Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL NO.9916 OF2017[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.32606 OF2014 RAJA VENKATESWARLU & ANR. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS MADA VENKATA SUBBAIAH & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Leave granted.2. The appellants approached the Execution Court for execution of a decree for permanent injunction granted in O.S. No.26 of 2001 on the file of the Junior Civil Judge, Badvel in Andhra Pradesh. It is not in dispute that the decree has attained finality. They sought for police protection in the execution proceedings. However, the 1 application for police protection was filed under Section 151 of the CPC. The Execution Court granted it. The High Court has interfered with the order holding that the application could have been filed only under Order XXI, Rule 32. We find it difficult to appreciate the stand taken by 3. the High Court. The decree for permanent injunction having become final, the decree holder approached the Execu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.9921 OF2017[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.18742 OF2017]. NISA & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS BINSHA Respondent(s) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Leave granted.1. 2. Having heard the learned counsel on both sides, we are of the view that the petition now pending before the Family Court should be finally disposed of. Accordingly, we direct the Family Court, Attingal to dispose of O.P. (G&W) No.450 of 2017 expeditiously and preferably within a period of six months.3. We are informed that the child is now with the appellants. We direct that status quo, as on today, shall continue till the matter is finally disposed of by the Family Court. We also direct the Family Court to see that the respondent is given visitation rights of the child intermittently.4. In view of this Judgment now passed, nothing survives in OP (FC) No.346 of 2017 pending before the High Court of Kerala and it is, accordingly, disposed of. 2 5. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE INTHESUPREMECOURTOFINDIA ORIGINALCIVILJURISDICTION TRANSFERPETITION(CIVIL)NO.567of2017 JANHITMANCH&ANR ...PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATEOFMAHARASHTRA&ORS....RESPONDENT(S) WITH SPECIALLEAVEPETITION(C)NOS.1174911750of2017 SHREERAMURBAN INFRASTRUCTURELTD. ...PETITIONER(S) VERSUS STATEOFMAHARASHTRA&ORS....RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ASHOKBHUSHAN,J.1. TheTransferPetitionandtheSpecialLeave 2 Petitionarisingoutofsimilarfactsandevents havebeenheardtogetherandarebeingdecidedby this common order. The background facts giving risetothetransferpetitionaswellasSpecial LeavePetitionneedtobenotedfirst.2. The parties in both the cases being common shallbehereinafterreferredtoasdescribedin thetransfer petition. Janhit Manchandanother whichhadfiledthePILattheBombayHighCourt arereferredtoaspetitionerswhereas,ShriRam Urban Infrastructure Ltd.(SRUIL) is referred to as respondent No.6 and other respondents are referredtoasdescribedintransferpetition. 3. ThegenesisofdisputeisPILNo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.9845-9858 OF2017[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.9497-9510 OF2016]. ARUN KUMAR AND ORS ETC VERSUS UNION OF INDIA ETC. Appellant (s) Respondent(s) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.9859-9860 OF2017[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.9513-9514 OF2016]. JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Leave granted.1. 2. The appellants approached this Court aggrieved by the insufficiency of the compensation of their lands acquired by the respondents. The notice in this case was limited to the entitlement of enhancement based on cumulative basis. The notice reads as follows :- ....... Issue notice in both the Special Leave Petitions limited to the claim for enhancement on the basis of 15% annual increase cumulatively, as has been granted in other cases. 3. There is no dispute that in similar cases, the enhancement was granted by this Court with the 2 compensation calculated on the basis of 15% increase on cumulative basis. Therefore, these appe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.9843-9844 OF2017[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOS. 19949-19950 OF2015 BEENA R. APPELLANT(s) VERSUS KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Leave granted.1. The qualification for appointment of Lower 2. Division Typist is prescribed in the Notification, which reads as follows :-7. Qualifications :1. S.S.L.C. or its equivalent qualification.2. Lower Grade Certificate in KGTE Malayalam Typewriting.3. Lower Grade Certificate in KGTE English Typewriting and Computer Word Processing or its equivalent (G.O.(P) No.17/2005/P&ARD dated 09.05.2005. Note 1 : Those who have passed KGTE Typewriting before January 2002 should produce separate certificate in Computer Word Processing or its equivalent. 