Court : Supreme Court of India
Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, J. 1. Unsuccessful appellant in the Writ Appeal before the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore is the appellant before us. This appeal is directed against the common judgment in W.A. Nos. 1936/2005 (LR) along with W.A. Nos. 1941/2005, 1946/2005 and 2202 of 2005(LR). The appellant is a religious Mutt called ‘Kannada Mutt’. Land of 197 acres was granted as Jagir to the Mutt in Survey Nos. 9, 10, 12 and 13 of Bettegeri village, Ammathy Hobli, Virajpet Taluk, Coorg District in the year 1809 by the then Ruler of Kodagu, Sri Veerarajendra Wodeyar. By a mortgage deed dated 1.3.1955, the predecessor of present Mathadhipathi stated to have mortgaged possession of 175.60 acres out of 197 acres of lands in favour of the predecessor-in-title of the present contesting respondents. By yet another mortgage deed dated 5.4.1967, a second mortgage deed in favour of the very same parties in respect of 17 acres of land was stated to have...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J. 1. These appeals have been preferred against the impugned judgment and order dated 4.1.2008, passed by the High Court of Rajasthan (Jaipur Bench) in D.B. Crl.A. Nos. 1250 and 1749 of 2003 by way of which, the High Court has dismissed the aforesaid appeals and affirmed the judgment and order dated 5.8.2003 of the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track) No. 1, Jaipur District in Sessions Case No. 19 of 2002 by way of which, the appellant stood convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 376 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, (hereinafter referred to as `the IPC’), and was awarded a sentence of life imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs.1,000/- under Section 302 IPC; 10 years rigorous imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs.1,000/- under Section 376 IPC, and rigorous imprisonment of 5 years alongwith a fine of Rs.500/- under Section 201 IPC, and in default of depositing such fine, to further suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of six mo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.696 OF 201.(SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(CRL.)NO.9953 OF 2012.RAJIV KUMAR & ORS. APPELLANTS VERSUS RAKSHA KUMARI RESPONDENT ORDER 1. Leave granted.2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order passed by the Punjab & Haryana High Court at Chandigarh in Criminal Miscellaneous No.5205 of 2012 (O & M), dated 31.10.2012. By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court has dismissed the petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (the code, for short), to quash the Criminal Complaint Case No.108 of 2003, dated 17.09.2003.3. When the matter was posted before the High Court, the High Court had issued notice to explore the possibility of arriving at a compromise.4. However, on a later date, when the learned counsel for the parties informed the Court that settlement between the parties could not take place, the learned Judge, without considering the petition on merit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4282 OF 201.[Arising out of SLP (Civil) NO.29831 of 2011]. REGISTRAR GENERAL, CALCUTTA HIGH COURT .. APPELLANT Versus SHRINIVAS PRASAD SHAH AND OTHERS .. RESPONDENTS J U D G M E M T K. S. Radhakrishnan, J 1.Leave granted.2. The question raised in this case is whether the Public Service Commission of West Bengal (for short the Commission) was justified in considering the application of respondent No.1 as a general candidate for recruitment to the West Bengal Judicial Service Examination, 2007 rather than a member of the Scheduled Tribe Community.3. The Commission circulated a notification on 17th January, 2007 for the information to the candidates on 17th February, 2007 of its conducting West Bengal Judicial Service Examination 2007. In response to the said information the respondent submitted his application by paying an amount of Rs.200/-, as required by the candidates in the general category in orde...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION(CIVIL) NO.9967 OF 201.Vidya Dhar & Ors. Petitioners Versus Multi Screen Media Pvt. Ltd. Respondent JUDGMENT ALTAMAS KABIR, C.J.I.1. The three petitioners before us are not detained in judicial custody in the Tihar Jail on being convicted under Section 120B of Indian Penal Code read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.2. The petitioner No.3 was the Chief Minister of the State of Haryana from 1999 to 2005 and during his tenure 3206 Junior Basic Trained Teachers were recruited in the year 2000. During that time, one Shri Sanjiv Kumar, IAS, was the Director, Primary Education, Government of Haryana.3. From 2000 onwards, upon certain facts being brought to the knowledge of the Government of Haryana, several disciplinary and vigilance inquiries were initiated against the said Shri