Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1822 of 2007 M/S. TATA MOTORS LTD. .Appellant versus THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF COMMERCIAL TAXES (SPL) & ANR. .Respondents With C.A. No.3004-3006/2017 C.A. No.1821/2007 C.A. No.2756/2012 C.A. No.3856/2013 C.A. No.3824/2011 C.A. No.3827/2011 C.A. No.3820/2011 C.A. No.3821/2011 C.A. No.3825-3826/2011 C.A. No.3823/2011 C.A. No.3822/2011 SLP(C) No.15642-15643/2011 SLP(C) No.25905/2013 SLP(C) No.12806-12808/2016 SLP(C) No.12280/2014 1 C.A. No.5815/2012 C.A. No.8049/2009 C.A. No.6167/2009 C.A. No.6171/2009 C.A. No.6166/2009 C.A. No.6160/2009 C.A. No.6173/2009 C.A. No.6161/2009 C.A. No.6164/2009 C.A. No.6163/2009 C.A. No.6162/2009 C.A. No.6165/2009 C.A. No.5967/2011 C.A. No.5969/2011 C.A. No.6168/2009 SLP(C) No.19758/2009 SLP(C) No.19745/2009 SLP(C) No.19754/2009 SLP(C) No.19748/2009 SLP(C) No.19750/2009 SLP(C) No.19756/2009 SLP(C) No.19757/2009 SLP(C) No.19746/2009 SLP(C) No.19755/2009 SLP(C) No.19752/2009 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 146869 OF2019[Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 2989029891of 2017]. Bihar State Beverages Corporation Ltd. & Ors. .. Appellants Versus Naresh Kumar Mishra & Ors. .. Respondents JUDGMENT M. R. Shah, J.1. Leave granted.2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned common judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Patna dated 19.7.2017 in Letters Patent Appeal No.162 of 2016 in CWJC No.9760 of 2012 and in Letters patent Appeal No.568 of 2016 in CWJC No.3224 of 2012, by which the Division Bench has allowed the said Letters Patent Appeals and has set aside the order passed by the learned 2 Single Judge passed in CWJC No.9760 of 2012 and CWJC No.3224 of 2012 dismissing the said writ petitions and, consequently, allowing the petitions by holding that the respective original Writ Petitioners Respondents herein, the employees of the Appellant Bihar State Bev...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.224 OF2019(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.6068 of 2017) STATE OF GUJARAT VERSUS Appellant AFROZ MOHAMMED HASANFATTA Respondent JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI, J.Leave granted.2. This appeal arises out of the order of the High Court of Gujarat dated 03.05.2017 allowing the Criminal Revision No.264 of 2017 in and by which the High Court has set aside the order dated 15.11.2014 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate at Surat by which the Magistrate had taken cognizance of the offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477A and 120-B IPC on the basis of the second supplementary charge sheet filed by the police in Criminal Case No.62851/2014 and ordered issuance of process to the respondent-accused. Brief factual matrix of the case is that a complaint was filed 3. by the Manager of ICICI Bank against M/s R.A. Distributors Pvt. Ltd. alleging that they hatched a conspiracy and as a part of this ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1723 OF2009Ambi Ram .Appellant(s) VERSUS State of Uttarakhand .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 14.05.2009 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital in Criminal Appeal No.258 of 2001 (Old No.1518/1991) whereby the High Court partly allowed the appeal filed by the appellant herein.2. A few facts need mention to appreciate the short controversy involved in this appeal. 1 3. The appellant was working as "Kanoongo/Patwari" at Didihat, Uttarakhand. He was prosecuted for commission of the offences punishable under Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 (hereinafter referred to as the PC Act) read with Section 161 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860(hereinafter referred to as IPC).4. The charge against the appellant was that he assured one Gopal Singh that he would not arrest him nor would implicate hi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1462 OF2019(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.14820 of 2017) Hori Lal .Appellant(s) VERSUS State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. 2. Leave granted. This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 09.03.2017 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Writ Petition No.44731 of 2016 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court 1 dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant herein.3. A few relevant facts need mention to appreciate the short controversy involved in this appeal.4. The appellant herein was the writ petitioner whereas the respondents herein were the respondents in the writ petition filed before the High Court out of which this appeal arises.5. In exercise of the powers conferred under Section 4 (1) of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (for short called the Act 1894), the State of UP (respondent No.1 herein) issued a notification...