Court : Supreme Court of India
1 NONREPORTABLE INTHESUPREMECOURTOFINDIA CIVILAPPELLATEJURISDICTION SPECIALLEAVEPETITON(C)NO(S).13931OF2017 NEWINDIAASSURANCECO.LTD. .Petitioner(s) VINISHJAINANDORS. Versus WITH Respondent(s) SPECIALLEAVEPETITON(C)NO(S).13932OF2017 NEWINDIAASSURANCECO.LTD. .Petitioner(s) VINISHJAINANDORS. Respondent(s) Versus CIVILAPPEALNO.2445OF2018 (@SPECIALLEAVEPETITION(C)NO(S).13933OF2017) NEWINDIAASSURANCECO.LTD. .Appellant(s) YOGESHJAINANDORS. Respondent(s) Versus JUDGMENT DeepakGuptaJ.1. These three cases are directed against the judgment dated 03.10.2016 whereby three appeals under the Motor VehiclesActweredisposedofbytheHighCourt. 2 SLP(C)NO(S).13931OF2017 2. ThiscaseisfiledbyVinishJainandothers.Itrelatesto deathofoneAlokJain.Evenasperthelearnedcounselfor thepetitionerifthejudgmentrenderedbytheConstitution Bench of this Court in National Insurance Co. Ltd. v. PranaySethi1 isapplied,thedifferenceincompensationis justabout5%. 3. ThisCourtnormallydoesnotinterferewherevariatio...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE/ORIGINAL JURISDICTION (ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.1808 OF CIVIL APPEAL No.2422 OF20182016) S. SUKUMAR APPELLANT THE SECRETARY, INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS VERSUS WITH WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.991 OF2013CENTRE FOR PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION PETITIONER UNION OF INDIA & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS VERSUS JUDGMENT ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.Leave granted in SLP (Civil) No.1808 of 2016 filed against the 1. order dated 3rd August, 2015 of the High Court of Karnataka in Writ 2 Petition No.17959 of 2012. The petition before the High Court sought direction for exercise of power under Section 21 of the Chartered Accountants Act, 1949 (CA Act) to initiate investigation against Multi-National Accounting Firms (MAFs) and Indian Chartered Accountancy Firms (ICAFs) having arrangement with such MAFs for breach of Code of Professional Conduct under the CA Act and also to take penal action by way of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE INTHESUPREMECOURTOFINDIA CIVILAPPELLATEJURISDICTION CIVILAPPEALNO(S).2431OF2018 (@SLP(C)NO(S).23659OF2015) M/s.UniversalCylindersLimited .Appellant(s) Versus TheCommercialTaxesOfficer Respondent(s) With CIVILAPPEALNO(S).2432OF2018 (@SLP(C)NO(S).23664OF2015) CIVILAPPEALNO(S).2433OF2018 (@SLP(C)NO(S).23667OF2015) CIVILAPPEALNO(S).2434OF2018 (@SLP(C)NO(S).23668OF2015) JUDGMENT DeepakGuptaJ.1. Leavegranted. 2 2. Sinceacommonquestionoflawarisesintheseappeals, theyarebeingdisposedofbythiscommonjudgment.Briefly statedthefactsarethattheappellantassesseemanufactures cylindersforstorageofLiquefiedPetroleumGas(LPG).Atthe relevant time, the entire production was for supply to Government owned companies viz. M/s. Indian Oil CorporationLtd.(forshorttheIOC),M/sBharatPetroleum CorporationLtd.,andM/sHindustanPetroleumCorporation Ltd.. Itisnotdisputedthatthecostofthe cylinderswas determinedbytheMinistryofPetroleumandNaturalGas(for shorttheMoP&NG)underthepricingpolicy. 3. On04....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5813 OF2009B. Muthukrishnan(Dead) by L.Rs. .Appellant(s) VERSUS S.T. Reddiar Educational & Charitable Trust & Ors. Respondent(s) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.5814 OF2009JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. These appeals are directed against the order dated 20.08.2008 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam in I.A. No.3280 of 2008 in R.F.A. No.474 of 2008 by which the Division Bench of the High Court modified the order dated 28.07.2008 in I.A. No.2907/88 granting stay and 1 the order dated 30.10.2008 in I.A. No.4422 of 2008 in R.F.A. No.474 of 2008 by which the High Court dismissed the application filed by the appellants herein for reconsidering the order dated 20.08.2008.2. Keeping in view the nature of order that we are passing for disposal of these appeals, it is not necessary to set out the facts much less in detail.3. The impugned order reads as under:The interim stay is modified. The judgment o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2356 OF2018UPENDRA SINGH .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS .....RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.The appellant herein has challenged the judgment dated July 25, 2013 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna dismissing the Letters Patent Appeal (LPA) filed by the appellant. In fact, by the said common judgment, two LPAs are decided. One LPA was filed by three persons and the other was filed by eight persons. All these eleven persons, who were engaged by one K.D.S. College (respondent No.8 in these proceedings) situate within the jurisdiction of P.S. Gogari, District Khagaria, Civil Appeal No.2356 of 2018 Page 1 of 11 Bihar, wanted regularisation of their services and payment of salary based on such regularisation. Their writ petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge and the intra-court appeal has met the same fate. However, it appears that out of eleven persons, who...