Court : Supreme Court of India
NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1626 OF2018(Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.) No.9837 of 2018) Jan Mohamad .Appellant(s) VERSUS State of Haryana .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 25.10.2017 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Revision No.667 of 2009 whereby the High Court dismissed the revision petition filed by the appellant herein.3. Few facts need mention hereinbelow for the disposal of this appeal. 1 4. The appellant was prosecuted and eventually convicted for the offence punishable under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as IPC) and was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 15,000/ and in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 months.5. Aggrieved by the said judgment, the appellant filed appeal...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL/CRIMINAL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION [CRIMINAL]. NO.225 OF2018MANOHAR LAL SHARMA . PETITIONER(S) VERSUS NARENDRA DAMODARDAS MODI & ORS. RESPONDENTS(S) WITH W.P.(C) NO.1205/2018 W.P. (CRL) NO.297/2018 W.P. (CRL) NO.298/2018 JUDGMENT RANJAN GOGOI, CJI1 The issues arising in this group of writ petitions, filed as Public Interest Litigations, relate to procurement of 36 Rafale Fighter Jets for the Indian Airforce. The procurement in question, which has been sought to be challenged, has its origins 2 in the postKargil experience that saw a renewed attempt to advance the strategic needs of the armed forces of the country.2. As far back as in the month of June of the year 2001, an inprinciple approval was granted for procurement of 126 fighterjets to augment the strength of the Indian Airforce. Simultaneously, a more transparent Defence Procurement Procedure (DPP) was formulated for the first time in the year 2002. A robust offset clause was incl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.10192 OF2010JANHIT MANCH THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT BHAGVANJI RAIYANI & ANR. APPELLANTS Versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS. .RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.The expanding population of rural and urban areas has created its own 1. problems, insofar as civic amenities are concerned. The problem is aggravated in metropolitan cities, where there is movement of population with the prospect of better livelihood. Lack of opportunities for employment has compelled people to leave their home and hearth. We are concerned in the present matter with the consequences of such mobility of population.2. Mumbai is perceived to be a city that fulfills the dreams of many. The movement of population has thus been manifold, putting a strain on civil services and open areas, including to play grounds and streets. There has 2 been vast encroachment on public lands by people who have migrated, or otherwise, and wh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5299-5304 OF2003M/S. TATA MOTORS LIMITED VERSUS .....APPELLANT(S) STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS .....RESPONDENT(S) W I T H CIVIL APPEAL No.6591 OF2003A N D CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 8-12 OF2004JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.A common question of law which arises in all these appeals pertains to levy of tax by the respondent No.1 State under Section 6 of the Bihar Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as the Bihar Act) on the chasis of the motor vehicles manufactured by the appellants during the period these chasis are in their possession, i.e., before they are delivered to the dealers and/or the purchasers of the said vehicles. 22) The Bihar Act envisages three kinds of taxes, namely: (a) on registered vehicles under Section 5 of the Act; (b) on vehicles held under trade certificates as per Section 6 of the Act; and (c) in respect of vehicles registered, where the registration is temporary, a ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL No.11774 OF2018VASANT GANPAT PADAVE (D) BY LRS. & ORS. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ANANT MAHADEV SAWANT (DEAD) THRU LRS. & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 11775-11798 OF2018SHRI ARJUN HARI KAMBLE AND ETC. ETC. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ANANT MAHADEV SAWANT (DEAD) THRU LRS. & ORS. ...RESPONDENT(S) ASHOK BHUSHAN,J.JUDGMENT These appeals have been filed against the common judgment dated 01.08.2014 of High Court of Bombay dismissing a bunch of writ petitions including those filed by the present appellants. 1 2. It shall be sufficient to notice the facts in Civil Appeal filed by Vasant Ganpat Padave for deciding these appeals.3. One Balwant Sawant was landlord of Survey No.92/2, corresponding to new Survey No.31 Hissa No.2/10, admeasuring about 0.01.3 H.R. at Village Padavewadi, Taluka & District Ratnagiri. Balwant Sawant died on 10.05.1950 leaving behind Smt. Indirabai Balwant Sawant, his widow as his l...