Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.274 OF2014RAM SINGH & ORS. ...PETITIONER (S) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA ...RESPONDENT (S) WITH W.P. (C) No.261 of 2014, W.P. (C) No.278 of 2014, W.P. (C) No.297 of 2014, W.P. (C) No.298 of 2014, W.P. (C) No.305 of 2014, W.P. (C) No.357 of 2014 & W.P. (C) No.955 of 2014 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J.1. The challenge in the present group of writ petitions is to a Notification published in the Gazette of India dated 04.03.2014 by which the Jat Community has been included in the Central List of Backward Classes for the States of Bihar, Gujarat, Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Madhya Pradesh, NCT of Delhi, Bharatpur and Dholpur districts of Rajasthan, Uttar Pradesh and Uttarakhand. The said Notification was issued pursuant to the decision taken by the Union Cabinet on 02.03.2014 to reject the advice tendered by the National Commission for Backward Classes (NCBC) to the contrary on the ground that the said advice ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2932 OF2015(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.27062/2013 DELHI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LTD. ..Appellant Versus INTERNATIONAL LEASE FINANCE CORPN. & OTHERS ..Respondents JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI, J.Leave granted.2. This appeal has been filed against the impugned order dated 8.5.2013 passed by the High Court of Delhi in Writ Petition (Civil) No.7767/2012, wherein the Division Bench of the High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent No.1. The issue falling for consideration is whether minutes of meeting can override statutory regulations.3. The appellant is Delhi International Airport Limited, a joint venture and public partnership between GMR companies, Ministry of Civil Aviation, Fraport Germany and Eraman Malaysia. Appellant has been granted aerodrome licence by Director General Civil Aviation (DGCA) on 1.5.2008 and is a competent authority with respect to Delhi Airport responsible for upgrada...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.461 OF2015[Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.)No.5746 of 2014]. M. Mahendar Kumar .....Appellant Versus M. Mani & Ors. .....Respondents JUDGMENT SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, J.Heard learned counsel for the parties. Leave granted. The appellant is an accused in a complaint case bearing Crime No.147 of 2009 pending in the file of learned Judicial Magistrate at Gingee, Tamil Nadu. He is aggrieved by impugned order dated 10.01.2014 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in a petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for brevity, 'Cr.P.C.') bearing Crl.O.P.No.707 of 2014 preferred by the de facto complainant, respondent no.1 herein, whereby the Crime No.147 of 2009 has been treated as pending before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Villupuram District, Tamil Nadu and as such transferred to the file of CBCID, Chennai for investigation. The facts relevant for deciding this appeal may be...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2341 OF2011Vesa Holdings P. Ltd. & Anr. ... Appellants versus State of Kerala & Ors. ... Respondents With CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS.2342-2344 OF2011JUDGMENT C. NAGAPPAN, J.1. All these appeals are filed challenging the impugned common order dated 28.1.2011 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in Criminal Misc. Nos.220 to 222 of 2011 whereby the petition filed by the appellants under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code seeking to quash the FIR in Crime No.1461/2010 registered by Changanasserry Police Station against the appellants under Sections 417, 418, 420, 120B and 34 IPC was dismissed.2. The undisputed facts in brief are as follows: The appellant in Criminal Appeal No.2341 of 2011 is a Limited company of which appellants Venkataraman in Criminal Appeal No.2344 of 2011 and appellant Mani Prasad in Criminal Appeal No.2343 of 2011 were Directors and the appellant Chandrasekhran in Crimi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2933 OF2015(Arising out of SLP(C) No.1868 of 2014) SURTI GUPTA ...APPELLANT Vs. UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. & ANR. ...RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.Delay condoned. Leave granted. This appeal has been filed by the appellant being dissatisfied with the impugned Judgment and award dated 02.07.2012 passed in FAO No.1647 of 1992 (O & M) by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh wherein the High Court has awarded the compensation amount of Rs.6,30,000/- to the appellant. The relevant facts are stated hereunder to appreciate the case with a view to determine whether the appellant is entitled for enhancement of compensation amount as prayed in this appeal. On the night intervening 9/10.07.1990 at around 12:30 a.m., Parmod Bala, mother of the appellant, who along with five other passengers were travelling in a Maruti Car bearing registration No.PBW-8399, met with an accident near Oasis Tourist Comple...