Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8276 OF 200.Pepsu Road Transport Corporation Appellant (s) Versus National Insurance Company Respondent (s) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.:1. Breach of conditions under Section 149(2)(a) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 absolves the insurer of its liability to the insured. Section 149(2)(a)(ii) deals with the conditions regarding driving licence. In case the vehicle at the time of accident is driven by a person who is not duly licensed or by a person who has been disqualified from holding or obtaining a driving licence during the period of disqualification, the insurer is not liable for the compensation. In the instant case, we are called upon to deal with a situation where the driver allegedly possessing only a fake driving licence.2. Widow and two minot sons of late Gurjinder Singh Modi are claimants before the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chandigarh in M.A.C.T. No.63/481 filed in the year 2002. The allegation was t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1274 OF2013(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.5972/2012) PREM CHAND Appellant(s) :VERSUS: STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Respondent(s) ORDER Leave granted.2. Heard Ms. Radhika Gautam, learned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr. Ajay Marwah, learned counsel appearing for the State of Himachal Pradesh.3. The only question which arises in this appeal is as to whether the fine to the tune of Rs.60,000/- imposed on the appellant is steep. The appellant was charged under Section 324 & 326 of the Indian Penal Code. The Trial Court acquitted the appellant for the offences as charged. The High Court though allowed the appeal of the State, has taken a considerate view considering that nearly 12-13 years have gone by from the date of the incident till the matter was heard by it. The High Court retained the conviction under Section 324 of the IPC but imposed a fine of Rs.60,000/-.4. Counsel for the appellant has brou...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.7139 OF 201.[Arising out of S.L.P.(Civil) No.1676 of 2012]. Master Mallikarjun Appellant (s) Versus Divisional Manager, the National Insurance Company Limited & Anr. Respondent (s) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.: Leave granted.2. What is the just and fair compensation to be awarded to a child, who suffered disability in a motor accident, is the main point arising for consideration in this case. THE UNDISPUTED FACTS 3 Appellant at the age of 12 years was hit by a motorcycle on 05.06.2006. He suffered the following injuries: - a. (Right) lower 1/3 leg deformity, movements restricted diagnosis of fracture. b. Two abrasions over left elbow posteriorly over olecrenot both measuring 4x1 cms. c. Abrasion over dorsal aspect right hand at the basis of index finger.4. Negligence of the rider was proved. The child was treated as inpatient from 05.06.2006 to 01.08.2006, for 58 days. He was operated on 24.06.2006. Six months afte...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7031 of 2009 Commissioner of Central Excise, Jalandhar Appellant Versus M/s. Kay Kay Industries Respondent WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.7032 of 2009 WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.7034 of 2009 WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.7392 of 2010 WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.7393 of 2010 WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.7148 of 2013 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.26499 of 2008) JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, J.Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (C) No.26499 of 2008.2. The controversy that emerges for consideration in this batch of appeals, being consubstantial, was heard together and is disposed of by a common judgment. For the sake of convenience the facts from Civil Appeal No.7031 of 2009 are set out herein.3. The respondent-company availed deemed MODVAT credit of Rs.77,546/- during the quarter of March, 2000 on the strength of invoices issued by M/s. Sawan Mal Shibhu Mal Steel Re-Rolling Mills, Mandi Govindgarh. During MODVAT verification it was found that the supplier...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1273 OF2013(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.4808/2012) SOWMITHRI S. Appellant(s) :VERSUS: STATE OF ASSAM & ORS. Respondent(s) ORDER Leave granted.2. Heard Mr. Radhakrishnan, learned senior counsel in support of this petition and Mr. Balasubramanium, learned counsel appearing for the respondents.3. This appeal has been filed to challenge the judgment and order dated 5th June, 2012 rendered by the Gauhati High Court in Criminal Petition No.43/2010 which was filed by the appellant herein under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash the criminal case filed against him bearing GR Case No.965/2004. The appellant was being prosecuted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code for, allegedly, being responsible for the death of a civilian. The appellant filed Criminal Petition No.43/2010 submitting that he could not be proceeded in the regular criminal court. At the highest, he could be proceeded in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.7137 OF 201.