Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4426 OF2011LALITESHWAR PRASAD SINGH & ORS. APPELLANTS Versus S.P. SRIVASTAVA (D) THR. LRS. RESPONDENT JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI, J.This appeal arises out of the judgment of High Court of Patna in First Appeal No.230 of 2007 dated 30.07.2007 reversing the judgment of the trial court and thereby decreeing first respondent-Plaintiffs suit for declaration of title.2. Genealogy of the first respondent-Plaintiff and Tarawati Devi are as under:- Mahabir Prasad Tej Pratap Narayan Jagadambi Prasad Rudra Mahendra Kanta Kanji Girish Chandra Prasad (1960) Narayan Prasad Prasad Prasad Tarawati Devi (died in 1985) died issueless died issueless Shailendra Prasad Suresh Chandra Prasad (1942) Plaintiff Deoki Devi Sita Devi Umashanker Prasad (1970) Died died issueless (died unmarried) The genealogy of parental side of Tarawati Devi is as under:- Dhanukdhari Sahay Tarawati Devi Laxmi Devi Raxn Devi Baidya Nath (Defendant) 3...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.12075 OF2016[ARISING FROM SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.36627 OF2016]. [ARISING FROM SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C).....CC. NO.23517/2016]. DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS SURESH KUMAR NANGIA AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Delay condoned.2. Leave granted.3. The issue, in principle, is covered against the appellant by judgments in Civil Appeal No.8477 of 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.8467 of 2015 and Civil Appeal No.5811 of 2015 arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.21545 of 2015.4. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.5. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, the appellant is given a period of one year to exercise its liberty granted under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 for initiation of the acquisition proceedings afresh.6. We make ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.12324 OF2016[@CIVIL APPEAL D. No.32409 OF2016 HARYANA VIDHYUT PRASARAN NIGAM LTD. Appellant(s) VERSUS HARYANA ELECTRICITY REGULATORY COMMISSION AND ANR. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Delay condoned.2. It is seen that the APTEL has left the issue regarding impact on tariff under Section 63 of the Electricity Act, 2003 to be decided by the Arbitral Tribunal.3. We make it clear that the Tribunal will take an independent decision, uninfluenced by any of the observations and findings in the impugned Judgment.4. The Arbitral Tribunal is directed to decide the impact on tariff as a preliminary issue.5. In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of. No costs. .......................J.[ KURIAN JOSEPH ]. .......................J.[ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ]. New Delhi; December 14, 2016....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.12080 OF2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.920 OF2016]. JIVANLAL Appellant(s) VERSUS PRAVIN KRISHNA, PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND ORS. Respondent(s) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.12082 OF2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.921 OF2016]. CIVIL APPEAL No.12083 OF2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.923 OF2016]. CIVIL APPEAL No.12085 OF2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.928 OF2016]. CIVIL APPEAL No.12087 OF2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.929 OF2016]. CIVIL APPEAL No.12088 OF2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.930 OF2016]. CIVIL APPEAL No.12089 OF2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.933 OF2016]. CIVIL APPEAL No.12092 OF2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.935 OF2016]. CIVIL APPEAL No.12093 OF2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.1024 OF2016]. CIVIL APPEAL No.12094 OF2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.1025 OF2016]. CIVIL APPEAL No.12096 OF2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.1026 OF2016]. CIVIL APPEAL No....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.12072 OF2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.36617 OF2016[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C).....CC NO.23707 OF2016DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY APPELLANT (S) VERSUS RADHA NAGPAL & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Delay condoned.2. Leave granted.3. The learned counsel for the appellant submits that the award could not be passed on account of the operation of stay. Apparently, there is no stay after 2010. If that be so, there is no merit in the contention taken by the appellant that the stay order granted by the Court prevented the award being passed within the time permitted under Section 11A of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894.4. Therefore, this appeal is dismissed. No costs. .......................J.[ KURIAN JOSEPH ]. .......................J.[ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ]. New Delhi; December 14, 2016....