Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORATABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.9149-9150 OF2015[Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.26425-26426 of 2014]. Dr. I. Ismail .. Appellant Vs. K. Shameem Rani & Anr. .. Respondents JUDGMENT C. NAGAPPAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. These appeals are preferred against the judgment dated 9.2.2011 passed by the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court in Writ Appeal (MD) No.295 of 2010 and order dated 30.6.2014 passed in Review Application (MD) No.84 of 2012.3. The facts in brief are as follows: The appellant joined the second respondent College as Assistant Professor in the year 1978 and was promoted as Professor in the year 1988. He was appointed as Principal in the year 1999. A charge memo containing 31 charges was served on the appellant on 30.8.2003. The first 9 charges related to harassment including sexual harassment based on the complaint given by the first respondent and other charges related to misuse of power, insubordinat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.2261-2262 OF2012MOHAMMED YASSIN ...APPELLANT VERSUS RAMIZABI ETC. ETC. ...RESPONDENTS WITH CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO.485-486 OF2011IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS.2261-2262 OF2012JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J.1. Aggrieved by the impugned judgment and order dated 26th February, 2010 passed by the High Court in Second Appeal reversing the decrees passed in favour of the plaintiff by the courts below the present appeals have been lodged by the plaintiff in the suits being O.S. No.760 of 1996 and eviction suit being O.S. No.761 of 1996. The facts in brief are as follows:2. The respondents in the two appeals before us as plaintiff Nos.5 and 6, along with four others, had instituted a suit [O.S. No.295 of 1981]. against the appellant and other co-owners for declaration of title and injunction on the basis of adverse possession. The suit was dismissed by the learned trial Court on 1st October, 1982 and the said ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6774 of 2015 (@ SLP(C) No.16650 OF2012 Poonam ... Appellant Versus State of U.P. & Ors. ... Respondents JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, J.The appellant invoked the jurisdiction of the High Court of Judicature at Allahbad under Article 226 of the Constitution praying, inter alia, for issue of writ of certiorari for quashment of the order dated 2.3.2012 passed by the respondent no.2, Commissioner, Azamgarh Division, Azamgarh in Appeal No.85/109/153/334/M of 2008-12 and further seeking a writ of Mandamus against the respondents not to interfere in the peaceful functioning of fair price shop in Gram Sabha Ardauna, Tehsil Sadar, District Mau.2. The facts that formed the bedrock of the writ petition are that a fair price shop being shop No.2 was run by the 5th respondent in Gram Sabha Ardauna, Tehsil Sadar, Block Ratanpura, District Mau, which was allotted to him by allotment order dated 11.5.2001 and while he was continuing, o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Non-reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1434 OF2008Shri Kamal Prashar Appellant Versus Airport Authority and Another. . Respondents AND Civil Appeal No.1435 of 2008 Shri Kamal Prashar .Appellant Versus National Airport Authority of India Respondent JUDGMENT Uday Umesh Lalit J.Civil Appeal No.1434 of 2008 seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated 07.02.2006 passed by the High Court of Delhi in LPA Nos.21 of 1999 and 314 of 2000 as well as the order dated 02.06.2006 in Review Application No.209 of 2006 arising from said judgment and order dated 07.02.2006 in so far as LPA No.314 of 2000 was concerned. Civil Appeal No.1435 of 2008 seeks to challenge the order dated 05.05.2006 passed by the High Court of Delhi in Review Application No.161 of 2006 arising out of the judgment and order dated 07.02.2006 in so far as LPA No.21 of 1999 was concerned. Since both these appeals arise out of the same proceedings they are being dealt with and d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5015 OF2008Union of India & Ors. .....Appellants VERSUS Manoj Deswal & Ors. ..Respondents JUDGMENT ANIL R. DAVE, J.1. Being aggrieved by the Judgment dated 17th August, 2007 delivered by the High Court of Delhi in Writ Petition No.8004 of 2006, this appeal has been filed by the Union of India and others.2. The facts giving rise to the present litigation in a nut-shell are as under: Respondent no.1 was recruited and was undergoing training for being appointed to the post of Store Hand Technical (SHT) in the Army Supply Corps and he had joined his Basic Military training at Bangalore on 14th August, 2004. Upon completion of the training but before being confirmed in service or being appointed as a soldier, he was granted annual basic leave for 28 days from 5th January, 2005 to 1st February, 2005. Thereafter, he became sick and hospitalized from 4th February to 8th February, 2005. Thereafter, he proceed...