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.11932 Of 2018 GANGAPPA AND ANR. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS FAKKIRAPPA ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN,J.This appeal has been filed against the judgment of Karnataka High Court, Dharwad Bench dated 17.07.2014 disposing of the writ petition filed by the respondent herein.2. Brief facts of the case necessary to be noticed for deciding this appeal are: The appellants/plaintiffs entered into agreements to sell with respondentdefendant dated 12.04.2005 and 16.05.2006 and earnest money of Rs.1,40,000/ was paid. The appellants filed Suit No.863 of 2008 and Suit No.864 of 2008 praying for specific performance of 2 contract. Another suit filed by the sister of the defendant being O.S.No.327 of 2008 was also clubbed. The Principal Civil Judge impounded agreements to sell filed by the plaintiffs in Suit Nos.863 and 864 of 2008 with direction to the plaintiff to pay deficit duty and penalty vide order dated ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.1007 OF2013JAMILA BEGUM (D) THR. LRS. ..Appellant VERSUS SHAMI MOHD. (D) THR. LRS. & ANOTHER ....Respondents J U G E M E N T R. BANUMATHI, J.This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 07.09.2007 passed by the High Court of judicature at Allahabad dismissing the Second Appeal No.135 of 1998 thereby upholding the oral gift by Wali Mohd. in favour of respondent No.1-plaintiff and the Will dated 30.09.1970 and directing the original plaintiff-deceased respondent No.1 to pay the mortgage amount of Rs.11,000/- and holding that the mortgage dated 21.11.1967 registered on 12.01.1968 shall stand redeemed and further directing appellants-defendants to handover the vacant possession of the property. 1 2. Facts giving rise to this appeal are that deceased respondent No.1-Shami Mohd. filed O.S. No.130 of 1978 against the appellant and one Sakina (deceased predecessor in interest of respondent Nos.2 to11) for dec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.3827 OF2014HUKUM CHANDRA (D) THR. LRS. ..Appellants VERSUS NEMI CHAND JAIN & ORS. ..Respondents J U G E M E N T R. BANUMATHI, J.This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 25.04.2012 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Second Appeal No.279 of 2007 affirming the judgment and decree passed by the first appellate court for eviction of appellant from the suit premises.2. The appellant is a tenant in the shop measuring 6.3 feet x 15 feet on the ground floor of a building located at Sarrafa Bazar, Muraina, Madhya Pradesh. The respondent No.1 filed a civil suit under Section 12(1)(f) of the Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 (the Act) seeking eviction of the appellant from the 1 suit shop on the ground of bona fide requirement to settle his son Rajendra Kumar Jain. By judgment dated 30.06.2004, the trial court dismissed the suit holding that Rajendra Kumar was already doing an independ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION APPEAL No.111 OF2011CRIMINAL V. Ravi Kumar Appellant VERSUS State, Rep. by Inspector of Police, District Crime Branch, Salem, Tamil Nadu & Ors. Respondents JUDGMENT Indira Banerjee, J.This appeal is against the final judgment and order dated 20-03-2006 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras, inter alia, allowing Criminal Original Petition No.27039 of 2005 filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and quashing the criminal proceedings being Crime No.54 of 2005 against the petitioners before the High Court and also against the first accused company, which was not party before the High Court. 2 2. The appellant, Shri Ravi Kumar carries on business of cotton ginning and conversion of cotton into yarn at Salem, Tamil Nadu as proprietor of SARAVANA YARN TRADERS. The appellant as proprietor of SARAVANA YARN3 TRADERS entered into transactions with Sri. Rajendran Mills Ltd., Salem (hereinafter referred to as the Mill). The ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1208812089 OF2018[Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 1009310094 of 2016]. Akhil Bhartvarshiya Marwari Agarwal Jatiya Kosh & Ors .. Appellants Versus Brijlal Tibrewal & Ors. .. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.12090/2018 @ SLP(C) No.15056/2016 and Contempt Petition Nos. 2526/2018 JUDGMENT M. R. Shah, J.1. Leave granted in all the Special Leave Petitions.2. As all these appeals are interconnected between the same parties and with respect to the same properties, these are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2 3. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order dated 23.12.2014 in F. A. No.466 of 2010 and the order dated 04.07.2015 in Civil Application No.1698 of 2015 in F.A.No.466 of 2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (hereinafter referred to as the High Court), the original Defendants have preferred the present appeals. 3.1 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the imp...
Tag this Judgment!