Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.9972 OF2014(Arising out of SLP(C) No.2339 OF2014 KALA DEVI & ORS. APPELLANTS Vs. BHAGWAN DAS CHAUHAN & ORS. .RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.Leave granted.2. This appeal has been filed by the appellant-claimants against the Judgment and order dated 31.07.2013 passed in First Appeal No.413 of 2007 by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla, wherein the High Court has partly allowed the appeal filed by the appellant-claimants.3. The necessary relevant facts are stated hereunder to appreciate the case with a view to ascertain whether the appellants are entitled for relief as prayed in this appeal. On 15.12.2003, Roshan Chauhan, husband of the appellant Kala Devi was travelling in a vehicle bearing No.HP-09A-0897(207 TATA), which was being driven by respondent No.3 Keshav Ram. When they reached near Narla, Tehsil Theog, District Shimla, the vehicle got stuck due to snow surfaced road. Roshan and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.906 OF2012Nand Kumar Appellant(s) Versus State of Chhattisgarh Respondent(s) WITH Criminal Appeal No.913 of 2012 Criminal Appeal No.912 of 2012 Criminal Appeal No.911 of 2012 Criminal Appeal No.908 of 2012 Criminal Appeal Nos. 900-902 of 2012 Criminal Appeal Nos.909-910 of 2012 Criminal Appeal No.914 of 2012 JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. These appeals have been directed against the final common judgment dated 11.05.2007 passed by the High Court of Chhatisgarh at Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal Nos. 785, 866, 762, 868, 761, 853, 875, 970, 851, 873 and 842 of 2001, whereby the High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of the appellants herein under Section 302 read with Sections 149 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short IPC) which was awarded to them by the Sessions Court whereas the High Court allowed the Criminal Appeals of other accused and acquitted them of the charges by setti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.906 OF2012Nand Kumar Appellant(s) Versus State of Chhattisgarh Respondent(s) WITH Criminal Appeal No.913 of 2012 Criminal Appeal No.912 of 2012 Criminal Appeal No.911 of 2012 Criminal Appeal No.908 of 2012 Criminal Appeal Nos. 900-902 of 2012 Criminal Appeal Nos.909-910 of 2012 Criminal Appeal No.914 of 2012 JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. These appeals have been directed against the final common judgment dated 11.05.2007 passed by the High Court of Chhatisgarh at Bilaspur in Criminal Appeal Nos. 785, 866, 762, 868, 761, 853, 875, 970, 851, 873 and 842 of 2001, whereby the High Court upheld the conviction and sentence of the appellants herein under Section 302 read with Sections 149 and 148 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short IPC) which was awarded to them by the Sessions Court whereas the High Court allowed the Criminal Appeals of other accused and acquitted them of the charges by setti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.242 OF2012B.D. Khunte Appellant Versus Union of India & Ors. Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2328 OF2014(@ Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.8457 of 2014 Crl. M.P. No.15455 of 2014) JUDGMENT T.S. THAKUR, J.Criminal Appeal No.242 of 2012:1. High Court of Delhi has, while dismissing writ petition No.4652 of 2010 filed by the appellant, affirmed the orders passed by the Armed Forces Tribunal, New Delhi and that passed by the Summary General Court Martial holding the appellant guilty for an offence punishable under Section 69 of the Army Act read with Section 302 of the Ranbir Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo imprisonment for life besides dismissal from service.2. Enrolled on 30th July, 2004, the appellant was posted at Razdan in Baramulla Sector of the State Jammu and Kashmir. Deceased Sub Randhir Singh was serving as a Senior JCO/Post Commander at the very same place of posting. The...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2327 OF2014(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.9751/2011) BINOD KUMAR & ORS. .. Appellant Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. ..Respondents JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI, J.Leave granted.2. Whether the charges under Section 406 IPC and the criminal complaint for criminal breach of trust for allegedly retaining the bill amount payable to respondent No.2 is liable to be quashed is the point falling for consideration in this appeal.3. Payment of bill pertaining to the contract executed by the second respondent in Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University had a chequered history. Case of second respondent is that contract was entered into between him and K.S.S. College on 4.9.1990 for the construction of building of K.S.S. College, Lakhisarai, a constituent unit of Tilka Manjhi Bhagalpur University. According to second respondent, since money and requisite materials were not given to him in time, the work was not comple...