales Tax Act, 1957 (for short, the KST Act) read with Article 366 (29A) (d) of the Constitution of India.2. The appellant The Great Eastern Shipping Co. Ltd. filed a writ petition questioning the competence of the State Government to impose a sales tax in respect of the goods which are used within the territorial waters of India. The appellant owns a tug (towing vessel, namely "Kumari Tarini"). The company entered into a Charter Party Agreement with New Mangalore Port Trust on 8.1.1998. It agreed to make ava...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chennai
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED :24. 01.2013 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.CHANDRU W.P.Nos.22054 of 2009 and 4110 of 2010 and M.P.Nos.1 of 2009 and 1 of 2010 W.P.No.22054 of 2009 : -------------------- The Tahsildar Mambalam-Guindy Taluk, Bharathidasan Salai, Chennai-600 078. .. Petitioner Vs. 1.Kaneez Fathima 2.Durab Zaman Begam 3.Dosth Mohamed Sherif @ Kaja 4.Hyder Sherif @ Aga 5.Humayun Zamam @ Hima 6.Basheer Ahamed @ Babu 7.Shameer Ali 8.Ahmed Sheriff 9.Karamat Zaman Begam 10.Settlement Officer, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005. .. Respondents W.P. No.4110 of 2010 : -------------------- Director i/c, King Institute of Preventive Medicine and Research, Guindy, Chennai-600 032. .. Petitioner Vs. 1.Durab Zamam Begum 2.Karamat Zamam Begum 3.Dosth Mohamed Sherif @ Kaja 4.Hyder Sherif @ Aga 5.Humayun Zamam @ Huma 6.Basheer Ahamed @ Babu 7.Kaneez Fathima 8.Shameer Ali 9.Ahmed Sheriff 10.The Settlement Officer, Chepauk, Chennai-600 005. 11.M/s.Chennai Metro Rail Ltd., represent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No 3249 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP(C) No 3860 of 2020 Union of India & Ors. Appellants M/S G S Chatha Rice Mills & Anr. Respondents Versus W I T H Civil Appeal No 3250 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.3861 of 2020) W I T H (Arising out of SLP (C) No.3869 of 2020) Civil Appeal No 3250 of 2020 W I T H (Arising out of SLP (C) No.3867 of 2020) Civil Appeal No 3252 of 2020 W I T H Civil Appeal No 3253 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.3865 of 2020) 1 W I T H Civil Appeal No 3262 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.5029 of 2020) W I T H Civil Appeal No 3265 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.7059 of 2020) W I T H Civil Appeal No 3267 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.6451 of 2020) (Arising out of SLP (C) No.7063 of 2020) Civil Appeal No 3269 of 2020 W I T H (Arising out of SLP (C) No.7064 of 2020) Civil Appeal No 3270 of 2020 W I T H W I T H Civil Appeal No 3271 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.7057 of 2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Gujarat
Bhaskar Bhattacharya, CJ: 1. By this Special Civil Application, the writ-petitioner has prayed for appropriate writ, order or direction, declaring Clause No. 4.1.11 of Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission [Electricity Supply Code and Related Matters] [Third Amendment] Regulations, 2010 [the Regulations], published vide the Notification No. 6/10 dated August 20, 2010, to be inconsistent and ultra vires the provisions of Electricity Act, 2003 [the Act] and to quash and set aside the said Clause. The petitioner has also prayed for a declaration that the action of the respondent authorities in directing the petitioner to pay up the dues of M/s. Arunesh Processors Pvt. Ltd. and till then, not to grant the electricity connection to the petitioner is bad, illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and for a direction upon the respondent authorities to refund the amount of Rs. 17,16,255/- deposited by the petitioner vide Annexure:J, with interest, with fur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
$~ *IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on :22. d May, 2018 Date of decision :4. h August, 2018 + W.P.(C) 8125/2016 & CM No.3362/2016 FEDERATION OF OKHLA INDUSTRIAL ASSOCIATION (REGD.) versus LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND ANR ........ RESPONDENTS ....... Petitioner + W.P.(C) 12088/2016 & CM Nos.9316/2017, 10386/2017 & 14678/2017 APEX CHAMBER OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY OF NCT DELHI ........ Petitioner LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ANR ........ RESPONDENTS versus versus DELHI FACTORY OWNERS' FEDERATION ....... Petitioner LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI & ANR. + W.P.(C) 2658/2017 & CM No.11560/2017 + W.P.(C) 3360/2017 & CM No.14703/2017 ....... RESPONDENTS AUTOMOBILE TRADERS ASSOCIATION OF DELHI LT GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND ANR ........ RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner versus + W.P.(C) 3385/2017 & CM No.14800/2017 + W.P.(C) 3684/2017 & CM No.16236/2017 versus COLORWHEEL LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR & ANR ....... RESPONDENTS ........ Petitioner SEVEN SEAS HOSPITALITY PVT LTD ........ Petitioner versus WP(C) 521...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.86258626 OF2019JAIPUR VIDYUT VITARAN NIGAM LTD. & ORS. APPELLANTS VS. ADANI POWER RAJASTHAN LIMITED & ANR. RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 3021 OF2020(DIARY NO.27976 OF2019 AND CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 30223023 OF2020(DIARY NO.39030 OF2019 JUDGMENT The appellant herein Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Limited is the 1. electricity Distribution Licensee in the State of Rajasthan. It entered into a Power Purchase Agreement (for short, PPA) on 28.1.2010 with Adani Power Rajasthan Limited (for short, APRL), a generating company in pursuance to a tariffbased competitive bid process in terms of Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (for short, the Electricity Act). The terms of PPA contained a tariff, and that could be 2 varied only as per the specific provisions contained in the PPA, not otherwise.2. APRL made a claim for an increased tariff under the change in law provisions in the PPA (Article 10). On 2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 14521453 OF2022(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) Nos. 34453446 of 2019) STATE THROUGH .APPELLANT(S) DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT Of POLICE VERSUS R. SOUNDIRARASU ETC. ....RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA, J.1. Leave granted.2. Since the issues raised in both the captioned appeals are the same, those were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this common judgment and order.3. These appeals are at the instance of the State of Tamil Nadu through the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Vigilance and 1 AntiCorruption, Salem District, Tamil Nadu and are directed against the two judgments and orders passed by the High Court of Madras dated 27.04.2017 allowing the criminal revision applications preferred by the respondents herein (original accused persons) discharging them from the prosecution under Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, ...
Tag this Judgment!