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.8918 OF2015(@ Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.15187 of 2010) M/s. Chebrolu Enterprises Rep. by its Proprietor Smt. Ch. Lakshmi Sesha Kumari .Appellant VERSUS Andhra Pradesh Backward Class Cooperative Finance Corporation Ltd. ..Respondent WITH C.A.No.8919/2015 @ SLP No.15408/2010 C.A.No.8920/2015 @ SLP No.15719/2010 C.A.No.8921/2015 @ SLP No.15734/2010 AND C.A.No.8922/2015 @ SLP No.18290/2010 JUDGMENT ANIL R. DAVE, J.1. Leave granted.2. In all these appeals validity of a common judgment delivered in Civil Misc. Appeal Nos. 973-995 of 2005 and 539, 674 and 675 of 2006 dated 14th December, 2009 has been challenged.3. The aforestated Civil Miscellaneous Appeals had been filed in the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) against a common order dated 14.03.2005 passed in different origin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.4920 OF2007M/S GMR ENERGY LTD. APPELLANT VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, BANGALORE ...RESPONDENT WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.3594 OF2008JUDGMENT R.F. Nariman, J.1. Two appeals have been filed against the impugned judgment dated 3.8.2007 passed by CESTAT. The appeal filed by the assessee M/s GMR Energy Ltd. concerns itself with the proper valuation of the import of parts of the Gas Turbine Hot Section of a naphtha based power plant which have to be replaced after 12,500 fired hours of use under a Long Term Assured Parts Supply Agreement (hereinafter referred to as LTAPSA) dated 20th December, 2000 entered into with GE, USA. The appeal of revenue concerns itself with whether the assessee is entitled to avail itself of the benefit of the exemption notification No.21 of 2002 dated 1.3.2002 in respect of the goods imported under two bills of entry dated 25.6.2003. Assessees Appeal 2. The appellant had imported a ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.8879 OF2015[Arising out of SLP [C]. No.24685/2013]. Kamlesh & Ors. Appellants Vs. Attar Singh & Ors. Respondents JUDGMENT ARUN MISHRA, J.1. Leave granted.2. The appeal has been preferred by the claimants aggrieved by the dismissal of their claim petition and setting aside award passed by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Sonepat on 5.8.2005 in Claim Petition No.217/2002/2004 by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh vide judgment and order dated 4.9.2009 in FAO No.345/2007.3. The claimants Kamlesh, widow of deceased Rishi Parkash, three minor sons and mother of the deceased filed a claim petition as against the driver, owner and insurer of Maruti Car No.DL4CC -5172 and driver of three- wheeler Tempo No.HRH-3572. The compensation of Rs.12 lakhs was prayed on account of the death of Rishi Parkash in the accident dated 8.5.2003 caused due to the collision between Maruti car and tempo. Maru...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2789 OF2007|COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CHENNAI |...APPELLANT | |VERSUS | | |M/S. NEBULAE HEALTH CARE LTD. |...RESPONDENTS | W I T H CIVIL APPEAL No.1142 OF2009JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.Delay condoned. These appeals raise an issue of eligibility of concession/exemption from excise duty that is provided under Notification nos. 8/1999, 8/2000, 8/2001, 8/2002 and 8/2003 to the Small Scale Industrial Units (for short, 'SSI Units'). It is not in dispute that the respondents assessees in these appeals fulfill eligibility conditions for availing the benefit of SSI exemption under the aforesaid Notifications. However, in addition to manufacturing goods on their own account, they are also doing job work of manufacturing goods of certain other parties on job work basis. The goods manufactured for third parties bear the brand name of those third parties and in respect of such goods manufactured for third parti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.808 OF2010Mehboob Ali & Anr. Appellants Vs. State of Rajasthan Respondent [With Crl.A. No.1088 of 2010]. JUDGMENT ARUN MISHRA, J.1. The appeals have been preferred against the common judgment and order dated 28.5.2009 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench in Criminal Appeal Nos.39/2006 and 40/2006 and other connected matters, thereby upholding conviction and sentence of the appellants for commission of offence under section 489C for 3 years RI, for section 489B read with section 120B IPC of IPC five years RI and fine of Rs.1000/- each; in default to further undergo one month simple imprisonment. Appellants Mehboob Ali and Firoz were convicted and sentenced under section 489B read with section 120B IPC for 5 years RI and fine of Rs.1,000/-; in default to suffer one month simple imprisonment. Other accused persons Liyakat Ali and Puran Mal were also convicted.2. As p...
Tag this Judgment!