Court : Supreme Court of India
NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.8581 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.30226 of 2015) |DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY |Appellant(s) | Versus |SATTAR MOHD. AND OTHERS |Respondent(s) | JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Leave granted. The issue, in principle, is covered against the appellant by judgment in Civil Appeal No.8477 of 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition(C) No.8467 of 2015. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. 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. We make it clear that in case no fresh acquisition proceedings are initiated within the said period of one year from today by issuing a Notification under Section 11 of the Act, the appellant, if in possession...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8721 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.17340 of 2016) GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI THR. SECRETARY, LAND AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND ANR. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS VIKAS MALHOTRA AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. The issue, in principle, is covered against the appellant by judgment in Civil Appeal No.8477 of 2016 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.8467 of 2015.3. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed.4. 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.5. We make it clear that in case no fresh acquisition proceedings are initiated within the said period of one year from today by issuing a Notification...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
CORRECTED NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2467 OF2006SECURITIES & EXCHANGE BOARD OF INDIA ... APPELLANT(S) VS. DSQ SOFTWARE LTD. & ANR. ... RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ANIL R. DAVE, J.1. Heard the learned counsel.2. By an order dated 3rd February, 2016, it was directed that Respondent No.2 should deposit Rs.30 Crorers (Rupees Thirty Crores only) in six months with SEBI. It was further ordered that if the afore-stated amount is not paid, the order dated 9th September, 2004 passed by the SEBI, shall stand revived.3. It is an admitted fact that Rs.30 Crores have not been deposited till today. In the circumstances, orders dated 8th December, 20O5 and 7th March, 2006 passed by the Securities Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai is set aside and the order dated 9th September, 2004 stands revived.4. The appeal is disposed of as allowed with no order as to costs. Pending application, if any, shall stand disposed of. ..............J.[ANIL R. DAVE]. ......
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.8438 OF2016(Arising out of SLP (C) No.8463 of 2008) KEDAR NATH YADAV APPELLANT Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS. RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.8440 OF2016(Arising out of SLP(C) No.10731/2008) CIVIL APPEAL NO.8441 OF2016(Arising out of SLP(C) No.11783/2008) CIVIL APPEAL NO.8444 OF2016(Arising out of SLP(C) No.11830/2008) CIVIL APPEAL NO.8446 OF2016(Arising out of SLP(C) No.12360/2008) CIVIL APPEAL NO.8447 OF2016(Arising out of SLP(C) No.12724/2008) CIVIL APPEAL NO.8453 OF2016Arising out of SLP(C)NO.25580 OF2016(Arising out of SLP(C) .CC No.13645/2008 And CIVIL APPEAL NO.8449 OF2016(Arising out of SLP(C) No.22491/2008) JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.Delay condoned in SLP (C) CC No.13645 of 2008. Leave granted in all the special leave petitions. The present appeals arise out of the impugned final common judgment and order dated 18.01.2008 in W.P. No.23836 (W) of 2006 and connected petitions, passed by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8477 OF2016(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.8467 of 2015) |DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY |APPELLANT(S) | Versus |KUSHAM JAIN AND ANOTHER |RESPONDENT(S) | JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Leave granted. The appellant is aggrieved by the judgment dated 10.11.2014 passed by the High Court of Delhi in Writ Petition (Civil) No.4232 of 2014. The High Court has granted a declaration that the land acquisition proceedings culminating in the Award dated 19.9.1986 in respect of 1 bigha 4 biswas of land in Khasra No.89/23/2 in village Palam, New Delhi has lapsed. At paragraph 2 of the judgment, the admitted position of non payment of compensation has been recorded by the High Court. Paragraph 2 of the judgment reads as under :- 2. Though the respondents claimed that possession of the said land was taken on 04.01.2002, the petitioner disputes this and maintains that physical possession has not been taken. However, insofar as the issu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS.8442-8443 