Court : Supreme Court of India
Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No9124 of 2017 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.7712 of 2016) STATE OF ORISSA AND ANR. BIBHISAN KANHAR Versus .... Appellant(s) .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.Leave granted. The order for removal of the Respondent who was working as Farash in the office of the Revenue Divisional Commissioner, Central Division, Cuttack (Second Respondent) was set aside by the Orissa Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack. The judgment of the Tribunal was confirmed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Orissa at Cuttack. Aggrieved, the State of Orissa has filed this Appeal.2. The Revenue Divisional Commissioner requested the Employment Officer of the Employment Exchange, Cuttack to sponsor five candidates belonging to the Schedule Tribe community and five from unreserved category for selection and appointment to the posts of Farash and Peon. On the 1 basis of a caste certificate filed by the Respondent in the Emp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.9161 OF2017(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) No.12747/2017) Shubham Bahuuddeshiya Sanstha, Waddhamana & Anr. VERSUS ...Appellant(s) Shri Dnyaneshwar Govindrao Daigavhane & Ors. .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1)2) Leave granted. This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 16.03.2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench, Nagpur in Writ Petition No.1958 of 2015 whereby the High Court set aside the judgment and order of the School Tribunal, Nagpur, cancelled the termination order of respondent No.1 and permitted him (writ petitioner) to withdraw his writ petition. 13) In order to appreciate the short controversy involved in this appeal, the relevant facts need mention in brief infra.4) There is a Trust called Shubham Bahuuddeshiya Sanstha, Waddhamana, Nagpur-23. It is registered under the provisions of the Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950 (hereinafter refer...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.40 OF2007PADMINI MAHENDRABHAI GADDA APPELLANT STATE OF GUJARAT RESPONDENT VERSUS JUDGMENT N.V. RAMANA, J.1. Aggrieved by the judgment and order, dated 4th October, 2006, passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmadabad in Criminal Appeal No.833 of 1997 and Crl.M.A. No.1121 of 1998 in Crl.A. No.833 of 1997, the appellant is before this Court.2. The facts of the case in a nutshell as presented by the prosecution, are that the appellant herein and Mahendrabhai (deceased) had love marriage in the year 1981 and they were blessed with two daughters. The deceased was running health clubs in the city of Ahmedabad in the name and style of P.M. Health Club at two different locations; one at Naranpura and 2 the other at Ambawadi. Accused No.1 i.e. Kishore Thakkar was employed by the deceased to work at Naranpura location. With passage of time, the appellant (A2) developed extramarital relationship with...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.9151 OF2017(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) No.23533/2016) Hameed Kunju Nazim ...Appellant(s) VERSUS .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1)2) Leave granted. This appeal is filed by the appellant-landlord against the final judgment and order dated 11.01.2016 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in O.P.(RC) No.69 of 2015(O) whereby the High Court allowed the petition filed by the respondent herein under Article 227 of the Constitution of India.3) The controversy involved in this appeal is short. It arises out of an eviction matter. However, in order to appreciate the controversy in its proper perspective, we consider it apposite to set out the 1 factual background of the case in detail with a view to show as to how the litigation between the parties progressed in the last 11 years before the Courts below and how it was dealt with at different stages which eventually led to passing of the im...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.9077 OF2017[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.25435 OF2008]. MANNU PRASAD SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. The matter pertains to the appointment of an Extra Department Branch Post Master in the year 2001. According to the appellant, he has been continuing in service ever since 2001. The dispute is between the appellant and Respondent No.4. It appears that despite several efforts, 3. Respondent No.4 could not be served. Be that as it may, the Central Administrative Tribunal has directed the Union of India to reconsider the matter of selection.4. We make it clear that in the process of reconsideration, the appellant as well as Respondent No.4 shall be afforded an opportunity of hearing. In case Respondent No.4 does not turn up for the hearing, it will be treated for all purposes that the appellant had been appointed validly and h...