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1463 OF2019(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.23718 of 2018) The Commissioner, Mysore Urban Development Authority .Appellant(s) VERSUS S.S. Sarvesh .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 19.02.2018 passed by the High 1 Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in Writ Petition No.34313 of 2017 whereby the High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant herein.3. In order to appreciate the short controversy involved in this appeal, it is necessary to set out a few relevant facts.4. The appellantMysore Development Authority(in short, the Authority) is the defendant whereas the respondent is the plaintiff in the suit out of which this appeal arises.5. The respondent filed a civil suit (O.S. No.685/2006) against the appellantAuthority in the Court of Principal Senior Civil Judge and Small Causes Court, Mysuru. The su...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1464 OF2019ARISING OUT OF SLP(CIVIL) No.12812 of 2015 Employees' State Insurance Corporation Appellant(s) VS. Venus Alloy Pvt. Ltd. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Dinesh Maheshwari., J Leave granted.2. The short question calling for determination in this appeal by special leave against the judgment dated 17.02.2014 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Bench at Indore in Miscellaneous Appeal No.1213 of 2006 is as to whether the Directors of respondent-Company, who are receiving remuneration, come within the purview of employee under sub-section (9) of Section 2 of the Employees' State Insurance Act, 1948 ('the ESI Act')?.3. Put in brief, the relevant background aspects of the matter are that the respondent-Company had been covered under the ESI Act and had been 1 depositing the amount of contribution with reference to the wages paid to some of its employees. However, in an inspection carried out by the ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA NONREPORTABLE CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICITON CIVIL APPEAL No.1474/2019 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Civil) No.12393 of 2013) Union of India & Ors. .. Appellants Versus Sri Harananda & Ors. Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 147581 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos. 3554835554/2015), CIVIL APPEAL No.1482 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.13937/2016), SLP (C) CC No.5735/2016 SLP (C) CC No.5736/2016 SLP (C) CC No.5737/2016 SLP (C) CC No.5738/2016 SLP (C) CC No.5743/2016 SLP (C) CC No.5742/2016 SLP (C) CC No.5740/2016 JUDGMENT M. R. SHAH, J.1. Leave granted in Special Leave Petitions (C) No.12393/2013, 3554835554/2015 and 13937/2016. All these appeals are being disposed of by this common judgment. 2 2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 4.12.2012 passed by the High Court of Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No.6314 of 2012, the Union of India and others have preferred the Civil Appeal @ SLP (C) No.12393/2013. 2.1 Feelin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1467 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) NO.116 OF2018 RITU BHATIA .. APPELLANT(S) Versus MINISTRY OF CIVIL SUPPLIES CONSUMER AFFAIRS & PUBLIC DISTRIBUTION AND OTHERS JUDGMENT ..RESPONDENT(S) M.R.SHAH, J.Leave granted.2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi dated 31.07.2017 passed in Letter Patent Appeal (LPA) No.160 of 2015 by which the Division Bench has dismissed the said appeal and has confirmed the judgment and order passed by 1 the learned Single Judge dated 02.02.2015 passed in Writ Petition (C) No.977 of 2015 dismissing the said writ petition by not interfering with the order terminating the services of the appellant, the original writ petitioner has preferred the present appeal.3. That respondent no.2 hereinCentral Railside Warehouse Company Limited invited applications for the post of Company Secretary. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.516 OF2009DHARAM SINGH (D) THR. LRS. & ORS. ...APPELLANTS Vs. PREM SINGH (D) THR. LRS. ...RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.This appeal has been filed challenging the judgment dated 28.07.2006 of High Court of Uttarakhand by the appellants, who were the plaintiffs in suit No.9 of 1992. The High Court by its judgment has allowed the first appeal filed by the defendants-respondents setting aside the judgment and decree dated 13.08.1996 of the District Judge in Suit No.9 of 1992.2. The brief facts of the case necessary to be noticed for deciding this appeal are:2. 1 One Badri Aswal was the owner of agricultural land in Khata/Khatauni No.46 of Village 1 Gyansu, District Uttar Kashi (earlier part of Tehri Garhwal) measuring a total of 62 Nali and 1 muthi. The said Badri had no issue. He married one Tulsa Devi. It is claimed that Tulsa Devi adopted one Bhopalu as her son after death of her husband but B...
Tag this Judgment!