OF2016(Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.9924-9925 of 2013) M/S SHANTI CONDUCTORS(P) LTD. ANR. APPELLANTS Vs. ASSAM STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD & ORS. RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.8445 OF2016(Arising out of SLP (C) No.15274 of 2013) CIVIL APPEAL NO.8448 OF2016(Arising out of SLP (C) No.9898 of 2014) AND CIVIL APPEAL NO.8450 OF2016(Arising out of SLP (C) No.538 of 2016) JUDGMENT V. GOPALA GOWDA, J.Leave granted in all the Special Leave Petitions.2. The present appeals were listed together as a common question of law arises in all of them for consideration before this Court.3. For the sake of convenience, reference is made to the facts of the appeals arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 9924-9925 of 2013, which have been directed against the impugned final judgment and orders dated 20.11.2012 and 20.12.2012 passed in RFA No.66 of 2000 and MC No.3472 of 2012 respectively, by the Gauhati High Court at Guwahati...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2341 OF2010Kadamanian @ Manikandan ..Appellant versus State Represented by Inspector of Police ..Respondent JUDGMENT JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, J.The prosecution in the instant case was lodged against the appellant herein - Kadamanian @ Manikandan, as well as, against co-accused - I.T. Manian @ Manikanda, for the offences under Sections 201, 302, 376 and 404 of the Indian Penal Code. The aforesaid offences were allegedly committed by the accused with reference to M. Jayalakshmi. As per the prosecution version, M.Jayalakshmi went missing at 7 a.m. on 6.9.2007, having left her residence to answer the call of nature. Since she did not return, a missing person's report was lodged on 7.9.2007 by her father P.Matheswaran at Namakkam Kumarapalayam Police Station. It is also relevant to mention, that in the first information report registered on 7.9.2007, the complainant had attached the photograph of M. Jay...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2341 OF2010Kadamanian @ Manikandan ..Appellant versus State Represented by Inspector of Police ..Respondent JUDGMENT JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, J.The prosecution in the instant case was lodged against the appellant herein - Kadamanian @ Manikandan, as well as, against co-accused - I.T. Manian @ Manikanda, for the offences under Sections 201, 302, 376 and 404 of the Indian Penal Code. The aforesaid offences were allegedly committed by the accused with reference to M. Jayalakshmi. As per the prosecution version, M.Jayalakshmi went missing at 7 a.m. on 6.9.2007, having left her residence to answer the call of nature. Since she did not return, a missing person's report was lodged on 7.9.2007 by her father P.Matheswaran at Namakkam Kumarapalayam Police Station. It is also relevant to mention, that in the first information report registered on 7.9.2007, the complainant had attached the photograph of M. Jay...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.824 OF2016[ARISING OUT OF S.L.P. (CRL) No.1474 OF2012 BABITA LILA & ANOTHER ....APPELLANTS VERSUS UNION OF INDIA ..RESPONDENT JUDGMENT AMITAVA ROY, J.Leave granted 2. Being aggrieved by the rejection of their challenge to the initiation of their prosecution under Sections 109/191/193/196/200/420/120B/34 IPC on the basis of a complaint made by the Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation)-I, Bhopal (M.P.), both on the ground of lack of competence of the complainant and of jurisdiction of the Trial Court at Bhopal, the appellants seek the remedial intervention of this Court under Article 136 of the Constitution of India.3. The appellants, who are husband and wife, are residents of both Bhopal and Aurangabad. A search operation was conducted by the authorities under the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, hereinafter referred to as the Act) on 28.10.2010 at both the residences of the appellants, i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.46 OF2008ASHIQ HUSSAIN FAKTOO ...PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, J.1. The writ petitioner has been convicted by this Court by its judgment and order dated 30th January, 2003 passed in Criminal Appeal No.889 of 2001 under Section 3 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as TADA Act) and under Section 302 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as IPC). He has been sentenced, inter alia, to undergo imprisonment for life. The review petitions filed by the writ petitioner as also by the co-accused (Mohd. Shafi Khan @ Mussadiq Hussain) against the aforesaid judgment dated 30th January, 2003 i.e. Review Petition (Criminal) No.478 of 2003 and Review Petition (Criminal) No.1377 of 2003 have been dismissed by order dated 2nd September, 2003 of this Court. Curati...
Tag this Judgment!