Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1167 OF2019(Arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No.4314 of 2015) Vijendra .Appellant(s) Versus State of Uttar Pradesh .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT A.S. Bopanna,J.Leave granted.2. The instant appeal arises from the judgment passed by the High Court of Allahabad in Criminal Revision No.1595 of 1988 in and by which the High 2 Court dismissed the revision filed by the appellant thereby affirming the conviction of the appellant under Sec. 7(1)/16(1)(a)(i) of Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954.3. Sri R.C. Kansal, Food Inspector filed a complaint stating that on 16.10.1979, at about 8:00 AM, while he was posted as Food Inspector at Primary Health Centre Bhojpur, he found the appellant taking buffalo milk for sale on the Acchapalgarhi Road, Pilakhuwa, District Ghaziabad. On demanding license from Appellant, it was revealed that he did not have any license for selling the milk. Suspecting adulteration i...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5898 OF2019(@ SLP(CIVIL) NO.15783 OF2017 CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA & ORS. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS TARA CHAND ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.This appeal has been filed by the Central Bank of India challenging the judgment of the Division Bench of the Rajasthan High Court dated 09.03.2017 in the DB Civil Special Appeal No.817 of 2015 dismissing the Special Appeal filed by the appellants. The Special Appeal was filed by the appellants against the judgment of the learned Single Judge dated 28.04.2015 allowing the writ petition filed by the respondent quashing the order of the Bank dated 12.09.2001 denying to grant pro-rata pension upon opting for 1 voluntary retirement under the Central Bank of India Employees Voluntary Retirement Scheme, 2001.2. Necessary facts for deciding this appeal are: On 26.10.1995 Central Bank of India (Employees) Pension Regulations, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as Regula...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1392 OF2008SUDHIR KUMAR JAIN ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI,J.1. This appeal arises out of the impugned judgment dated 03.04.2008 passed by the High Court of Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench in Criminal Appeal No.1717 of 2003 in and by which the High Court has affirmed the conviction of the appellant-accused under Section 302 IPC and Section 3 read with 25 of the Arms Act and the sentence of life imprisonment imposed upon him. On 17.04.2003 at around 09.45 a.m., deceased Rajendra Sahu came to the auto-stand near Baheti Hospital in his auto rickshaw. At around 12 noon when he was sitting on his auto-rickshaw, he saw one Maruti 800 bearing No.RJ-06C-3432 coming and three persons were sitting in the Car. Out of them, one of the occupants of the car opened the left front side door of the car and signalled Rajendra Sahu to come nearer to the car. T...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No(s). 556 of 2009 SAHIB SINGH Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF PUNJAB Respondent(s) A.S. BOPANNA, J.: JUDGMENT (1) The appellant before us is assailing the judgment of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal No.499 of 2005 dated 23.01.2008. The High Court through the said judgment upheld the judgment of Sessions Case No.20 of 2002 dated 22.02.2005. Both the courts, through the concurrent judgments have convicted the appellant herein for the offence punishable under Section 326 I.P.C. On the quantum of sentence, the High Court while taking note of other aspects and having taken into consideration that the appellant has already undergone more than five years of actual imprisonment has held the same to be sufficient. The High Court has also imposed compensation of a sum of Rs.20,000/-. Being aggrieved, the appellant is before us in this appeal. (2) We have heard Mr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5979 OF2019(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.8352 of 2015 NARENDRA KUMAR MITTAL & ORS. APPELLANTS VERSUS M/S NUPUR HOUSING DEVELOPMENT PVT. LTD. AND ANR. RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.5980 OF2019(Arising out of S.L.P. (Civil) No.8528 of 2015 JUDGMENT S. ABDUL NAZEER, J.CIVIL APPEAL No.5979 OF2019(Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.8352 of 2015 1. Leave granted. 2 2. The question for consideration in this appeal is whether the suit filed by the first respondentplaintiff for cancellation of the sale deed dated 15.06.2006 against the appellantsecond defendant and second respondentfirst defendant, and for injunction restraining them from interfering with its possession of the property was maintainable?.3. The plaintiff is a private limited company, registered under the Companies Act, 1956. It had purchased from the first defendant certain properties (for short 'the disputed property') in Village Yakootpu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No(s). 