Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5252 OF2016(ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (CIVIL) No.8988 OF2014 |STAR SPORTS INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED |.....APPELLANT(S) | | | | |VERSUS | | |PRASAR BHARATI & ORS. |.....RESPONDENT(S) | JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.Leave granted. The instant appeal is filed against the impugned judgment dated October 3, 2013 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi in W.P.(C) No.3611 of 2013 which was filed by the appellant herein. The appeal raises the issue regarding the scope of obligations of a Television Broadcasting Organisation under the Sports Broadcasting Signals (Mandatory Sharing with Prasar Bharati) Act, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as Sports Act). We may mention at the outset that under Section 3 of the Sports Act, a Television Broadcasting Organisation is prohibited from carrying the live television broadcast of a sporting event of national importance on cable or Direct-to- Home (DTH) networks in India, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.532 OF2016(ARISING OUT OF SLP(Crl.) NO.9510/2015) Pragna Paramita Praharaj Appellant(s) VERSUS State of Orissa Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.Leave granted. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 11.05.2015 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in Misc. Case No.528 of 2015 in Criminal Appeal No.202 of 2015 whereby the High Court has, pending appeal against the judgment of the District & Sessions Judge, Jajpur, dismissed the bail application filed by the appellant herein.3) The appellant(daughter) along with two other accused, i.e., her father and mother were prosecuted and eventually convicted for commission of murder of one boy-Sanjay Rana and were directed to undergo life sentence by the learned Sessions Judge, Jajpur in CT No.76/2010.4) The appellant and two accused filed appeal being Crl. A. No.202 of 2015 in the High Court of Oris...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION No.239 OF2016Subhan Tours & Travel Services Petitioner (s) VERSUS Union of India Respondent(s) WITH WRIT PETITION Nos. 844 & 845 OF2015 70, 71 & 72 of 2016, 831 of 2015, 166, 211, 246, 263, 279, 280,318, 319, 320, 325, 344, 286, 317, 64, 362, 363, 364,310, 360, 328, 369, 368 & 262 of 2016 JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1) This decision shall dispose of all the writ petitions because as stated by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, all these writ petitions essentially involve common issues.2) These writ petitions are filed by the writ petitioners under Article 32 of the Constitution of India for claiming following reliefs. (a) Issue a Writ, order or direction in the nature of Mandamus commanding and directing the respondents to accept application for registration and issue Registration Certificate as PTO under Category II for conducting Haj Tour, 2016; Issue a Writ, order or direction in the n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
CORRECTED Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.531 OF2016(ARISING OUT OF SLP(Crl.) No.4278 /2016) (@ SLP(Crl.)..Crl.M.P.No.21881/2015) Nirmal Dass Appellant(s) VERSUS State of Punjab Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.Delay condoned. Leave granted.2) This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 06.05.2015 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in C.R.R. No.2027 of 2003 whereby the High Court dismissed the revision petition filed by the appellant herein.3) Facts of the case lie in a narrow compass. They, however, need mention in brief infra.4) The appellant and his brother Sukhdev were prosecuted and tried for commission of the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as IPC) pursuant to FIR No.74 dated 04.10.1994 filed at Police Station Banga, District Nawanshahr, Punjab in Criminal Case No...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5647 OF2006The Land Acquisition Officer, A.P. Appellant(s) VERSUS Ravi Santosh Reddy(D) by L.Rs. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1) This appeal is filed against the final order dated 13.04.2001 of the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in C.R.P. No.928 of 1998 wherein the High Court dismissed the revision filed by the appellant herein against the order dated 22.10.1997 passed by the Subordinate Judge at Bhongir, Nalgonda Dist. In E.A. No.41 of 1997 in E.P. No.34 of 1993 in O.P. No.7 of 1987.2) Few facts need mention for the disposal of the appeal, which involves short point.3) The appellant-State acquired 53 acres of land pursuant to the notification issued under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) on 11.05.1978. This notification included the land belonging to the respondents predecessors measuring around 13 acres 18...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2265 OF2011CHAMOLI DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD. THROUGH ITS SECRETARY/MAHAPRANDHAK & ANR. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS RAGHUNATH SINGH RANA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the order dated 01.12.2010 of the Division Bench of the High Court of Uttrakhand by which judgment, the writ petition filed by the respondent Raghunath Singh Rana has been disposed of after quashing the dismissal order dated 01.02.2002. Aggrieved by the judgment, the Chamoli District Co-operative Ltd., is in appeal before this Court. The short facts necessary for deciding this appeal are: the Chamoli District Co-operative Bank Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the appellant/Bank) is a District Co-operative Bank registered under the U.P. Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the Act). The Raghunath Singh Rana, respondent No.1 (hereinafter referred to as the employe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.750 OF2006State of Rajasthan Appellant(s) VERSUS Firoz Khan @ Arif Khan Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1) This appeal is filed by the State of Rajasthan against the final judgment and order dated 28.10.2005 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur in D.B. Criminal Leave to Appeal No.227 of 2005 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the application filed by the appellant herein seeking leave to file appeal under Section 378(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) against the judgment dated 13.08.2004 passed by the Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer in Sessions Trial Case No.48 of 2002.2) Keeping in view the short point involved in the appeal, it is not necessary to state the facts in detail except few to appreciate the grievance of the appellant.3) The respondent (accused) was prosecuted and tried for commission o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5174 OF2016(ARISING OUT OF SLP(C) NO.13981/2016) Krishna Devi Appellant(s) VERSUS Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. & Anr. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.Leave granted.2. Having regard to the nature of short controversy involved in this appeal, notice to Respondent No.1 is not considered necessary. It is more so when the contesting respondent No.2 is present on caveat.3. The High court while admitting the appeal of Respondent No.1 against the final order dated 28.01.2016 passed by the Single Judge in W.P. No.19906/2013 filed by Respondent No.2 against the appellant herein and Respondent No.1 passed the following interim order:- The controversy in these Letter Patent Appeals pertains to appointment of Retail Outlet Dealership. The selection committee placed first respondent- writ petitioner at No.1 and the appellant in the accompanying appeal at No.2 without even inspecting the land offere...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 1863-1865 OF2016M/S ARTI SPINNING MILLS ETC.ETC. Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF HARYANA & ANR Respondent(s) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.This is in continuation of our Judgment dated 26.02.2016. It appears that one part of the Judgment is left out, which was to the effect that the compensation awarded in these cases is confined to the facts of the case and the same shall not have any precedential value. The Judgment dated 26.02.2016 is clarified accordingly. .......................J.[ KURIAN JOSEPH ]. .......................J.[ ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN ]. New Delhi; May 13, 2016....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION I.A. Nos.363-364, I.A NO.425 IN I.A. NO.364 IN I.A. NOS.344, 355, 362 IN WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.13029/1985 M.C.MEHTA ...Appellant Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ...Respondents IDBI BANK LIMITED AND STATE BANK OF INDIA Applicants JUDGMENT Interlocutory applications No.363 and 364 of 2015 have been filed by the Consortium of Banks seeking direction from this Court that the rights of the Consortium of Banks who has financed the Kundli-Manesar- Palwal Expressway (BOT) in the State of Haryana and has outstanding dues approximately Rs.1419.15 crores as on 28.02.2015 are not prejudiced by this Courts order dated 30.01.2015 passed in I.As. No.344, 355 and 362 in W.P.(C) No.13029 of 1985.2. Shorn of unnecessary details, facts leading to the present applications are as follows: Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited (HSIIDC) invited bids for developing of 135.650 kms long Kundli-Manesar-Palw...
Tag this Judgment!