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8192 OF2003|VIKRAM CEMENT & ANR. |.....APPELLANT(S) | |VERSUS | | |STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS. |.....RESPONDENT(S) | JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.The bare minimum facts which are required to be mentioned to decide this appeal are recapitulated, in brief, hereinbelow: The appellant Nos. 1 and 2 are the units of Grasim Industries Limited, which carries on manufacture and sale of cement. It requires raw material in the form of coal, gypsum and bauxite. On the aforesaid raw materials, the appellants had been paying entry tax for entry of these goods in the territory of the State of Madhya Pradesh under M.P. Sthaniya Kshetra Me Mal Ke Pravesh Par Kar Adhiniyam, 1976 (hereinafter called the 'Entry Tax Act'). In the year 1997, the entry tax on the aforesaid items of raw materials payable under the Act was at the following rates: COAL - 2.5% GYPSUM - 2% BAUXITE - 10% In the year 1999, respondent No.1 - State iss...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 2935-36 of 2015 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.6513-6514 of 2015) Jyoti Limited & Others ... Appellants Versus Bharat J.Patel & Others ...Respondents JUDGMENT Chelameswar, J.1. Leave granted. Heard Mr. Dushyant Dave and Dr. Abhishek Manu Singhvi, learned senior counsel appearing for the appellants and the respondents respectively.2. Aggrieved by an order dated 19.02.2015 of the High Court of Gujarat in Civil Application No.14367 of 2014 in Appeal From Order No.548 of 2014 and Civil Application No.222 of 2015 in Appeal From Order No.548 of 2014, the respondents therein preferred the instant appeals.3. The respondents herein preferred the above mentioned AFO No.548 of 2014. They were the plaintiffs in Civil Suit No.652 of 2014. Alongwith the Civil Suit, they filed an interim application seeking certain interim reliefs. The prayer in the interim application is as follows:- "i) restr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 2938-2939 OF2015(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos.8972-8973 of 2014) Tata Steel Ltd. ....Appellant Versus Union of India & Ors. ...Respondents AND CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 2940-2941 OF2015(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos.9016-9017 of 2014) Tata Steel Ltd. ....Appellant Versus State of Jharkhand & Ors. ...Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.303 OF2004Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. ....Appellant Versus State of Jharkhand & Ors. ....Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.307 OF2004State of Bihar (Now Jharkhand) & Ors. ...Appellants Versus Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. ...Respondent JUDGMENT Madan B. Lokur, J.1. Leave granted.2. Two sets of appeals are before us. One set of appeals pertains to the Tata Iron and Steel Company Limited (TISCO) and the other set pertains to Tata Steel.3. In the set of appeals pertaining to TISCO, the first appeal is Civil Appeal No.303/2004 filed by TISCO against the judgment and order dated 23rd July...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5167 OF2008M/S. QUEEN'S EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY ...APPELLANT VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ...RESPONDENT WITH C.A. NO.5168 OF2008C.A. NO.8962 OF2010C.A. NO.909 OF2011CIVIL APPEAL No.2919 OF2015[ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO.3804 OF2011 CIVIL APPEAL No.2920 OF2015[ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO.5381 OF2011 CIVIL APPEAL No.2921 OF2015[ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO.5383 OF2011 CIVIL APPEAL No.2922 OF2015[ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO.5530 OF2011 CIVIL APPEAL No.2923 OF2015[ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO.19945 OF2012 JUDGMENT R.F.Nariman, J.1. Leave granted in the special leave petitions.2. The present appeals relate to a common judgment dated 24th September, 2007 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand, Nainital in two income tax appeals, and a judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court dated 29th January, 2010 in Pine Grove International Charitable Trust v. Union of India - (2010) 327 ITR273. Various o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.600 OF2007RAMDEV FOOD PRODUCTS PRIVATE LIMITED ...APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT ...RESPONDENT JUDGMENT ADARSH KUMAR GOEL J.1. This appeal by special leave has been preferred against the Judgment and Order dated 17th February, 2006 of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Special Criminal Application No.1821 of 2005.2. The High Court declined to interfere with the Order dated 16th August, 2005, of the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sanand on a complaint filed by the appellant against fourteen accused for alleged commission of offences under Sections 409, 420, 406, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120-B and 114 of the Indian Penal Code directing the Police Sub-Inspector, Sanand, to give a report to the Court within thirty days under Section 202(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "the Code") instead of directing investigation under Section 156(3) of the Code, as sought ...
Tag this Judgment!