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2475 of 2009 Munni @ Syed Akbar . Appellant VERSUS State of Inspector Of Police, All Women Police Station, Gobichettipalayam, Erode .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, J.1. This appeal at the instance of A1, who is the appellant herein, is directed against the judgment of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court dated 16.08.2007, passed in Criminal Appeal No.434 of 2006.2. Brief facts which are required to be stated are that the appellant is the husband of the deceased Gulsara Banu. Along with the appellant, his parents were also proceeded against, who were arrayed as A2 and A3. All the three accused were charged for offences under Sections 498(A), 302 and 201 of I.P.C. The parents of the appellant viz., A2 and A3 were found guilty of the offences under Section 498(A) of I.P.C. as well as under Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. A2 who was also charged under S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.9951 OF2014(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.15445 of 2010) HUDA & Anr. ... Appellants Versus Kedar Nath ... Respondent JUDGMENT ANIL R. DAVE, J.1. Leave granted.2. Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 10th December, 2009 in R.S.A. No.790 of 2008 delivered by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh, this appeal has been filed by the original defendant Haryana Urban Development Authority, through its Chief Administrator.3. The facts giving rise to the present litigation in a nutshell are as under :- The present respondent had participated in an auction conducted by the appellants for disposal of certain booths situated in Sector 9 at Panchkula and had offered the highest bid of Rs.4 lakhs for booth no.103 situated in the said sector. As he was the highest bidder, subject to the conditions of the auction, he was allotted the said booth vide Memo No.12351 dated 14th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1381 OF2011Mallella Shyamsunder Appellant (s) Versus State of Andhra Pradesh Respondent (s) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.: Nemo moriturus praesumitur mentire literally means no one at the point of death is presumed to lie. Nobody normally may lie and die for fear of meeting his maker. Acceptability and reliability of statement made by a person who is about to die, which statement, in common parlance, is known as dying declaration, has been the subject matter of several reported decisions of this Court and, therefore, it is not necessary to add one more to the same. However, for the purpose of understanding the first principles, we shall refer to a Constitution Bench decision in Laxman v. State of Maharashtra[1]., wherein at paragraph-3, it is held as follows:3. The juristic theory regarding acceptability of a dying declaration is that such declaration is made in extremity, when the party is at the point of death a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELALTE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 9949-9950 OF2014(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.35800-35801 of 2011) Rathnavathi & Another Appellant(s) VERSUS Kavita Ganashamdas Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. Leave granted.2. The plaintiff filed two suits, one for specific performance of agreement and other for grant of permanent injunction in relation to the suit house. The trial court vide common judgment and decree dated 16.10.2001 dismissed both the suits. The first appellate court, i.e., the High Court, in appeal, by impugned judgment and decree dated 08.09.2011 reversed the judgment and decree of the trial court and decreed both the suits in appeal, against the defendants. Being aggrieved by the judgment and decree of the High Court, Defendants 1 and 3 have approached this Court in the instant civil appeals.3. The question arises for consideration in these appeals is whether the High Court was justified in allowing the fir...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.9947 OF2014(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.19555 of 2012) Zarina Siddiqui Appellant versus A. Ramalingam alias R. Amarnathan ..Respondent JUDGMENT M.Y. EQBAL, J.Leave granted.2. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 1.3.2012 passed by the High Court of Karnataka whereby Regular First Appeal No.265 of 1999 filed by the defendant-respondent was allowed and the judgment and decree passed by the trial court in the suit of the appellant-plaintiff was set aside.3. The facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the respondent- first defendant is the absolute owner of 1/3rd undivided share in the property bearing no.43, Mission Road, Bangalore (hereinafter referred to as the suit schedule property) and his elder brother-second defendant is his power of attorney holder. It is the case of the plaintiff that on 25.6.1979, the second defendant-respondent...
Tag this Judgment!