Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.11176 OF2013(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.34062 of 2013) Yogendra Singh Tomar ... Appellant Versus Bar Council for Uttarakhand and others ...Respondents JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, J.Leave granted.2. The appellant, a practising advocate, was duly elected as a Member of the Bar Council of Uttarakhand and being eligible to contest for the post of Chairman of the Bar Council filed the nomination papers for the said post, election for which was scheduled to be held on 19.1.2013. The election, as scheduled, was held on the date fixed and on the basis of the voting, the appellant and the third respondent received six votes of first preference each, respondent No.4 received three votes of first preference and four votes of first preference were declared invalid. The first preference votes secured by the respondent No.4 were eliminated and his second preference votes were counted. After counting of votes on the principle of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2100 of 2013 Ashfaq Ahmed Quereshi & Anr. Appellants Versus Namrata Chopra & Ors. Respondents ORDER Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J.1. This appeal has been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 15.3.2012 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in M.Cr.C. No.8882/2011, by which the High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings against the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in exercise of its power under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Cr.P.C.).2. Facts and circumstances giving rise to this appeal are that: A. The appellants entered into an agreement for sale of land admeasuring 1.10 acres of land out of 2.20 acres of total land on 26.11.2009 which had been claimed by the said respondents 1 & 2 to be of their exclusive ownership and for that appellants paid a sum of rupees fifty lakhs to the said respondents as earnest money o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL/CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.120 OF2012Manohar Lal Sharma .Petitioner Versus The Principal Secretary and Ors. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.463 OF2012WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.429 OF2012WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.498 OF2012WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.515 OF2012AND WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.283 OF2013ORDER R.M. LODHA, J.The question for the purposes of this order really resolves itself into this: whether the approval of the Central Government is necessary under Section 6A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (DSPE Act for short) in a matter where the inquiry/investigation into the crime under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act for short) is being monitored by the Court. It is not necessary to set out the facts in detail, suffice, however, to say that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has registered preliminary enquiries (PEs) against unknown public servants...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5634 OF2008Union of India & Ors. Appellants Versus Maharaja Shree Umaid Mills Respondent With C.A. No.5635/2008, C.A. No.5636/2008, C.A. No.5922/2008, C.A. No.6506/2008, C.A. No.11175 OF2013@ SLP (C) No.28055 /2008, C.A. No.6886/2008, C.A. No.906/2009, C.A. No.895/2009, C.A. No.1296/2009 AND C.A. No.11174 OF2013@ SLP (C) No.938/2010 1 JUDGMENT1ANIL R. DAVE, J.1. Leave granted in SLP (C) No 28055 of 2008 and SLP (C) No.938 of 2010.2. As a common question of law is involved in all these appeals, at the request of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, all the appeals were heard together and they are decided by this common judgment.3. The issue involved in all these appeals is with regard to the liability to pay interest under the provisions of Section 112 of the Finance Act, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as the 2000 Act), which pertains to liability of the assessee to pay interest under the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL/CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.120 OF2012Manohar Lal Sharma .Petitioner Versus The Principal Secretary and Ors. Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.463 OF2012WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.429 OF2012WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.498 OF2012WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.515 OF2012AND WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO.283 OF2013ORDER R.M. LODHA, J.The question for the purposes of this order really resolves itself into this: whether the approval of the Central Government is necessary under Section 6A of the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (DSPE Act for short) in a matter where the inquiry/investigation into the crime under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act for short) is being monitored by the Court. It is not necessary to set out the facts in detail, suffice, however, to say that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) has registered preliminary enquiries (PEs) against unknown public servants...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2114 2013 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.1233 of 2012) J.L. Soman & Ors. ... Appellants Vs. State of Bihar & Anr. ... Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2115 2013 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.1232 of 2012) AND CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2116 2013 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.1234 of 2012) ORDER V.Gopala Gowda,J.Leave granted.2. These criminal appeals have been filed by the appellants as they are aggrieved by the final common judgment and order dated 29.07.2011 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna dismissing their petitions for the reason that their earlier criminal misc. petitions were dismissed by a common order dated 12.06.2007 after hearing the parties which fact is admitted by the appellants but they again approached the High Court for similar relief. Hence, the High Court was not inclined to interfere with the same in the said criminal misc. petitions and dismissed the same...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.11229 OF2013(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.26321 of 2012) Yazdani International P. Ltd. Appellant Versus Auroglobal Comtrade P. Ltd. & Ors. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.11230 OF2013(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.26319 of 2012) CIVIL APPEAL No.11231 OF2013(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.26922 of 2012) CIVIL APPEAL No.11232 OF2013(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.26894 of 2012) CIVIL APPEAL No.11233-11234 OF2013(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 27013-27014 of 2012) CIVIL APPEAL No.11235 OF2013(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 27477 of 2012) CIVIL APPEAL No.11236 OF2013(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 27480 of 2012) CIVIL APPEAL No.11237 OF2013(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.27481 of 2012) CIVIL APPEAL No.11238 OF2013(Arising out of Special Leave Petitio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.11150 OF2013(@ out of SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No.33402/2012) Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and Ors. Appellants Versus Kohinoor CTNL Infrastructure Company Private Limited and another Respondents JUDGMENT H.L. Gokhale J.Leave granted.2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 9.7.2012 passed by a Division Bench of the Bombay High Court whereby Writ Petition No.143/2012 filed by the respondents was allowed, and which quashed the stop work notice dated 22.12.2011 issued by Executive Engineer (Building Proposal) City-III, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai, and order dated 27.4.2012 passed by the Additional Municipal Commissioner restricting to four floors the height of Wing C (providing for public parking lot- PPL for short) of the buildings being constructed on Plot No.46 of Town Planning Scheme-III, N.C.Kelkar Road, Shivaji Park, Dadar, Mumbai. Dispute between the partie...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1613 OF2008Chhotan Sao & Another Appellants Versus State of Bihar Respondent JUDGMENT Chelameswar, J.1. The two appellants herein were convicted for the offences under sections 304B and 498A IPC by the Additional Sessions Judge VI, Gaya and the same was continued in appeal by the High Court of Patna.2. Initially three accused were charged for the offences under sections 328, 304B and 498A Indian Penal Code and sections 3 and 5 of Dowry Prohibition Act on the allegation that they harassed and were responsible for the unnatural death of one Babita Devi, the daughter of PW1 and PW6, mother and father respectively. All three accused were found guilty of the offences they were charged with by the trial court. Each of the accused was awarded punishment for seven years for the offence under section 304B IPC and two years for the offence under section 498A IPC. However, the trial court did not award...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 11227-11228 of 2013 (S.L.P (C) Nos. 38901-38902 of 2013 arising out of CC1880818809 of 2013) Bhusawal Municipal Council Appellant Versus Nivrutti Ramchandra Phalak & Ors. Respondents JUDGMENT Dr. B. S. CHAUHAN, J.1. Delay condoned.2. Leave granted.3. These appeals have been filed with a delay of 308 days against the orders dated 20.4.2012 and 5.3.2013 passed by the High Court of Bombay (Aurangabad Bench) in Civil Application No.1724/2012 and Writ Petition (C) No.1586/2013 respectively, by which the High Court has granted interim relief to the extent of payment of 50% of the enhanced amount of compensation as awarded by the reference court in land acquisition proceedings.4. Facts and circumstances giving rise to these appeals are that: A. The land in dispute i.e. agricultural land bearing Gat No.196/2B/1 to 196/2B/7 admeasuring 4.25 R. situated at Bhusawal, Distt. Jalgaon, Maharashtra, was acquir...
Tag this Judgment!