Court : Supreme Court of India
Swatanter Kumar, J.1. Unlike natural calamities that are beyond human control, avoidable disasters resulting from human error/negligence prove more tragic and completely imbalance the inter-generational equity and cause irretrievable damage to the health and environment for generations to come. Such tragedy may occur from pure negligence, contributory negligence or even failure to take necessary precautions in carrying on certain industrial activities. More often than not, the affected parties have to face avoidable damage and adversity that results from such disasters. The magnitude and extent of adverse impact on the financial soundness, social health and upbringing of younger generation, including progenies, may have been beyond human expectations. In such situations and where the laws are silent or are inadequate, the courts have unexceptionally stepped in to bridge the gaps, to provide for appropriate directions and guidelines to ensure that fundamentals of Article 21 of the Const...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chhattisgarh
1. Since both the writ petitions i.e. Writ Petition (C) No. 5789 of 2007 and Writ Petition (C) No. 5844 of 2007 involve common facts and question of law, thus, both are being disposed of by this common order. 2. Challenge in these petitions i.e. Writ Petition (C) No. 5789 of 2007 (for short `the first petition') and Writ Petition (C) No. 5844 of 2007 (for short `the second petition') is to the order dated 08.06.2007 (Annexure P/4) passed by the Estate Officer, Municipal Corporation, Bhilai, District Durg, whereby allotment of shop bearing No. F/16 in the first petition and No. F/15 in the second petition, Shitla Commercial Complex, Bhilai, to the petitioners on 27.03.2006, were cancelled, and the petitioners were directed to make an application for refund of the security deposit and other amount. 3. The indisputable facts, in nutshell, as projected by the petitioners, in both the writ petitions are that pursuant to the notice for auction sale, published in "Dainik Bhaskar", Raipur Edit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chhattisgarh
1. The appellants challenged the legality and validity of the order dated 7-8-2001 (Annexure-P/9) and the order dated 20th March, 2003 (Annexure-P/1) by which the State Government in purported exercise of power under sub-section (5) of Section 80 of the Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (for short `the Act') has refused to accord sanction in respect of the lease deed executed in favour of the appellants. 2. The order was challenged on the grounds that the same was passed against a person who died during the pendency of the recommendation before the State Government and also on the ground that the impugned order was passed in a review filed by son of Ratan Lal Rathi. The above contentions have been rejected with observations that resolution for grant of lease in favour of Ratan Lal Rathi was passed on 3rd April, 1987 when he was alive, however, the petitioners/appellants did not take steps to substitute the name of Ratan Lal Rathi before the State Government when the matter w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : AIR1991SC1676; JT1991(2)SC439; 1991(1)SCALE617; 1991Supp(1)SCC430; [1991]2SCR105
ORDERS. Ranganathan, J.1. These are connected batches of Civil Appeals and Special Leave Petitions. We grant special leave to appeal in all the petitions (condoning the delay in the filing of the unnumbered one referred to below) and proceed to dispose of all the appeals by this common judgment. The details of the appeals and petitions are, for sake of convenient reference, tabulated below: High CourtDate of judgmentCivil Appeal/ S.L.P. Nos.Name of Appellant1. Orissa17-4-1980C.A. 2053-2080/80Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd.7-3-1983C.A. 4353-4354/83Orissa Cement Ltd.22-12-1989S.L.P. 1479/90State of Orissa22-12-1989S.L.P./90Orient Paper &Industries; Ltd. & Anr.13-7-1990S. O. P. 11939/90- do-2. Bihar10-2-1986C.A. 592/86Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd.3. Madhya Pradesh28-3-1986C.A. 1641-1662/86State of M. P.2. We shall discuss later the manner in which these appeals and petitions have arisen. THE ISSUE3. The validity of the levy of a 'cess', based on the royalty derived from mining lands, by the State...
