Skip to content


Supreme Court of India Court August 2011 Judgments Home Cases Supreme Court of India 2011 Page 1 of about 68 results (0.064 seconds)

Aug 30 2011 (SC)

M/S Air Liquide North India Pvt. Vs. Commnr. of Central Excise, Jaipur ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

1. This appeal has been filed against the Judgment and Order dated 31.8.2004 passed in Final Order No 595/2004-NB(C) by the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi in Appeal No. E/247/2004-NB(C), whereby the Tribunal has allowed the appeal filed by the Department and reversed the findings of the Commissioner(Appeals). 2. The issue which falls for consideration in the present appeal is whether the treatment given or the process undertaken by the appellant to Helium gas purchased by it from the open market would amount to manufacture, rendering the goods liable to duty under Chapter Note 10 of Chapter 28 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'). Chapter Note 10 of Chapter 28 of the Act, in relation to `manufacture', reads as under: “10. In relation to products of this chapter, labelling or relabelling of containers and repacking from bulk packs to retail packs or adoption of any other treatment to render the product m...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2011 (SC)

Md. Murtaza, and ors. Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals have been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 28.4.2008 passed by the Gauhati High Court in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 8081 of 2005. 3. The appellants are wholesale vegetable and fruit vendors and were engaged in selling vegetables and fruits at Machkhowa market, Gauhati in the State of Assam since 1995. However, they had to vacate their respective possession of the premises in pursuance to the orders of the Gauhati High Court. Machkhowa market is situated close to the railway station and is inside the city and the land thereon has been allotted to the Department of Handloom and Textiles, Government of Assam for the purpose of construction of an administrative building. For this purpose it was proposed to remove the appellants and other wholesale vendors from the Machkhowa market, and instead a new market has been constructed at Ganeshguri. It was submitted by the appellants and others that there is not enough space in the Ganeshguri mu...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2011 (SC)

C. Venkatachalam Vs. Ajitkumar C. Shah and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

1. These appeals emanate from the judgment dated 4.9.2002 delivered by the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Writ Petition Nos. 1147 and 1425 of 2002. We propose to dispose of these appeals by a common judgment because same questions of law are involved in these appeals. BRIEF FACTS: 2. A complaint bearing no.428 of 2000 of alleged deficiency in service was filed before the South Mumbai District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Mumbai (for short, Consumer Forum) against the two tour operators. During the pendency of the complaint, applications were filed by the opposite parties contending that the authorized agent should not be granted permission to appear on behalf of the complainants as he was not enrolled as an Advocate. The Consumer Forum considered the applications and held that the authorized agent had no right to act and plead before the Consumer Forum as he was not enrolled as an advocate. 3. In complaint bearing no.167 of 1997 filed before the Consumer Forum, the m...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2011 (SC)

Sanjoy Narayan Ed.In Chief Hindusthan and ors Vs. Son. High Court of A ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 04.04.2011 passed by the Allahabad High Court. 3. The appellants being aggrieved by the aforesaid order had filed this appeal on which we issued notice. On service of the notice, the respondent has also entered appearance through counsel. 4. We have heard the counsel appearing for the parties. The appellants have now filed an affidavit which is on record tendering unqualified apology for the publication of article in question in Hindustan Times on 20.09.2010 out of which contempt proceedings arise. 5. The media, be it electronic or print media, is generally called the fourth pillar of democracy. The media, in all its forms, whether electronic or print, discharges a very onerous duty of keeping the people knowledgeable and informed. 6. The impact of media is far-reaching as it reaches not only the people physically but also influences them mentally. It creates opinions, broadcasts different points of view, brings to th...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2011 (SC)

Rakesh Sharma and ors. Vs. State of M.P. and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

1) Leave granted. 2) These appeals are directed against the judgment and final order dated 18.01.2008 passed by the High Court of Judicature of Madhya Pradesh, Jabalpur, Bench at Gwalior in Writ Petition Nos. 1873, 1878 and 2101 of 2003 and 310 of 1999 whereby the High Court disposed of the writ petitions and issued various directions to the Municipal Corporation, Gwalior in paragraph 8 of the impugned order for construction of a market complex known as “New Gandhi Market Building”. 3) Brief facts: (a) According to the appellants-shopkeepers, after the partition of the country, in the year 1952, the Government constructed Gandhi Market in Gwalior with 250 shops and allotted them to the appellants herein, who were migrated to India from Pakistan at the time of partition, as tenants/licensees. Each shop covers 60 sq.ft. space + 30 sq.ft. Verandah, in total 90 sq.ft. area and has in front a 5 ft. wide footpath and then a public road. In the year 1975, notice was issued by the...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 30 2011 (SC)

