Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.13785 OF2015(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.37226 OF2012 D.N. Jeevaraj .Appellant versus Chief Secretary, Govt. of Karnataka & Ors. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.13786 OF2015(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.38453/2012) D.V. Sadananada Gowda ..Appellant versus K.G. Nagalaxmi Bai & Ors. .Respondents JUDGMENT Madan B. Lokur, J.1. Leave granted in both petitions.2. The question for consideration is whether the appellants (Sadananda Gowda and Jeevaraj) have per se violated the terms of the lease-cum-sale agreement that they have individually entered into with the Bangalore Development Authority (for short the BDA) by constructing a multi- storeyed residential building on the plots allotted to them. The alternative question is whether the construction made by them is contrary to the plan sanctioned by the Bruhat Bangalore Mahanagara Palike (for short the BBMP) and thereby violated the lease-cum-sale agreement...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2727 OF2006A.R. Dahiya Appellant Versus SEBI Respondent JUDGMENT VIKRAMAJIT SEN, J.1 This Appeal assails the Judgment dated 19.4.2006 of the Securities Appellate Tribunal which upheld the order of the Securities and Exchange Board of India dated 1.8.2003. The factual matrix is that one Mr. V.P. Garg (hereinafter referred to as Garg) entered into an Assisted Sector Agreement with the Haryana State Industrial Development Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as HSIDC) on 4.1.1993, for the purpose of setting up a modern resort hotel complex at Village Chowky, Tehsil Kalka, Haryana. The parties agreed to collaborate for the profitable implementation and operation of the project in the assisted sector through a company already incorporated by Garg under the name and style of Polo Hotels Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Target Company). HSIDC extended a term loan to Garg and also subscribed to ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 1364-1365 OF2005SEBI THROUGH ITS CHAIRMAN APPELLANT VERSUS ROOFIT INDUSTRIES LTD. RESPONDENT WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOs.1366-1367 OF2005 CIVIL APPEAL NOs.1368-1369 OF2005 CIVIL APPEAL NOs.1370-1371 OF2005 CIVIL APPEAL NOs.1372-1373 OF2005 CIVIL APPEAL NOs.1374-1375 OF2005 CIVIL APPEAL NOs.1376-1377 OF2005AND CIVIL APPEAL NOs.1378-1379 OF2005JUDGMENT VIKRAMAJIT SEN, J.1 These Appeals lay siege to the decision of the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) which modified the order of the Adjudicating Officer under SEBI, reducing the penalty payable by the Respondent, Roofit Industries Ltd., under Section 15A of the Securities And Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (SEBI Act) from Rs. 1 crore to Rs. 60,000. In the connected matters, the penalty imposed by the Appellant SEBI was reduced from Rs. 75,00,000 to Rs. 15,000 in five cases and Rs. 60,000 in one case. What formulae, if any, has been followed in these red...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.13724-13725 OF2015(Arising out of SLP(C)Nos.33090-33091 of 2014) VINDU KISHORE SHARMA .......APPELLANT VERSUS CHANCELLOR, CHAUDHARY CHARAN SINGH UNIVERSITY, MEERUT & ORS. .......RESPONDENTS WITH CONMT.PET.(C)Nos.479-480/2015 IN SLP(C)Nos.33090-33091/2014 JUDGMENT J.S.KHEHAR, J.C.A.Nos.13724-13725 of 2015 (Arising out of SLP(C)Nos.33090-33091 of 2014) 1. Leave granted.2. The appellant Vindu Kishore Sharma was appointed as a Reader in the Department of Physics of the Chaudhary Charan Singh University, Meerut (hereinafter referred to as `the University') on 30.03.1982. The appellant claimed onward promotion to the post of Professor under the Personal Promotion Scheme. The promotion under the Personal Promotion Scheme was introduced by an amendment of the Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as `the University Act') by inserting Section 31A therein. Section 31A being relev...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.13727 OF2015[Arising out of SLP (C) No.36166 of 2014]. State of U.P. & Ors. .. Appellants Versus Ajay Kumar Sharma & Anr. .. Respondents WITH C.A. No.13728 of 2015 [arising out of SLP(C) No.1425 of 2015]. JUDGMENT VIKRAMAJIT SEN, J.1 Leave granted. 2 Applications for correcting the cause title and all the applications for impleadment as party respondent are allowed. 3 In these Appeals, we are concerned with the renewal as also the appointment of District Government Counsel (Civil and Criminal) in the Subordinate Courts across the State of Uttar Pradesh. The State as the Appellant, has assailed the final judgment and order dated 5.11.2014 in Writ Petition being Misc. Bench No.9127 of 2012 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench. The High Court in this impugned Order has quashed the Orders of the State Government terminating the appointment of District Gove...