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Common Judgment 1. By this common Judgment, all the above matters, are being disposed of together, inasmuch as identical question is required to be determined in both the Appeals and the Misc. Applications. 2. For the sake of convenience, the Appeal No.7 of 2013, will be treated as leading matter and the relevant averments and documents filed therein, will be referred for the purpose of discussion. 3. Original Appellants in Appeal No.7 of 2013, Dr.(Sau) Nandini Sushrut Babhulkar and Ors, have preferred Appeal against the Environment Clearance (EC) certificate dated March 28th, 2012, granted by the Respondent No.3 -SEIAA, i.e. competent authority of the Environment Ministry of the State of Maharashtra, in favour of Respondent No.4 M/s AVH Chemicals P Ltd. (For short, hereinafter referred to as "Chemical Industry"). 4. The same the Environment Clearance (EC) certificate dated March 28th, 2012, is the subject matter of challenge in Appeal No.2 of 2014, filed by the Appellant - Narsing Pat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
1. The Secretary Environment Department, State of Maharashtra, on 24th April, 2012 vide its order issued final directions under Section 5 of the Environment Protection Act, 1986 (for short the Act) read with Environment Impact Assessment Notification dated 14th September, 2006 (for short the notification) directing the Member Secretary, Maharashtra Pollution Control Board to file complaint in the Court of law under Section 19(a) of the Act for the offences committed by M/s. Veena Developers under Section 15 of the Act read with the said notification and to initiate further line of action in Court of law. Aggrieved from the said order M/s. Veena Developers as well as M/s. Nikunj Developers have filed the present appeal (Appeal No. 76 of 2012). This appeal was instituted in the Registry of the Tribunal on 20th September, 2012. The limitation provided under Section 16 of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 (for short the NGT Act) is 30 days. Admittedly, the appeal was filed much beyond ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
1. Vide Crl. M.C. No.2784/2011, the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR bearing No.RC-AC-1-2007-A-0003 dated 02.04.2007, chargesheet dated 13.12.2010 and the order dated 05.07.2011 passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate-01 (ACMM), Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, whereby cognizance under Section 35 read with Section 3 of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 2010 (hereinafter shall be called FCRA, 2010) was taken and summons were issued against the petitioner. 2. Vide Crl. M.C. No.3342/2011, the petitioner seeks quashing of the order dated 20.08.2011 passed by the learned Revisional Court in Criminal Revision No.02/2011 filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). While allowing the said revision petition, order dated 05.07.2011 was substituted providing that deemed cognizance has been taken under Section 23 read with Section 4 of the Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act, 1976 (hereinafter shall be called FCRA, 1976'). 3. Since the issues raised in bot...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
S.H. KAPADIA, CJI 1. Leave granted. Introduction 2. This matter concerns a tax dispute involving the Vodafone Group with the Indian Tax Authorities [hereinafter referred to for short as the Revenue], in relation to the acquisition by Vodafone International Holdings BV [for short VIH], a company resident for tax purposes in the Netherlands, of the entire share capital of CGP Investments (Holdings) Ltd. [for short CGP], a company resident for tax purposes in the Cayman Islands [CI for short] vide transaction dated 11.02.2007, whose stated aim, according to the Revenue, was acquisition of 67% controlling interest in HEL, being a company resident for tax purposes in India which is disputed by the appellant saying that VIH agreed to acquire companies which in turn controlled a 67% interest, but not controlling interest, in Hutchison Essar Limited (HEL for short). According to the appellant, CGP held indirectly through other companies 52% shareholding interest in HEL as well as Options to ac...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Chhattisgarh
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. By this petition, the petitioners seek to challenge the legality and validity of the order dated 07/08/2001 (Annexure P/9) and the order dated 20/03/2003 (Annexure P/1), by which the State Government in purported exercise of powers under sub-section (5) of Section 80 of Chhattisgarh Municipal Corporation Act, 1956 (for short "the Act, 1956") has refused to accord sanction in respect of the lease deed executed in favour of the petitioner. 3. The facts, in brief, for disposal of the case, are that the land in dispute was initially allotted to Babu Hari Singh Darbar, who constructed the cinema hall. According to the petitioner, Babu Hari Singh Darbar leased out the cinema hall to the father of the petitioner on 24/3/1956. Babu Hari Singh Darbar died on 21/4/1972 and on his death, his son; Prithviraj Singh Darbar was brought on record, as his legal representative. Prithviraj Singh Darbar further executed a lease deed in favour of the father of t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
M. Chockalingam, Judicial Member) Appeal No. 172 of 2013 (SZ) This appeal has been preferred by the appellant herein against the order of the 1st respondent, Ministry of Environment and Forests (for short MoEF) dated 18.11.2013, granting Environmental Clearance (for short EC) to the 4th respondent, M/s. KGS Aranmula Air Port Ltd., to set up an airport at Mallappuzhasserry, Aranmula and Kidangannur villages in Kozencherry taluk of Pathanamthitta District, Kerala. A writ petition has also been filed in W.P. (C). No. 6004 of 2012 challenging the notification issued by the 2nd respondent, the State of Kerala declaring the area as an industrial area and the said writ petition is still pending before the Honble High Court of Kerala. The brief facts of the appeal filed herein are stated as follows: 2. The proposed airport is being set up by the 4th respondent on the banks of the holy river Pampa, in an ecologically sensitive and environmentally diverse and rich area. Aranmula is a declared he...
Tag this Judgment!