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE INTHESUPREMECOURTOFINDIA CIVILORIGINALJURISDICTION WRITPETITION(C)NO.835OF2017 SUNILSAMDARIA ...PETITIONER VERSUS UNIONOFINDIATHROUGHITS SECRETARY,MINISTRYOFLAWAND JUSTICEANDOTHERS ...RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT ASHOKBHUSHAN,J.This writ petition under Article 32 of the ConstitutionofIndiahasbeenfiledbythepetitioner, a practicing Advocate of Rajasthan High Court, questioning the Notification dated 12.05.2017 appointingrespondentNos.2and3asAdditionalJudges ofRajasthanHighCourt.ThisCourton03.10.2017had issued notice to respondent No.1 only. A counter affidavit has been filed by the Union of India respondentNo.1.2. We have heardthepetitioner,appearing inperson and Shri Maninder Singh, learned Additional Solicitor GeneralofIndiafortherespondent. 2 3. Thepetitionerappearinginpersonchallengingthe appointment of respondent Nos.2 and 3 as Additional Judges of Rajasthan High Court makes following two submissions: (1) Theappointmentofrespo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MISC. APPLICATION No.711 of 2017 CONTEMPT PETITION (C) NO.785/2018 IN IN CIVIL APPEAL No.4482 OF1998Rajeshwar Mahto .Appellant(s) VERSUS Alok Kumar Gupta, G.M. M/s Birla Corporation Ltd. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. This contempt petition arises out of the two orders, one dated 04.05.1999 and final order dated 31.10.2000 passed by this Court (Three Judge Bench) in Civil Appeal No.4482 of 1998. This application is filed by the respondent (employee) of the said appeal. 1 2. To appreciate the grievance of the applicant herein(employee)- respondent of the aforementioned appeal, it is necessary to set out the relevant facts which led to the filing of civil appeal in this Court which later gave rise to filing of this contempt petition.3. The applicant was an employee of one limited Company called "Birla Corporation Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as "the Corporation"), which is controlled by Birla Group. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.321 OF2018(Arising Out of SLP (Crl.) Diary No.1445 of 2018) PANKAJ JAIN APPELLANT VERSUS UNION OF INDIA & ANR. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.Leave granted.2. This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order of Allahabad High Court dated 21.12.2017 dismissing the Writ Petition No.62167 of 2017 filed by the appellant. The principal issue, which has arisen for interpretation of this Court, is the content and meaning of Section 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.). Before we come to the impugned 2 judgment of the High Court, it is necessary to note a series of litigations initiated at the instance of the appellant in different courts, arising out of criminal proceeding lodged against him.3. A First Information Report under Sections 120-B, 409, 420, 466, 467, 469 and 471 of Indian Penal Code and under Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2439 OF2018(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.29519 OF2015 M/S. ELITE ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION (HYD.) PRIVATE LIMITED REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S. TECHTRANS CONSTRUCTION INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED REP. BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR .....RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.Leave granted.2) National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) had entered into agreement dated July 19, 2007 (hereinafter referred to as the Concession Agreement) whereby it had awarded a contract to M/s. T.K. Toll Road Pvt. Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Concessionaire) for undertaking, inter alia, the design, engineering, financing, procurement, construction, operation and Civil Appeal No.2439 of 2018 (arising out of SLP(C) No.29519 of 2015) Page 1 of 18 maintenance of the Project Highway on Build Operate and Transfer (BOT) basis on the National Highway 67 connecting Coimbatore and Nagapattinam. The Conces...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.458 OF2018NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S. PROGRESSIVEMVR (JV) .....RESPONDENT(S) W I T H CIVIL APPEAL No.459 OF2018A N D CIVIL APPEAL No.460 OF2018JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.All these appeals involve the lis of an identical nature. National Highway Authority of India (NHAI) is the appellant in these appeals. Respondents in different appeals are the contractors who were awarded the contracts by the appellant/NHAI for construction of roads etc. The terms and conditions on which the contracts were to be executed are Civil Appeal No.458 of 2018 & Ors. Page 1 of 37 identical in all these cases, as the standard form contract was signed by the parties. Dispute had arisen about the interpretation that is to be given to sub-clause 70.3 of Conditions of Particular Application (COPA) of the contract which contains Price Adjustment Formula. The tender document of the NHAI, modeled up...
Tag this Judgment!