5978 OF2019(Arising out of SLP(C) No(s).11267 of 2016) DHARAMRAJ NIVRUTTI KASTURE Appellant(s) VERSUS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND ANR. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT BANUMATHI, J.: Leave granted. (2) This appeal arises out of judgment and order of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition No.3353 of 2002 dated 07.01.2016 in and by which the High Court has set aside the order of the Labour Court and the Industrial Tribunal of reinstatement of the appellant. However, the High Court has directed the respondent-Zilla Parishad to pay compensation of Rs.50,000/- in lieu of reinstatement of the appellant and in full quit of all claims. (3) The appellant was appointed as peon in Zilla Parishad on 23.03.1983 on daily-wage basis for a period of two months and his services were discontinued from 31.12.1987 by Order dated 07.01.1988. The appellant filed a complaint under Sections 28 read with clau...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No(s). 5998 of 2019 (@SLP(C) No.23604/2014) M/s. Balwant Singh & Sons Appellant(s) Versus National Insurance Company Ltd & Anr. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud Leave granted. This appeal arises from a judgment of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission1 dated 11 March 2014 dismissing a revision petition filed by the appellant. The NCDRC upheld the view of the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Jalandhar2 and of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Chandigarh3 that the insurer was not liable on a claim preferred under a policy of insurance for the loss of a vehicle occasioned by theft. 1 NCDRC 2 District Forum 3 SCDRC 2 The third respondent entered into a Hire Purchase Agreement with ICICI Bank4, the second respondent through its Branch at Jalandhar in respect of a vehicle. Pursuant to the agreement, the third respondent paid a few instalments but the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1773 OF2002TALAT FATIMA HASAN THROUGH HER CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY SH. SYED MEHDI HUSAIN APPELLANT(S) Versus NAWAB SYED MURTAZA ALI KHAN (D) BY LRS. & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.4012 OF2002CONTEMPT PETITION (CIVIL) No.1079 OF2018IN CIVIL APPEAL No.1773 OF2002JUDGMENT Deepak Gupta, J.1. Whether succession to the properties declared by an erstwhile ruler to be his private properties in the agreement of accession with the Dominion of India will be governed by the 1 rule of succession applicable to the Gaddi (rulership) or by the personal law applicable to the ruler, is the question for consideration in the present appeals.2. The British Government decided to withdraw from the Indian subcontinent and the plan in this regard was published on 03.06.1947 which envisaged the formation of two countries, India and Pakistan. As per the Indian Independence Act, 1947 two independent Dominions India and P...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1082 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL.) No.10762 OF2018 CHILAKAMARTHI VENKATESWARLU & ANR. Appellants VERSUS STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH & ANR. Respondents JUDGMENT Indira Banerjee, J.This appeal is against a judgment and order dated 30th August, 2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Hyderabad for the State of Telangana and the State of Andhra Pradesh dismissing Criminal Petition No.9225 of 2018 filed by the appellant under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.PC) to quash the criminal proceedings being PRC No.2 of 2018 pending against the Appellants in the Court of the Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate, Narsapur, West Godavari District for offences 2 punishable under Sections 307, 323, 427, 447 and 506(2) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).2. The Appellants and the Respondent No.2, being the de facto complainant, are apparently close relatives and are ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Civil Appeal Nos.3207-3208 of 2019 Marvel Omega Builders Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Shrihari Gokhale and Anr. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 3207-3208 OF20191 Reportable MARVEL OMEGA BUILDERS PVT. LTD. AND ANR. Appellants Versus SHRIHARI GOKHALE AND ANR. Respondents JUDGMENT Uday Umesh Lalit, J.1. These Appeals under Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 are directed against (i) the judgment and final order dated 31.05.2018 passed in Consumer Case No.2010 of 2016 and (ii) the order dated 05.09.2018 passed in Miscellaneous Application No.578 of 2018 by the Commission1.2. The Respondents had booked a residential villa viz: Emerald- 07 in a project named Marvel Selva Ridge Estate to be developed by the Appellants. The total consideration for the villa with three 1 National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi Civil Appeal Nos.3207-3208 of 2019 Marvel Omega Builders Pvt. Ltd. and Anr. Vs. Shrihari Gokhale and Anr. 2 covered c...
Tag this Judgment!