Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CRIMINAL APPEAL No.395 OF2019(Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No.4626 of 2017) SUNIL KUMAR GUPTA AND OTHERS ...Appellants VERSUS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS WITH ...Respondents CRIMINAL APPEAL No.396 OF2019(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.4560 of 2017) KHUSBU GUPTA ...Appellant VERSUS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS ...Respondents JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI, J.Leave granted.2. These appeals arise out of the order dated 25.04.2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Revision No.1354 of 2017 in and by which the High Court has affirmed the order of the trial court summoning the appellants 1 under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.3. Marriage of deceased Shilpa, daughter of Sudhir Kumar Gupta (PW-1) was solemnized with Dimpal @ Akash Deep on 26.01.2006. Out of the wedlock, two children were born. According to the complainant - Sudhir Kumar Gupta (PW-1), his daugh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 13591361 OF2007The State of Gujarat :Versus: ..Appellant(s) Anwar Osman Sumbhaniya and Ors. ....Respondent(s) JUDGMENT A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. The instant appeals filed under Section 19 of the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 (for short TADA), are against the final judgment and order dated 12th January, 2007 passed by the Designated Judge, Jamnagar in Special TADA Case Nos.3/1994, 3/1997 and 1/2005, whereby the respondents have been acquitted after finding them not guilty of the stated offences. 2 2. Separate chargesheets were filed against the respondents for offences punishable under Sections 121, 121A, 122 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, Sections 3, 4 and 5 of TADA, Sections 25(1)(A)(D), 25(1AA), 25(1B)(A B F G), 27(1), 29(A) of the Arms Act, 1959 (for short 1959 Act), Section 20 of the Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 (for short 1885 Act) and Section 6(1A...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2362 OF2019(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.20075 of 2017) Commissioner of Income TaxI .Appellant(s) VERSUS M/s Rashtradoot (HUF) .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 25.10.2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Bench at Jaipur in D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.43 of 2002 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the 1 1 appeal filed by the appellant herein and affirmed the order dated 24.05.2001 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in I.T.S.S.A. No.29/JP/2000.3. A few facts need mention infra for the disposal of the appeal.4. This appeal filed by the Revenue arises out of the income tax proceedings initiated against the respondent(assessee) on the basis of a search operation which was carried out by the Income Tax Department in assessees premises on...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
C.A.@ SLP(C)No.36299/2016 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2361 OF2019[Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.36299 of 2016]. Jagdish Chander ...Appellant Versus Satish Chander And Ors. ...Respondents JUDGMENT R. Subhash Reddy, J.1. 2. Leave granted. The appellant in this appeal was the first defendant in the suit in, Civil Suit No.RBT125195/92 filed before the Sub-Judge, 1st Class, Jawali, District Kangra, Himachal Pradesh. This appeal is filed aggrieved by the judgment dated 25.10.2016 in Regular Second Appeal No.383 of 2007 passed by the High Court of Himachal Pradesh, at Shimla.3. The first respondent-plaintiff has filed the aforesaid suit for declaration to the effect that he is joint owner to the extent of 435/924 shares i.e 0-04-57 hectares in the suit scheduled land. It was his case in 1 C.A.@ SLP(C)No.36299/2016 the suit that Smt. Vidya Devi, the mother of the plaintiff and the first defendant was the original owner of the suit land. S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7159 of 2014 DELHI TRANSPORT CORPORATION .Appellant versus BALWAN SINGH & ORS. .Respondents JUDGMENT SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.1. The respondents are all ex-employees of the appellant/Delhi Transport Corporation (for short DTC), who availed of the Voluntary Retirement Scheme (for short VRS). The respondents have, however, been held disentitled to pension on account of exclusion of period when they remained absent without authorisation for which period they were 1 held not entitled to salary. In D.T.C. v. Lillu Ram,1 such exclusion was upheld with the consequence that the ex-employees would not get pensionary benefits, having not completed 10 years of qualifying service. In the present appeal, two Honble Judges of this Court, after examining Lillu Rams2 case opined that a reconsideration by a larger Bench, of that view, was required. As a sequitur, the present appeal has been placed before us.2. A perusal ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 2285-2330 OF2019(@ SLP(C) NOS.928-930, 932-938, 