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5254 OF2010State of Uttar Pradesh and others Appellant(s) versus |United Bank of India and others Respondent(s) | WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.4688 OF2010M/s. Amrita Bazar Patrika Pvt. Ltd. Appellant(s) versus M/s. Jvine Development Pvt. Ltd. and others Respondent(s) CIVIL APPEAL No.2462 OF2010United Bank of India Appellant(s) versus M/s. Jvine Development Pvt. Ltd. and others Respondent(s) CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 1969-1970 OF2010Northern India Patrika A.P.K.S. Morcha Appellant(s) versus United Bank of India and others Respondent(s) JUDGMENT | | |M.Y. Eqbal, J.: | Since all these appeals arise out of a common judgment and order dated 3.11.2009, they have been heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.2. By the impugned judgment dated 3.11.2009 passed by a Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court, the writ petition filed by the writ petitioner United Bank of India was allowed and necessary directions ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6015 OF2009State of Himachal Pradesh and others Appellant(s) versus Ashwani Kumar and others Respondent(s) JUDGMENT | | |M.Y. Eqbal, J.: | This appeal by special leave is directed against judgment dated 7.5.2007 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, whereby the writ petition preferred by the respondents was allowed and the orders passed by the Revenue Authorities were quashed, holding that every landowner of the family of one Dev Raj was entitled for a separate unit.2. The facts in nutshell are that Dev Raj, predecessor-in-interest of the respondents herein, was holding land measuring 2400 kanals 9 marlas in village Kalroohi and Mubarikpur as owner. He was issued notice in form C-V in which area measuring 1767 Kanals 9 Marlas was proposed to be declared as surplus under the Himachal Pradesh Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1972. Instead of filing objection, the landowner fil...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.951 of 2008 COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE APPELLANT VERSUS M/S NESTLE INDIA LIMITED RESPONDENT JUDGMENT R.F. Nariman, J.The respondent herein is a 100% EOU engaged in the manufacture of instant tea falling under Chapter 2101.20 of schedule to the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985. The present appeal is concerned with clearances of their product to two sister units on payment of duty in terms of Notification No.8/97 - CE dated 1.3.1997 and Notification No.23/2003 CE dated 31.3.2003. The first notification would cover the period 1.11.2000 to 30.3.2003 and the second notification would cover the period 31.3.2003 to 31.5.2005. Inasmuch as the instant tea was manufactured wholly out of indigenous raw materials, the notifications aforesaid applied and whatever was in excess of what is chargeable by way of excise duty on the said tea is exempted. It is not in dispute that the said notifications applied in the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5275 OF2006Securities & Exchange Board of India ..Appellant Versus ICAP India Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent JUDGMENT SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, J.This appeal under Section 15Z of the Securities & Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 (for brevity, the SEBI Act) has been preferred by the Securities & Exchange Board of India (for brevity, the SEBI) to challenge the judgment and order dated 14.08.2006 passed by the learned Securities Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the SAT) in Appeal No.56 of 2004. The substantial question of law falling for determination involves interpretation of the term annual turnover as it finds mention in the Explanation after paragraph 3 of Schedule III to the Securities & Exchange Board of India (Stock Brokers & Sub-brokers) Regulations, 1992 (for brevity, the Regulations). The aforesaid Explanation reads as follows :Explanation. For the purpose of paragraphs 1, 2 and 3, annual tur...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2401 OF2003K.S. Soundararajan and Ors. .. Appellants versus Commissioner of H.R. & C.E. and Ors. .. Respondents JUDGMENT C. NAGAPPAN, J.1. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and decree dated 13.12.2000 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Letters Patent Appeal No.183 of 1994, wherein the Division Bench held that the first object of the three charities mentioned in the Will, is of private Trust and the rest are of public Trust and therefore, the respondent no.1 and 2 therein, have power under Section 64 of the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowment Act, 1959, to frame a scheme, in so far as, the public Trust is concerned.2. Briefly the facts are summarized as follows : One Sundararaja Naidu had no male issues, except two daughters and his brothers son is Kondasamy Naidu and he executed a registered Will dated 7.12.1949 bequeathing properties mentioned in Item nos....
Tag this Judgment!