2 Universities Certificates in Computer Word Processing issued by Central, State Government Departments/ Agencies/ Societies, after successfully completing course of study not less tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1277 OF2017[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) No.7495 OF2015 REPORTABLE UNION OF INDIA VERSUS NIYAZUDDIN SK & ANR. APPELLANT(S) RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.We are informed that Respondent No.2/Md. Asif Aslam is Leave granted. The appellant is before this Court aggrieved by the 2. order dated 22.09.2014 releasing Respondent Nos.1 and 2 on bail.3. absconding.4. The respondents are the accused in a N.D.P.S. case charged under Section 22/23 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short 'the NDPS Act'). The consideration by the High Court in the impugned order reads as follows:Having heard the learned advocate for the petitioners and the learned advocate for the State and considering the materials available in the case diary and also considering the fact that the petitioners are in custody for last 203 days and the investigation is complete and the chargesheet has already been submitt...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2740/2010 NON-REPORTABLE SHUSHMA PANDEY Appellant VERSUS SHEELA SHARMA & ORS. Respondents JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. The appellant and the contesting respondent No.1 are before this Court against the order passed by the Patna High Court in L.P.A No.1323 of 1998. The issue pertains to the appointment of the appellant as Professor in the Department of Obstetrics and Gyneacology in the Patliputra Medical College, Dhanbad. We are informed that the appellant and the contesting 2. first respondent have retired from service and, therefore, practically nothing survives in this Appeal.3. Accordingly, the Civil Appeal is dismissed. .....................J.[KURIAN JOSEPH]. .....................J.[R. BANUMATHI]. JULY27 2017; NEW DELHI....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1923 OF2010KHUBI RAM LALIT MOHAN VERSUS JUDGMENT APPELLANT RESPONDENT KURIAN, J.1. The appellant, who is the tenant, is before this Court aggrieved by the order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No.46048/2000 whereby the order delivered by the first appellate authority in the eviction matter has been confirmed. The dispute only pertains to the arrears of 2. rent. The Rent Controller has taken a view that the non-deposit of a portion of the arrears claimed is on account of mistake of fact. However, that contention has not been accepted by the High Court. We are informed that the appellant and his wife are both handicapped and that they have a small tailoring shop and that they have unmarried 2 daughters. The respondent is a Doctor who has retired 3. from Government service and the wife of the respondent is also a Doctor who is retiring shortly. The r...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1053 OF2016NARESH KUMAR alias NITU ..........APPELLANT STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH ......RESPONDENT Versus JUDGMENT NAVIN SINHA, J.The acquittal of the appellant by the Special Judge, Shimla in Sessions Trial No.7-S/7/2012, from the charge under Sections 20 and 61 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred as the Act) has been reversed by the High Court. The appellant has been sentenced to fifteen years imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,00,000/-. Thus the present appeal. 1 2. The appellant is stated to have been apprehended at Majhotli, by the police party, on suspicion, at about 6.15 A.M. after he disembarked from the State public transport bus going from Nerwa to Chamunda. Two kilograms of Charas is stated to have been recovered from a bag in his possession in presence of PW-2, Sita Ram an independent witness. DW-1 Shayam Singh, the depot in-charge at Nerwa, an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 CORRECTED IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1242/2017 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.)No.9648/2014) (Non-Reportable) Altab Gharami @ Atlab SK & Anr. Appellants The State of West Bengal Respondent Vs. WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1243/2017 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.) No.1052/2015) JUDGMENT MOHAN M.SHANTANAGOUDAR,J.1. Challenge in these appeals are against the Judgment dated 22.08.2014, passed by the High Court of Calcutta in C.R.A No.310 of 2009, by the convicted accused.2. The appellants faced trial for certain offences including the offences punishable under Sections 307, 456, 427 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as I.P.C). The Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court III, Krishnagar, Nadia convicted the appellants for the offences under Sections 307, 456 & 427 read with 34 of IPC, accordingly sentenced them to undergo R.I. for 5 years and fine of Rs.5,000/- each, in default to suffer simple imprisonmen...
Tag this Judgment!