Court : Supreme Court of India
1. Leave granted. 2. The question that arises in this appeal, by special leave, is: whether the benefits of Hindu Succession (Amendment) Act, 2005 are available to the appellants. 3. The appellants and the respondents are siblings being daughters and sons of Chakiri Venkata Swamy. The 1 st respondent (plaintiff) filed a suit for partition in the court of Senior Civil Judge, Ongole impleading his father Chakiri Venkata Swamy (1st defendant), his brother Chakiri Anji Babu (2nd defendant) and his two sisters - the present appellants - as 3rd and 4th defendant respectively. In respect of schedule properties `A', `C' and `D' - coparcenary property - the plaintiff claimed that he, 1st defendant and 2nd defendant have 1/3rd share each. As regards schedule property `B'--as the property belonged to his mother--he claimed that all the parties have 1/5th equal share. 4. The 1st defendant died in 1993 during the pendency of the suit. 5. The trial court vide its judgment and preliminary decree date...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2012)1SCC656; AIR2012SC206; (2012)340ITR1
1. By an earlier order dated 15.5.2009 [reported in Suraj Lamp & Industries Pvt.Ltd. vs. State of Haryana & Anr. - 2009 (7) SCC 363], we had referred to the ill - effects of what is known as General Power of Attorney Sales (for short `GPA Sales') or Sale Agreement/General Power of Attorney/Will transfers (for short `SA/GPA/WILL' transfers). Both the descriptions are misnomers as there cannot be a sale by execution of a power of attorney nor can there be a transfer by execution of an agreement of sale and a power of attorney and will. As noticed in the earlier order, these kinds of transactions were evolved to avoid prohibitions/conditions regarding certain transfers, to avoid payment of stamp duty and registration charges on deeds of conveyance, to avoid payment of capital gains on transfers, to invest unaccounted money (`black money') and to avoid payment of `unearned increases' due to Development Authorities on transfer.2. The modus operandi in such SA/GPA...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2012)1SCC333
Respondents 1 to 3 claimed that they belonged to `Dhobi' caste, a scheduled caste in Bhopal district of Madhya Pradesh, and secured appointment to posts reserved for Schedule Castes. The appellant, who was the President of the Schedule Caste Employees Association, made a complaint to the Sub-Divisional Magistrate that respondents 1 to 3 did not belong to any scheduled caste and had produced false caste certificates. The Collector enquired into the matter and gave a report dated 20.1.2000 2holding that the caste certificates produced by respondents 1 to 3 were false. Consequently, the appointments of respondents 1 to 3 were cancelled on 20.4.2000. Respondents 1 to 3 challenged the report of the Collector and their consequential termination in WP No. 2666/2000. The Madhya Pradesh High Court directed that the caste certificates of respondents 1 to 3 be verified by the State Level Screening Committee in accordance with the decision of this court in Kumari Madhuri Patil v. Additi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2012)1SCC194; AIR2012SC189
1. Leave granted.2. These are appeals against the common judgment and order dated 15.12.2008 of the Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi in Civil Writ Petition Nos.2147 of 1992 and 2148 of 1992 (for short the `impugned order').3. The facts very briefly are that in the year 1959, the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, set up a Committee to study the problems of introducing measures of control on land values and stabilizing land prices in the urban areas of Delhi and this Committee submitted its report recommending some measures. The Government of India considered the recommendations and conveyed its decision to the Chief Commissioner, Delhi, by its letter dated 02.05.1961 regarding acquisition, development and disposal of land (hereinafter called `the 1961 Scheme').The 1961 Scheme inter alia contemplated that land may be allotted at pre- determined rates, namely, at the cost of acquisition and development plus the additional charges mentioned in the Scheme, to...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1. We have heard Mr. C.A. Sundram, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Vaiko in-person for respondent no.1, Mr. V. Prakash, learned counsel for the respondent no.2, Mr. Guru Krishna Kumar, learned Additional A.G. for the Government of Tamil Nadu, Mr. Subramanium Prasad, learned counsel for the Tamil Nadu Pollution Control Board, and Mr. Vijay Panjwani, learned counsel for the Central Pollution Control Board. 2. The High Court has by the impugned judgment inter alia directed that the industrial unit of the petitioner be closedown immediately because of the environmental pollution caused by the industrial unit. On 01.10.2010, this Court directed that the matter be listed on 18.10.2010 and stayed the impugned judgment of the High Court till then. On 18.10.2010, the Court issued notice and continued the interim stay. The Court has continued the interim stay from time to time. 3. When the matter was taken up on 25.02.2011, the Court after hearing learned counsel for the parties was of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2012)1SCC157; AIR2012SC214