Sanjiv Kumar. An FIR was registered against him under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J1. Leave granted.2. The question raised in this case is whether the Public Service Commission of West Bengal (for short ‘the Commission’) was justified in considering the application of respondent No.1 as a general candidate for recruitment to the West Bengal Judicial Service Examination, 2007 rather than a member of the Scheduled Tribe Community.3. The Commission circulated a notification on 17th January, 2007 for the information to the candidates on 17th February, 2007 of its conducting West Bengal Judicial Service Examination 2007. In response to the said information the respondent submitted his application by paying an amount of Rs.200/-, as required by the candidates in the general category in order to appear for the examination of 2007. In the application form he had mentioned that he belonged to ‘Gonda Community’ - Scheduled Tribe Community and also attached a certificate from the Director, Backward Class Welfare, West Bengal. The Com...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
SudhansuJyoti Mukhopadhaya, J. The present appeal is filed against the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No. 1831 and 2071 of 2003. By the impugned judgment dated 29th July, 2011, the Rajasthan High Court upheld the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Tribunal’) and observed as follows: “13. In the situation, in the light of the above detail and analysis it appears that the learned tribunal’s basis of calculating amount of compensation might be erroneous but in totality determined, assessed and awarded total amount of compensation Rs.14,93,700/- is proper and justified, and there is no adequate basis for increasing or reducing it. Therefore, judgment dated 21.06.2003 by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur is affirmed and appeals by the appellants and Insurance Company are dismissed.” 2. The factual matrix of the case is that on 14th September, 199...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5513 OF 201.(arising out of SLP(C)No.6367 of 2012) VIMAL KANWAR & ORS. . APPELLANT VERSUS KISHORE DAN & ORS. .RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J.The present appeal is filed against the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench in S.B. Civil Misc. Appeal No.1831 and 2071 of 2003. By the impugned judgment dated 29th July, 2011, the Rajasthan High Court upheld the compensation awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) and observed as follows:13. In the situation, in the light of the above detail and analysis it appears that the learned tribunals basis of calculating amount of compensation might be erroneous but in totality determined, assessed and awarded total amount of compensation Rs.14,93,700/- is proper and justified, and there is no adequate basis for increasing or reducing it. Therefore, judgment dated 21.06.20...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION 1 CRIMINAL APPEAL No.684 OF 201.(Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.7293 of 2009) Madhao & Anr. .... Appellant(s) Versus State of Maharashtra & Anr. .... Respondent(s) 2 WITH 3 4 CRIMINAL APPEAL No.685 OF 201.(Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.7324 of 2009) 5 CRIMINAL APPEAL No.686 OF 201.(Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.7332 of 2009) 6 CRIMINAL APPEAL No.687 OF 201.(Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.7693 of 2009) JUDGMENT P.Sathasivam,J.1) Leave granted in all the special leave petitions8. CRIMINAL APPEAL not OF 201.(Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No.7293 of 2009) 2) This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 02.09.2009 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in Criminal Application No.3112 of 2006 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellants herein while confirming the order dated 27.09.2005, passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1421 OF 200.Md. Ishaque and Others .. Appellants Versus State of West Bengal and Others ..Respondents JUDGMENT K. S. RADHAKRISHNAN, J.1. This appeal arises out of a common judgment and order dated 14.8.2006 passed by the High Court of Calcutta in CRA No.425 of 2001and CRA No.463 of 2001, whereby the High Court confirmed the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellants.2. The prosecution version is that on 5.7.1983 at about 5 AM to 5.30 AM, some 200-250 villagers, which included the accused persons as well, armed with various weapons like Lathi, Ladna, Farsa, Hasua and Ballam surrounded the village Siktahar. The accused persons forced out a number of persons from their houses, assaulted them in various ways and ultimately took four of them in tie-bound condition to a place called Hijul Pakur Field which is some distance away from village Siktahar and they assaulted them with various weapons ...
Tag this Judgment!