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CRL.) No.129 OF2012Extra Judl. Exec. Victim Families Assn. & Anr. .Petitioners Union of India & Ors. versus WITH ...Respondents WRIT PETITION (C) No.445 OF2012JUDGMENT Madan B. Lokur, J.1. In the present petitions, the allegation was that 1528 persons had been killed in fake encounters by police personnel and personnel in uniform of the armed forces of the Union. By our judgment and order dated 8th July, 20161 we respectfully followed the view laid down by a Constitution Bench of this Court in Naga Peoples Movement of Human Rights v. Union of India.2 The Constitution Bench held that an allegation of use of excessive force or retaliatory force by uniformed personnel resulting in the death of any person necessitates a thorough enquiry into the incident. We were of opinion that 1 2 (2016) 14 SCC578(2) (1998) 2 SCC109W.P. (Crl.) No.129 of 2012 etc. Page 1 of 26 even the Dos and Donts and the Ten Commandm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1163 OF2017( ARISING OUT OF S.L.P (CRIMINAL) No.207 OF2016) MUKHTIAR SINGH (SINCE DECEASED) THROUGH HIS L.R. APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB ....RESPONDENT JUDGMENT AMITAVA ROY, J.Leave granted.2. The appellant, heir of Mukhtiar Singh (since deceased) has carried this appeal to this Court against the affirmation of his conviction under Sections 7 and 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, hereafter referred to as 'the Act'), recorded at the first instance by the learned Special Judge, S.A.S. Nagar (Mohali) in his judgment and order dated 04.09.2009. Thereby the predecessor of the present appellant had been, as a consequence of his conviction, sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence under Section 7 and to pay a fine of 2 Rs.2,000/- therefor and further sentenced to 2 years' rigorous imprisonment for the offence under Section 13(2) of the Act along w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2500 OF2017Manmohan Attavar ...Appellants Versus Neelam Manmohan Attavar Respondents CIVIL APPEAL NO.2502 OF2017WITH JUDGMENT SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.1. The appellant is 84 years old and the respondent is 62 years old. The respondent seeks to establish her status as the wife/companion of the appellant who has been left high and dry by the appellant while on the other hand the appellant categorically denies any such status.2. The admitted facts are that the respondent was married to 2 one Shri Harish Chander Chhabra. That marriage did not work out and ultimately a consent decree for divorce was obtained on 10.10.1996. Even in the interregnum period, the respondent claims to have developed a relationship with the appellant starting from their introduction in 1987. It is her case that there was continuous interaction between the two and the appellant even proposed to her in December 1993. The appellant e...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).9310/2017 (Arising from Special Leave Petition(s)No.24702/2015) FIRDAUS Petitioner(s) VERSUS ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. & ORS. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.Leave granted. This appeal has been filed against the judgment of the High 2. Court of Judicature at Allahabad, dated 12.12.2014 in First Appeal from Order No.2337 of 2005 filed by the respondent - Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., challenging the award passed by the Workmen Compensation Commissioner, awarding a sum of Rs.4,27,148/- (Rupees Four Lakhs Twenty Seven Thousand One Hundred and Forty Eight Only) along with interest of 12% per annum to claimants. The brief facts of the case are:3. On 01st September, 2003, Parvez Khan, the husband of appellant was driving the vehicle No.HR-2 G1875while going to Rampur from 2 Hapur. The vehicle was hit by a truck bearing No.UP22C-9714 coming from the opposite side and due to the accident, Parvez...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 6056/2011 NON-REPORTABLE UNION OF INDIA VERSUS O.T. ANTHRAYOSE APPELLANT(S) RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. We are not inclined to exercise our jurisdiction to interfere with the concurrent findings rendered by the Central Administrative Tribunal and the High Court with regard to the conferment of past service including seniority from the date of joining the service of DGS & D and the consequential benefits, in the peculiar facts of this case.2. law open.3. disposed of.4. The appeal is dismissed leaving the question of Pending applications, if any, shall stand There shall be no orders as to costs. NEW DELHI; JULY13 2017. .......................J.[KURIAN JOSEPH]. .......................J.[R. BANUMATHI]....
Tag this Judgment!