Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (Civil) No.853 OF2014VARUN SAINI & ORS. ... PETITIONERS VERSUS GURU GOBIND SINGH INDRAPRASTHA UNIVERSITY ... RESPONDENT WITH WRIT PETITION(C) No.854/2014 WRIT PETITION(C) No.855/2014 WRIT PETITION(C) No.857/2014 WRIT PETITION(C) No.883/2014 WRIT PETITION(C) No.867/2014 WRIT PETITION(C) No.884/2014 JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, J Education is the spine of any civilised society. Formal education has its own significance, for it depends upon systemic imparting of learning regard being had to the syllabus prescribed for the course and further allowing space for cultivation by individual endeavour. The sacrosanctity of formal education gains more importance in the field of technical studies because theory, practical training and application in the field cumulatively operate to make a student an asset to the country and, in a way, enables him to achieve excellence as contemplated under Article 51A of the Constitut...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.28189 OF2014(CC NO.2940 OF2014 WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO28195-96 OF2014(CC NO.1707 OF2014 RAUNAQ EDUCATION FOUNDATION .... PETITIONER VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA & ORS. ..... RESPONDENTS ORDER ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.1. Delay condoned. Heard on merits.2. These petitions have been preferred against the Judgment and Order dated 27th September, 2013 passed in LPA No.1687 of 2013, Order dated 16th September, 2013 passed in LPA No.1618 of 2013 and Order dated 16th December, 2013 passed in RA LP No.133 of 2013 in LPA No.1618 of 2013 by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh, upholding the order of the learned Single Judge, declining to interfere with the Order of the Government of Haryana dated 18th September, 1998, resuming land measuring 76 acres 5 kanals and 5 marlas, except land measuring 7 acres left to be retained by the petitioner foundation.3. The case of the petition...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2202 OF2014[Arising Out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.7185 of 2013]. |ANANDA POOJARY |.....APPELLANT(S) | |VERSUS | | |STATE OF KARNATAKA |.....RESPONDENT(S) | JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.Leave granted.2. By this appeal, the appellant Ananda Poojary questions the legality and validity of the judgment dated 14.02.2013 passed by the High Court of Karnataka, whereby the appellant's conviction for offences under Section 302 and Section 201 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC') has been upheld. The High Court has also upheld the sentence passed by the Sessions Judge, Udupi. The result is that the appellant is made to suffer incarceration for life for allegedly murdering his own foster mother.3. It is an admitted position, accepted by the two courts below, that the deceased Dorathi Kutinho, who was a Teacher, had brought Ananda Poojary (the appellant) who was her student to her house and had...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6862 OF2014[Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.6757 of 2012) Rajni Rani & Anr. ... Appellants Versus Khairati Lal & Ors. ...Respondents JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, J.The centrirorial issue that has stemmed in this appeal by grant of special leave is whether an order of dismissal of the counter-claim being barred by principles of Order 2, Rule 2 of the Code of Civil Procedure (C.P.C.) can be set aside in exercise of revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the C.P.C. or in exercise of power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution of India or is it required to be assailed by preferring an appeal. The factual score need not be exposited in detail. Suffice it to state that one Phoolan Rani, wife of Om Prakash, and another instituted Civil Suit No.107B of 2003 seeking a declaration that they are the owners in possession of the land admeasuring 1/9th share in the suit land and further praying for perm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
(REPORTABLE) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1740 OF2007Dr. Thakar Singh (D) by Lrs.& Anr. Appellants Vs. Sh. Mula Singh (D) thr. LR. & Ors. Respondents JUDGMENT R.F. NARIMAN, J.1. In this Civil Appeal an interesting question arises for decision. One Nand Singh and Dr. Thakar Singh filed a suit for recovery for possession of various shops cum vacant sites situated in the main Bazar of Moga Town against 14 defendants. The suit property had been mortgaged to one Suba Singh and Saudagar Singh, defendants 1 and 2, for a sum of Rs.26,000/- vide registered mortgage deed dated 9th March 1942. After taking an additional amount of Rs.3,000/- from the aforesaid Suba Singh and Saudagar Singh, the plaintiffs executed an additional registered mortgage deed dated 3rd March 1943. The material terms of the mortgage deed dated 9th March 1942, with which we are concerned, reads as follows:Now we the executants while in our full senses and with our free ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.9699 OF2014[Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.33699 of 2011]. Sameer Singh and Another ... Appellants Versus Abdul Rab and Others ... Respondents JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, J.Leave granted. The Universal Construction Company, the respondent No.3 herein, instituted Civil Suit No.480 of 1971 in the High Court of Calcutta invoking its original civil jurisdiction for realization of a sum of Rs.2,15,289.28 paise from the Engineers Syndicate (India) Private Limited, the 4th respondent herein, and an ex parte decree was passed in the suit. After obtaining the decree, respondent No.3 assigned the same in favour of Abdul Rab, respondent No.1 herein, on 20th May, 2005. After the deed of assignment was given the formal shape, the 1st respondent moved the High Court of Calcutta and got the said decree transferred to the Court of Sub Judge-I, Jamshedpur for execution by way of attachment and sale of immovable properties of the 4th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION INTERLOCUTORY APPLICATION NO.86 OF2014IN WRIT PETITION(C) No.435 OF2012Goa Foundation .Petitioner versus Union of India and others .Respondents And in the matter of: M/s Bandekar Brothers Private Limited .Applicant ORDER1 Through the instant interlocutory application, the applicant-M/s Bandekar Brothers Private Limited has prayed for a direction to the concerned authorities for restraining them from auctioning the mined mineral ore produced by the applicant prior to 22.11.2007, through e- auction. This prayer is premised on the foundation, that the applicant's above stated mined mineral ore cannot be sold, under the orders passed by this Court. In this behalf, it was the contention of the learned counsel for the applicant, that the applicant had mined 67,285 metric tons of iron ore (Grade 63.19% Fe approximately) prior to 22.11.2007, and therefore, the applicant should be released the aforesaid iron ore, with the right to dispos...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S).729-732 OF2010|RAJIB RANJAN & ORS. |..APPELLANT(S) | | | | |VERSUS | | |R. VIJAYKUMAR |..RESPONDENT(S) | JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.These appeals are filed by four appellants, who were arrayed as accused persons in the complaint case No.183/2007 filed by the respondent herein before the Court of Judicial Magistrate No.II, Tiruchirapalli, Tamil Nadu. The complaint has been filed under Sections 120-B, 468, 420 and 500 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC'). The learned Judicial Magistrate took cognizance of the said complaint and summoned the appellants. The appellants (who were arrayed as accused Nos.3, 4, 5 and6) challenged the said summoning orders and sought quashment of the complaint by filing petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Cr.P.C.) inasmuch as according to them the allegations in the complaint did not make out any offence under the afo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.46 OF2007A K DEVAIAH .Appellant Versus STATE OF KARNATAKA .Respondent JUDGMENT M.Y. EQBAL, J.The instant Criminal Appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 25-8-2005 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore in Criminal Appeal No.828 of 1999 whereby setting aside the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court allowed the appeal filed by State and the accused-appellant herein has been convicted for the offences punishable under Sections 3, 4, and 6 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and Sections 498-A and 304-B of the Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC). The XXV Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bangalore had acquitted the accused of the offences punishable under aforesaid sections.2. The prosecution case in a nutshell is that one Smt. Leelavati was married to the appellant on 16.4.1989 and was living in the house of the appellant at Konanakunte in Bangalore. Besides a...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1812-1815 OF2010STATE OF ORISSA & ANR. ... APPELLANT (S) VERSUS FAKIR CHARAN SETHI ... RESPONDENT (S) (DEAD THROUGH LRS) & ORS. JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J.1. Civil Appeal No.1812 of 2010 arising from the common judgment and order dated 30.7.2009 passed by the High Court of Orissa in F.A.No.10 of 2001 affirming the decree dated 29.7.2000 passed by the learned Trial Court may be conveniently treated as the main appeal for consideration. In that event the fate of the connected appeals would stand determined by the outcome of the aforesaid Civil Appeal i.e. C.A. No.1812 of 2010.2. The respondents 1 and 2, as plaintiffs, instituted Title Suit No.620 of 1998 in the Court of learned Civil Judge, (Senior Division) Bhubaneswar seeking a declaration of occupancy rights in their favour as well as for affirmation of their possession as tenants in respect of the suit land. A further direction to the defend...
Tag this Judgment!