(Arising out of SLP(C) No.21139 of 2011) KISHAN GOPAL & ANR. APPELLANTS Vs. LALA & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT V.Gopala Gowda, J.This appeal has been filed by the appellants questioning the correctness of the judgment dated 15th March, 2011 passed in SBCMA No.1283 of 2000 by the High Court of Judicature at Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, affirming the judgment and award dated 25.5.2000 of the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Tonk (for short 'the Tribunal') in MAC case No.7/93, urging various relevant facts and legal contentions in support of their claim made in this appeal.2. Necessary relevant facts are stated hereunder to appreciate the case of the appellants and also to find out whether the appellants are entitled for the reliefs as prayed in this appeal. The appellants are the parents of the deceased Tikaram, who died in a road accident on 19.07.1992 on account of rash and negligent dr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1079 OF 200.ECON ANTRI LTD. APPELLANT VS. ROM INDUSTRIES LTD. & ANR. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT (SMT.) RANJANA PRAKASH DESAI, J.1. On 13/10/2006, while granting leave in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.211 of 2005, this Court passed the following order: In our view, the judgment relied upon by the counsel for the appellant in the case of Saketh India Ltd. & Ors. v. India Securities Ltd. (1999) 3 SCC 1 requires reconsideration. Orders of the Honble the Chief Justice may be obtained for placing this matter before a larger Bench. Pursuant to the above order, this appeal is placed before us.2. Since the referral order states that the judgment of this Court in Saketh India Ltd. & Ors. v. India Securities Ltd.[1]. (Saketh) requires reconsideration, we must first refer to the said judgment. In that case, this Court identified the question of law involved in the appeal before it as under: W...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1517 OF 200.Kamlesh Prabhudas Tanna & Another ... Appellants Versus State of Gujarat ...Respondent JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, J.Assailing the legal acceptability of the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal No.531 of 2004 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court has given endorsement to the judgment passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.1, Jamnagar in Sessions Case No.158 of 2001 wherein the learned trial Judge had found the appellants guilty of the offences under Sections 304B, 306 and 498A read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC) and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 and imposed the sentence of rigorous imprisonment of seven years and a fine of Rs.1,000/- on the first score, five years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000/- on the second score, eighteen months rigorous imprisonment a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6815 OF 201.GOA COASTAL ZONE MG. AUTH. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS RUDRESH NAIK RESPONDENT(S) ORDER 1. Taken on board.2. The civil appeal being devoid of any merit deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed accordingly.3. In the peculiar facts of this case, we delete the costs of Rs.25,000/- imposed by the Tribunal. However, the appellant is granted another three weeks' time from today to comply with the orders and directions issued by the Tribunal. Ordered accordingly. ...........................J.(H.L. DATTU) ...........................J.(SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA) NEW DELHI; AUGUST 23 2013....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
[REPORTABLE]. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.7032/2013 (arising out of S.L.P.(Civil) No.20506 OF 2011.Union of India & Ors. .Appellants Vs. Shri G.R.Rama Krishna & Anr. ..Respondents JUDGMENT A.K.SIKRI,J.1. Leave granted.2. The respondent No.1 herein (hereinafter referred to as the respondent) was appointed as Engineering Assistant (Mechanical) in Andaman Lakshdeep Harbour Works (ALHW) on ad-hoc basis with effect from 17.4.1979. Though this ad-hoc period was of one year, the respondent continued to work in the capacity even thereafter without obtaining the approval of the Department of Personnel and Training. The services were continued as ALHW was facing lots of problems due to shortage of staff at various levels. He was later on promoted as Inspector of Works on ad-hoc with effect from 11.11.1984. This post was later on merged with that of Junior Engineer and thus the respondent was accorded the status of Junior Engineer.3. Next pro...
Tag this Judgment!