1. Heard. Leave granted.2. The first appellant is the son of second appellant who is a Professor in the Indian Institute of Technology (IIT for short), Kharagpur. Admission to undergraduate courses in fifteen IITs as also IT--BHU and ISM, Dhanbad is through the Common Entrance Examination known as the Joint Entrance Examination (for short IIT-JEE). The said examination is considered to be the toughest entrance examination in India, with more than 50 candidates vying for each seat in the said examination. IIT-JEE is conducted every year by a different IIT on a rotation basis and is supervised by the Joint Admission Board (JAB or the `Board'), the first respondent herein. The first appellant appeared in the IIT-JEE 2006, as a general category candidate. He secured 75 marks in Methamatics, 104 marks in Physics and 52 marks in Chemistry, aggregating to 231. The Board had fixed the cut off marks for admission as 37 for Maths, 48 for Physics and 55 for Chemistry and the aggregate cut of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1. Civil Appeal Nos. 5059 of 2007, 179-180 of 2008, 311-314, 317-318 of 2008, 363 of 2008, 2065 of 2008, 1229-1230 of 2008 and 3868 of 2009: These are appeals under Section 18 of the Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 (for short “the TRAI Act”) against the common judgment and order dated 30.08.2007 of the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi (for short “the Tribunal”) in Petition No. 7 of 2003. 2. The relevant facts very briefly are that with the introduction of the National Telecom Policy, 1994 liberalizing the Telecom Sector, telecom licenses were issued to different service providers. The licenses granted to the service providers stipulated a fixed license fee, which was payable by the service providers every year. During the period 1994 to 1999, the licensees defaulted in payment of license fee and made a representation to the Government of India, Ministry of Telecommunications for relief against the high license fee for...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1. Leave granted. 2. These are appeals by special leave against the impugned orders of the Division Bench of the Gujarat High Court. 3. The facts very briefly are that the respondents are different unaided private professional and educational colleges and institutions in the State of Gujarat. The fees for admission to the private unaided professional and educational colleges and institutions in the State of Gujarat are regulated by the Gujarat Professional Technical Educational Colleges or Institutions (Regulation of Admission Fixation of Fees) Act, 2007 (for short `the Act'), which came into effect on 30.04.2008. Section 9 of the Act provides that the State Government shall, for the purpose of determining the fees for admission of students in the professional educational colleges or institutions, constitute a Fee Regulatory Committee with a retired judge of the High Court nominated by the State Government as its Chairperson. Section 10(1) of the Act provides that the Fee Regulatory Co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2012)1SCC200
1. Civil Appeal Nos. 5247, 5244, 5248, 5245, 5246 of 2008 arise out of a common order and judgment dated 17.11.2004 passed by a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court at Lucknow on five Writ Petitions bearing Nos. 6415 (S/S) of 2002, 2759 (PIL) of 2003, 2049 (M/S) of 2003, 4704 (S/S) of 2003 and 7179 (M/B) of 2002. The appellant is an educational society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860. The issue in these five appeals is with respect to the decision of the appellant to shift the secondary and higher secondary courses of education conducted in its school and intermediate college, affiliated to the Board of High School and Intermediate Education of Uttar Pradesh (`U.P. State Board' for short), to the Indian Certificate for Secondary Education course (`ICSE course' for short) by seeking affiliation with the Council for the Indian School Certificate Examination, New Delhi (`Council' for short).2. Civil Appeal Nos.5249-5250 of 2008 and 5251-5252 of 2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reported in : (2012)1SCC260; AIR2012SC528; 2012CriLJ846; (2012)1SCC(Cri)520; (2012)1SCC(Civ)79
1. Leave granted. Heard.2. The complainant in a complaint under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (`Act' for short) is the appellant in this appeal by special leave. A cheque dated 31.3.1995 for Rs.20,000/- issued by the first respondent drawn in favour of the complainant, towards alleged repayment of a loan was dishonoured when presented for payment. The appellant sent a notice dated 20.4.1995 demanding payment. According to the complainant, the notice was served on the first respondent but the payment was not made. Therefore on 25.5.1995 the appellant lodged a complaint against the first respondent, under section 138 of the Act before the First Class Magistrate -IV, (Mobile), Thiruvananthapuram. After trial, the learned Magistrate by judgment dated 30.11.1996 found the accused guilty under section 138 of the Act and sentenced her to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- and in default to undergo imprisonment for one month. He also directed the accused to pay Rs.20,000/- as c...
Tag this Judgment!