940-967 and 969-976 OF2019 DLF HOMES PANCHKULA (P) LTD. THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. SHIV KUMAR VS. SUSHILA DEVI AND ANR. 1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Reportable CIVIL APPEAL NOS.2285-2330 OF2019(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.928-930, 932 TO938 940 TO967AND969TO976of 2019) DLF HOMES PANCHKULA (P) LTD. THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. SHIV KUMAR Appellant VERSUS SUSHILA DEVI AND ANR. ETC. Respondents WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NOS.931, 939 AND968OF2019DLF HOMES PANCHKULA (P) LTD. THROUGH ITS AUTHORISED SIGNATORY MR. SHIV KUMAR Petitioner MRIDULA SOOD ETC.. VERSUS WITH Respondent CIVIL APPEAL NO.2354 OF2019(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.26519 of 2018) RAVI DATT AGGARWAL AND ORS. Appellants VERSUS DLF HOMES PANCHKULA PVT. LTD. AND ORS. Respondents CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 2285-2330 OF2019(@ SLP(C) NOS.928-930, 932-938, 940-967 and 969-976 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.1062910631 OF2014The Competent Authority Calcutta, Under the Land (Ceiling And Regulation) Act, 1976 And Anr. .Appellant(s) Versus David Mantosh & Ors. .Respondent(s) WITH CIVIL APPEAL Nos.98299830 OF2016Apollo Gleneagles Hospitals Ltd. .Appellant(s) Versus David Mantosh & Ors. .Respondent(s) AND CIVIL APPEAL No.9900 OF2016Apollo Gleneagles Hospitals Ltd. .Appellant(s) Versus David Mantosh & Ors. .Respondent(s) 1 JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. C.A. Nos.1062910631 of 2014 are filed by the Competent Authority against the Judgment and Order dated 27.09.2013 in F.A. No.202/2008, Judgment and Order dated 24.07.2014 in the Review Petition being RVW No.36/2014 with CAN No.1450/2014 in F.A. No.202/2008 passed by the High Court at Calcutta.2. C.A. Nos.98299830 of 2016 are filed by M/s Apollo Gleneagles Hospitals Ltd. against the judgment and order dated 27.09.2013 in F.A. No.202/2008 with CAN No.1054/2014...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
SLP(C)No.618 of 2018 M/S. Model Economic Township Ltd. Vs. Land Acquisition Collector 1 Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL)NO.618 OF2018M/S. MODEL ECONOMIC TOWNSHIP LTD. Petitioner VERSUS LAND ACQUISITION COLLECTOR ... Respondent ORDER Uday Umesh Lalit, J.1. In the present case, pursuant to notification under Section 4 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (the Act for short) issued on 19.05.2008, followed by declaration under Section 6 of the Act on 26.05.2008 in respect of 136 acres of land, award was declared on 21.12.2009 granting compensation @ 25,00,000/- per acre. Applications seeking reference under Section 18 of the Act were preferred by many landholders but the petitioner SLP(C)No.618 of 2018 M/S. Model Economic Township Ltd. Vs. Land Acquisition Collector 2 (formally known as M/s. Reliance Haryana SEZ Limited) holding about 15 acres of land did not prefer any such application.2. The Reference Court by order dated 1...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
C.A.@ SLP(C)No.25699/18 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2276 OF2019[Arising out of S.L.P.(C)No.25699 of 2018]. Union of India & Ors. ... Appellants Versus Coastal Container Transporters Association & Ors. ... Respondents JUDGMENT R. Subhash Reddy, J.1. 2. Leave granted. This civil appeal is filed by Union of India and others, respondents in Special Civil Application No.6679 of 2016 filed before the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, aggrieved by the judgment and order dated 18.12.2017. By the aforesaid order, the High Court has quashed the show cause notices dated 08.10.2015 and 30.09.2015 issued by the appellants, in exercise of power under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 (for short, the Act).3. The first respondent is Coastal Container Transporters Association and the second and third 1 C.A.@ SLP(C)No.25699/18 respondents are, Yamuna Shipping Logistics Pvt. Ltd. and Pushpak Logistics Pvt. Ltd. who are engaged in the transp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2024 of 2019 {Arising out of SLP(C) No.32721/2017} VINOD JAIN .Appellant versus SANTOKBA DURLABHJI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL & ANR. .Respondents JUDGMENT SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.1. 2. Leave granted. The sad demise of the wife of the appellant on 31.10.2011 has resulted in the legal proceedings being initiated by the appellant on a belief that the cause of her death was medical negligence. The State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Rajasthan (for short State Commission) found in favour of the appellant vide order dated 11.5.2016, but the said order was upset in appeal in the National 1 Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (for short NCDRC) vide order dated 1.8.2017. We are, thus, faced with the present appeal.3. Late Mrs. Sudha Jain was the wife of the appellant, who was suffering from various diseases oesophageal cancer (past history of colon and breast cancer), hypertension and type 2 diab...
Tag this Judgment!