Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1335-1358 OF2015COMMISSIONER OF SERVICE TAX ETC. .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S. BHAYANA BUILDERS (P) LTD. ETC. .....RESPONDENT(S) W I T H CIVIL APPEAL No.15865 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.2888 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.7238 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3248-3252 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 2452-2455 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL No.45 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.1400 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.10206 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.6207 OF2016CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 8148-8149 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL No.7370 OF2014Civil Appeal Nos. 1335-1358 of 2015 with Ors. Page 1 of 26 CIVIL APPEAL No.10027 OF2014CIVIL APPEAL No.4209 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.1326 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.1647 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.3060 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.2437 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.1888 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.2081 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 2082-2083 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.4208 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.3247 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.2474 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.5601 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL No.7038 OF2015CIVIL APPEAL...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 2267/2018 (ARISING FROM SLP (C) NO.21066/2017) NON-REPORTABLE INDIRA GANDHI NATIONAL OPEN UNIVERSITY APPELLANT(S) VERSUS DR. V.N. RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Leave granted.2. The appellant is before this Court, aggrieved by the interim order passed by the High Court of Kerala in W.P.(C) No.18255/2015 which was confirmed by the Division Bench in an appeal vide impugned order dated 11.04.2017 passed in W.A. No.703 of 2017.3. The issue pertains to the claim made by Respondent No.1 for counting his service under the appellant towards pensionary benefits. Since, the writ petition itself is pending before the High Court, we do not propose to go into the various contentions raised by the learned Additional Solicitor General of India as well as the learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.1. These are all contentions on merits, to be considered by the High Court while disposing of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. [Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.27440-27441 of 2017]. 2265-2266 OF2018Mohd. Anwar .. Appellant Versus The Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. & Anr. .. Respondents JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1)2) Leave granted. These appeals arise from the final judgment and order dated 22.08.2017 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in FAO No.424 of 2016 whereby the Single Judge of the High Court allowed the 1 appeal filed by respondent No.1 herein and set aside the order dated 06.05.2016 passed by the Employees Compensation Commissioner, Delhi by which the Commissioner partly allowed the claim petition filed by the appellant herein. By order dated 11.09.2017, the High Court also dismissed the application bearing C.M. No.32982 of 2017 in FAO4242016 filed by the appellant herein for setting aside the judgment dated 22.08.2017.3) These appeals involve a short point. Few facts need mention infra to apprecia...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 NONREPORTABLE INTHESUPREMECOURTOFINDIA CRIMINALAPPELLATEJURISDICTION CRIMINALAPPEALNO.271OF2018 (ArisingoutofSLP(Crl.)No.57of2013) P.RAMADAS ..APPELLANT(S) :Versus: STATEOFKERALAANDANOTHER ..RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT A.M.Khanwilkar,J.1. Thisappeal,byspecialleave,arisesfromorderdated10th February, 2012 passed by the High Court of Kerala at ErnakulaminCriminalRevisionPetitionNo.3075/2011. 2. TheappellantwasconvictedbytheJudicialFirstClass MagistrateII, Ottappalam, for offence punishable under Section138oftheNegotiableInstrumentsAct,1881andwas sentencedtoundergosimpleimprisonmentfor3monthsand topayacompensationofRs.2,45,000/tothecomplainant 2 underSection357(3)oftheCodeofCriminalProcedure,1973, vide his order dated 30th March, 2010 passed in Summary TrialNo.69/2008.Indefaultofpaymentofcompensation,the appellant was directed to undergo further simple imprisonmentof15days.3. Assailing the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the Judi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.2269 of 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.8427 OF2011 Odisha Industrial Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited .... Appellant Pitabasa Mishra & Ors. Versus .Respondent WITH Civil Appeal No.2270 of 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.9478 OF2011 Sri Saisankar Associates, Represented by Proprietor, Shri Satyanarayan Mohanty .... Appellant Versus .Respondents Pitabasa Mishra & Ors. JUDGMENT L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.Leave granted in both the Special Leave Petitions. These Appeals are filed against the judgment of the High Court of Orissa dated 24th December, 2010 in Writ Petition (C) No.12408 of 2009 filed by Respondent Nos. 1 to 6 by which the allotment of an industrial plot in the Commercial Estate 1 at Rourkela in favour of M/s. Sai Sankar Associates (Respondent No.7) was set aside.2. For the sake of convenience, the parties would be referred to as arrayed in Special Leave Petition (Civi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.9118-9119 OF2010Surat Singh (Dead) .Appellant(s) VERSUS Siri Bhagwan & Ors. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. These appeals are directed against the final judgment and order dated 13.12.2006 passed by the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in Civil Regular Second Appeal No.382 of 1992 whereby the High Court allowed the appeal filed by respondent No.1 herein, set aside the judgment dated 13.11.1986 of the District Judge, Narnaul in Civil Appeal No.83 of 1984 and reversed the judgment dated 16.05.1984 of the Trial Court in 1 Civil Suit No.315 of 1981. By order dated 22.01.2007, the High Court also dismissed the application (C.M. No.448-C of 2007 in RSA No.382/1992) filed by the appellant herein for recalling the judgment dated 13.12.2006.2. In order to appreciate the short issue involved in the appeals, few relevant facts need mention infra.3. One Murti Devi (since dead) and he...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) No.225 OF2013CIVIL APPEAL No.2456 OF2007IN State of Tamil Nadu represented by the Secretary to Government Public Works Department Siddaramaiah, Chief Minister, Government of Karnataka & Ors. Versus ...Petitioner(s) Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Dipak Misra, CJI As we have disposed of Civil Appeal No.2456 of 2007, we do not intend to proceed with the Contempt Petition against the respondents. It stands closed accordingly. New Delhi; February 16, 2018 .CJI (Dipak Misra) .J.(Amitava Roy) .J.(A.M. Khanwilkar)...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2216 OF2018[Arising out of SLP (C) No.14021 of 2017]. D. SRINIVAS APPELLANT VERSUS SBI LIFE INSURANCE CO. LTD.AND ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT S. ABDUL NAZEER, J.1. Leave granted.2. In this appeal, the appellant has questioned the legality and correctness of the order dated 03.02.2017 in First Appeal No.560/2012, passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (for short the National Commission) whereby the National Commission has allowed the appeal filed by the first respondent herein and rejected the complaint of the appellant. 2 3. Brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that the appellant along with his wife, Smt. D. Suguna and son Mr. D. Venugopal obtained housing loan of Rs.30,00,000/- (Rupees thirty lacs) in the month of September, 2008 from the respondent Nos. 2 and 3 for construction of a house in Hyderabad. On 29.09.2008, a sum of Rs.78,150/- (Rupe...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).394 OF2009Mahant Lalita Sharanji ...Appellant(s) Versus Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Deoki Devi & Anr. Deepak Gupta J.1. The appellant is the Mahant of Shri Mukunddevacharya Peeth, Topi Kunj, Temple of Thakur Radhemohanji Maharaj at Vrindavan. The temple was owner of plot bearing No.212/2 measuring 2.48 acres. The contesting respondent No.1 Deoki Devi was owner of land bearing No.319 measuring 0.44 acres. One Bansi Ballabh [not a party to these proceedings]., was the owner of Plot No.215 and Plot No.216. 2 2. Consolidation proceedings took place and during the course of these proceedings, the appellant was allotted a portion of Plot No.212/2, a portion of Plot No.215 and a portion of Plot No.216. A portion of Plot No.212/2, adjoining the road, was treated as bachat land for use by the Gaon Sabha. It is pertinent to mention that one Premwati (not a party to these proceedings), was also allotted a very s...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE INTHESUPREMECOURTOFINDIA CIVILAPPELLATEJURISDICTION CIVILAPPEALNo.8747of2014 TRANSMISSIONCORPORATIONOF ANDHRAPRADESHLTD.ANDOTHERS .......APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/s.GMRVEMAGIRIPOWER GENERATIONLTD.ANDANOTHER ......RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT NAVINSINHA,J.Thecontroversyfordeterminationinthepresentappeal is, whether the word fuel as used in clause 1.1.27 of the Power Purchase Agreement (hereinafter referred to as PPA) means natural gas only or includes Regasified Liquefied NaturalGas(hereinafterreferredtoasRLNG)also. 1 2. TheAndhraPradeshElectricityRegulatoryCommission (hereinafterreferredtoastheCommission),inO.P.No.20of 2013dated08.08.2013,preferredbytherespondent,heldthat thetermfuelasusedinthePPAmeantnaturalgasonlyinits naturalform,anddidnotincludeRLNG.Simplybecausethe physicalcompositionofnaturalgasandRLNGaresimilar,it does not automatically entitle the respondent to generate power with RLNG, which was more expensive and not domesticallyavaila...
Tag this Judgment!