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.906 OF2014BACHPAN BACHAO ANDOLAN .... PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD, J These proceedings which have been instituted under Article 32 of the Constitution by Bachpan Bachao Andolan bring focus upon the alarming increase in the use of drugs and alcohol among children in India. The petition has been instituted in the public interest for enforcing the fundamental rights of children particularly those suffering from and involved in substance use and abuse. The petitioner seeks the intervention of this Court for a mandamus to the Union of India to formulate and implement a national action plan for children on the issue of drugs, alcohol and substance abuse amongst children. This must, according to the petitioner, include in its coverage issues pertaining to identification, investigation, recovery, counselling and rehabilitation. This essentially ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ARBITRATION PETITION No.13 OF2016MEARS GROUP INC. ..... PETITIONER VERSUS FERNAS INSAAT A.S. (FERNAS CONSTRUCTION COMPANY INC) .....RESPONDENT ORDER Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD, J1The Petitioner is a company incorporated in the US. The Respondent is incorporated in Turkey. The Respondent was awarded a contract for the construction of a pipeline by the Gas Transmission Company Ltd., Bangladesh. A Letter of Intent was issued by the Respondent to the Petitioner on 16 April 2012 for performing Horizontal Directional Drilling works for six river crossings under the above-mentioned project in Bangladesh. A detailed work order was issued on 12 June 2012 to the Petitioner for a total contract price of USD7225,000/-. The work to be executed by the Petitioner involved the installation of thirty inch diameter and six inch diameter gas pipelines under six rivers in Bangladesh. According to the Petitioner the effective date of the contract...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.12073 OF2016[ARISING FROM SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.36620 OF2016 [ARISING FROM SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C).....CC. No.4965/2016]. RATTAN LAL APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) WITH C.A. NOS.12140-12141/2016 @ S.L.P.(C) Nos.36769-70/2016 @ CC No.21058-21059/2016 JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Delay condoned.2. Leave granted.3. It is seen that in a similar matter in Paramjit Panag & Ors. v. State of Punjab, this Court vide order dated 15.01.2015 has enhanced the compensation by Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only). Therefore, on the principle of parity these appeals are disposed of declaring that the appellants shall be entitled to an additional amount of Rs.1,00,000/- (Rupees One Lac only) per acre, over and above the amount granted by the High Court.4. The appellants shall also be entitled to all the statutory benefits except for the period covered by the delay including the delay in r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.103 OF2014KARMA DORJEE & ORS .....PETITIONERS Versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS .....RESPONDENTS WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.111 OF2014JUDGMENT Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD, J The petitioners are advocates and have initiated these proceedings under Article 32 of the Constitution, in public interest for guidelines to be set down to curb acts of discrimination against persons from the north- eastern states. The petitioners speak of the paradox of secular India where on the one hand, students from the north-eastern states who move to other parts of the country in search of employment and education, learn in the process the culture and traditions of the rest of the country while on the other hand, there is an absence of reciprocating sensitivity towards and awareness of their concerns. They have drawn attention to the discrimination prevalent in society against citizens of the nation drawn from the north-east...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.12067 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) 30610 of 2016) Correspondent, Anaikar Oriental (Arabic) Higher Secondary School and Anr. Appellants Versus Haroon and Anr. Respondents JUDGMENT Prafulla C. Pant, J.Leave granted.2. This appeal is directed against judgment and order dated 26.09.2016, passed by the High Court of judicature at Madras in Writ Appeal No.427 of 2016, whereby the Writ Appeal is dismissed, affirming the order dated 20.03.2015 of learned Single Judge of the High Court in Writ Petition No.17838 of 2010.3. Brief facts of the case are that respondent no.1 (writ petitioner) was P.G. Assistant in Biology, with the minority institution run by the appellants. It is pleaded by the appellants that respondent No.1 disobeyed the orders of the Head Master (appellant no.2) and assaulted him. He not only failed to organize Science Club in the year 2002-2003, but also failed to submit Stock Register for the a...
Tag this Judgment!