M/S. Shiv Cotex. Vs. Tirgun Auto Plast P. Ltd, and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Leave granted. 2. The purchaser, who was not party to the suit but impleaded as 2nd respondent in the first appeal and was arrayed as such in the second appeal, is the appellant being aggrieved by the judgment and order of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana whereby the Single Judge of that Court allowed the second appeal preferred by the plaintiff (1st respondent) and set aside the concurrent judgment and decree of the courts below and remanded the suit to the trial court for fresh disposal after giving the plaintiff an opportunity to lead evidence.  3. In the month of May, 1991, the 1st respondent -- M/s. Tirgun Auto Plast Private Limited - applied to the Punjab Financial Corporation (for short, `Corporation') for a term loan of Rs. 47.60 lac and special capital assistance (soft loan) of Rs. 4 lac. The term loan of Rs. 46 lac and soft loan of Rs. 4 lac was disbursed by the Corporation to the 1st respondent in the month of October, 1991 on execution of the mortgage deed. Vide th...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 26 2011 (SC)

Justice P.D. Dinakaran Vs. Judges Inquiry Committee and anr.

Court : Supreme Court of India

1. This petition is directed against order dated 24.4.2011 passed by the Committee constituted by the Chairman of the Council of States (Rajya Sabha) (for short, `the Chairman') under Section 3(2) of the Judges (Inquiry) Act, 1968 (for short, “the Act”) rejecting the petitioner's prayer for supply of the details and documents enumerated in paragraph 4(a) to (m) of application dated 19.4.2011 and objections raised by him to the jurisdiction of the Committee to frame certain charges. 2. Fifty members of the Rajya Sabha submitted a notice of motion for presenting an address to the President of India for removal of the petitioner, who was then posted as Chief Justice of the Karnataka High Court, under Article 217 read with Article 124(4) of the Constitution of India. The acts of misbehaviour allegedly committed by the petitioner were enumerated in the notice, which was accompanied by an explanatory note and documents in support of the allegations. For the sake of convenient ref...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 26 2011 (SC)

V.Gopal Vs. P.Ganaselvaudayakumari and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

1. Leave granted. 2. On December 5, 1991, a notice was issued under the hand of the Director, Social Welfare Department, Government of Tamil Nadu, inviting applications from persons working in the department for appointment to the post of P.G. Assistant in M.A. (Political Science) in the Government Higher Secondary School for the blind. The last date for submission of application was December 15, 1991. The educational qualifications required from the candidates were a Master's degree in Political Science and a Bachelor's degree in Education. Apart from the academic qualification prescribed in the notice, Government Order No.511-Education dated March 16, 1959, provided that no person would be eligible for appointment to a post of the School Assistant in Government School for the blind unless he possessed the Government Certificate of Competency in teaching the blind. The Government Order, however, made a relaxation, in case no suitable and qualified person was available and in that rega...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 26 2011 (SC)

State of Maharashtra and ors. Vs. Subhash Arjundas Kataria

Court : Supreme Court of India

1) The principle question which arises in these appeals is as to what is the true scope and correct purport of the expression “commodity in packaged form” under Section 2(b) of the Standards of Weights and Measures Act, 1976 (in short `the Act). In Civil Appeal No. 1117 of 2010, the specific question is whether the sun glasses can be considered “pre-packed commodity” under Rule 2(l) of the Standards of Weights and Measures (Packaged Commodities) Rules, 1977 (in short `the Rules). In the connected appeals, the product includes Titan watches, fixed wireless phones, sun glasses, electrical goods, home appliances, consumer electronics and Samsung Microwave Oven. The State of Maharashtra is the appellant in all these appeals. 2) For convenience, let us briefly state the facts in Civil Appeal No. 1117 of 2010. According to the respondent, he is engaged in the business of trading in sun glasses and has a counter on commission basis at Globus Stores, Bandra. On 17.10.20...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 26 2011 (SC)

State of Punjab and ors. Vs. Jagdish Kaur and ors

Court : Supreme Court of India

1. These two appeals, at the instance of the State of Punjab and its officials, are directed against orders passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court by which it knocked down the requirement of passing typing test in Punjabi at the speed of 30 words per minute (w.p.m.) as an eligibility criterion for promotion from class IV to class III posts in the State Government service. 2. Jagdish Kaur, the respondent in Civil Appeal No.2897 of 2006 was appointed as a Peon in the Government High School Vairwal, Tehsil Tarn Taran, District Amritsar, on February 21, 1978. Her appointment was made on compassionate grounds following her husband's death in harness on January 14, 1977. At the time of her appointment, she had passed matriculation examination in 3rd division. After joining the service, she passed the Senior Secondary School Examination from the Punjab School Education Board in 2nd division in the year 1992. According to her case, after passing the plus two examination, she became eligib...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //