Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.346 OF2015(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.1532 of 2014) JASMER SINGH ... APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA & ANR. ...RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.Leave granted. This appeal is filed by the workman, aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court in L.P.A. No.2245 of 2011 (O & M) dated 19.09.2013 affirming the judgment and order of the learned Single Judge dated 7.04.2010 passed in C.W.P. No.9532 of 2001 by which Award dated 27.07.2000 of the Industrial Tribunal-cum-Labour Court, Panipat, in Reference No.205 of 1997 is set aside, raising certain questions of law and urging various legal grounds in support of the same. In nutshell, facts are stated for the purpose of finding out whether the impugned judgment and order of the Division Bench warrants interference by this Court in this appeal. The appellant-workman was working as daily paid worker in the offic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.347 OF2015(Arising out of SLP(C) No.976 OF2014 KANHSINGH & ANR ...APPELLANTS Vs. TUKARAM & ORS ...RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.Leave granted. This appeal has been filed by the appellants against the impugned Judgment and order dated 23.07.2012 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore wherein the High Court partly allowed and disposed of the Miscellaneous Appeal No.2918 of 2009 filed by the appellants. The necessary relevant facts are stated hereunder to appreciate the case with a view to determine whether the appellants are entitled for relief as prayed in this appeal. On 02.07.2006, Deependra Singh Chouhan, son of the appellants herein, aged 27 years, was driving the motor cycle No.MP-09-LM-8244 along with his friend Ashok Sharma. The aforesaid motor cycle which was being ridden by Deependra met with an accident when it was hit by tanker No.MP-14-B-6645 driven by Tukaram, respondent...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 348-349 OF2015(Arising out of SLP(C) Nos. 4897-4898 OF2014 SMT.NEETA W/O KALLAPPA KADOLKAR & ORS.ETC. ...APPELLANTS Vs. THE DIV. MANAGER, MSRTC, KOLHAPUR ...RESPONDENT JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.Leave granted.2. The appellants have filed these appeals against the impugned common judgment and order dated 05.06.2013 passed in M.F.A. No.21286 of 2012 (MV) C/W M.F.A. No.21290 of 2012 by the High Court of Karnataka, Circuit Bench at Dharwad, wherein the High Court has partly allowed the appeals filed by the appellants.3. The necessary relevant facts are stated hereunder to appreciate the case with a view to ascertain whether the appellants are entitled to the relief of enhancement of compensation as prayed in these appeals. On 22.03.2011, the deceased Kallappa Gunavant Kadolkar, and his cousin Vijay Kadolkar (both aged about 33 years) were returning from Shinnoli village towards their village Kangra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELALTE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.324 OF2015(ARISING OUT OF SLP(C) No.14024/2013) Shasidhar & Others Appellant(s) VERSUS Smt. Ashwini Uma Mathad & Anr. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal is filed by the defendants against the judgment and order dated 06.12.2012 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka Circuit Bench at Dharwad in Regular First Appeal No.3052 of 2010, which in turn arises out of the judgment and decree dated 10.02.2010 passed by the Ist Additional Civil Judge (Sr. Division) at Hubli in Original Suit No.73 of 2004.3. In order to appreciate the short issue involved in this appeal, it is necessary to state a few relevant facts:4. One Basavantayya Revanayya Mathad was married to Shantakka Mathad (defendant No.2). Out of this wedlock, three children were born - one son Shashidhar (defendant no.1) and two daughters - Rajeshwari (Died in 2003) and - Gayatri (Died in...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.335 OF2005VINAYAK NARAYAN DEOSTHALI ... APPELLANT VERSUS CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION ... RESPONDENT JUDGMENT N.V. RAMANA, J.This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 3rd December, 2004 of the Special Court (Trial of offences relating to transactions in Securities) at Bombay in Special Case No.3 of 1995 whereby the Special Judge convicted and sentenced the appellant for the offences under Sections 409/120B, 403, 477-A/109, IPC and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.2. The prosecution story, briefly stated, is that during the year 1991, the appellant (accused No.1) while he was working as Assistant Manager in the Securities Department of UCO Bank, Hamam Street Branch, Mumbai in connivance with a colleague of the Bank (accused No.2) hatched a criminal conspiracy with the infamous share & stock broker of Bombay of those times, Harshad S. M...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 297-298 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos.13121-13122 of 2011) Sudhir N. & Ors. ...Appellants Versus State of Kerala & Ors. ...Respondents With CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 299-300 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos.11597-11598 of 2011) CIVIL APPEAL No.301 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.11606 of 2011) CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 302-303 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos.13123-13124 of 2011) CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 304-305 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos.13126-13127 of 2011) AND CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 306-307 of 2015 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos.13130-13131 of 2011) JUDGMENT T.S. THAKUR, J.1. Leave granted.2. These appeals arise out of a judgment and order dated 30th March 2011 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in Writ Petitions No.1014 of 2009 and 2610 of 2010 filed by the respondents whereby the High Court has allowed the said petitions with the direction that selection of in- service m...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 224-225 OF2015KAMLESH AGGARWAL .........APPELLANT Vs. NARAIN SINGH DABBAS & ANR. ......RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT V.GOPALA GOWDA, J.Aggrieved by the dismissal of her First Appeal Nos. 645 and 646 of 2013 vide order dated 8.1.2014 by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, purported to have been filed under Section 21 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 (for short "the Act"), against the order dated 30.7.2013 passed by the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Lucknow in Appeal Nos. 2082 and 2083 of 2010, the appellant has filed these appeals, urging various relevant facts and legal contentions seeking for setting aside the said order. The brief facts of the case are stated as under :- The appellant filed a Complaint No.24 of 1998 before the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Ghaziabad (for short "the District Forum") against Navchetna Sahkari Awas Samiti Ltd.-the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.193 OF2015[ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO.32039 OF2012 M/s. Kailash Nath Associates ...Appellant Versus Delhi Development Authority & Anr. ...Respondents JUDGMENT R.F. Nariman, J.Leave granted.2. The present appeal arises out of a public auction conducted by the Delhi Development Authority ("DDA") wherein the appellant made the highest bid for Plot No.2-A, Bhikaji Cama Place, District Centre, New Delhi for 3.12 Crores (Rupees Three Crores Twelve Lakhs). As per the terms and conditions of the auction, the appellant, being the highest bidder, deposited a sum of Rs.78,00,000/- (Rupees Seventy Eight Lakhs), being 25% of the bid amount, with the DDA, this being earnest money under the terms of the conditions of auction. The relevant provisions in the conditions of auction read as follows: "(ii) The highest bidder shall, at the fall of the hammer, pay to the Delhi Development Authority through the officer co...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.34 OF2015(arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.2961 of 2013) |SUNIL BHARTI MITTAL |.....APPELLANT(S) | |VERSUS | | |CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION |.....RESPONDENT(S) | W I T H CRIMINAL APPEAL No.35 OF2015(arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.3161 of 2013) A N D CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 36-37 OF2015(arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.3326-3327 of 2013) JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.Leave granted. Introduction: In the year 2008, during the tenure of the then Minister of Telecommunications, Unified Access Services Licenses ("UASL") were granted. After sometime, an information was disclosed to the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) alleging various forms of irregularities committed in connection with the grant of the said UASL which resulted in huge losses to the public exchequer. On the basis of such source information, the CBI registered a case bearing RC DAI2009A0045o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1889/2008 AHMED SHAH & ANR. .. Appellants Versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN ..Respondent WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1904/2008 STATE OF RAJASTHAN ..Appellant Versus RASOOL SHAH & ORS. ..Respondents WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1938/2008 STATE OF RAJASTHAN ..Appellant Versus MST. HALIMA & ORS. ..Respondents AND CRIMINAL APPEAL No.17/2009 STATE OF RAJASTHAN ..Appellant Versus IQBAL & ORS. ..Respondents JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI, J.These appeals arise out of the judgment dated 20.08.2007 passed in Criminal Appeal No.704 of 2005 in which Jodhpur Bench of Rajasthan High Court confirmed the conviction of the appellants under Section 302 and also the sentence of life imprisonment imposed on them with a fine of Rs.1,000/- . The High Court acquitted eighteen other accused of the charges under Section 302 IPC read with Section 149 IPC and convicted them under Section 148 IPC and sentenced those eighteen accused persons to the...
Tag this Judgment!