Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7432 OF2019(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) No.36926 of 2012) UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .... APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/s UNICORN INDUSTRIES .... RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.2345 OF2017and CIVIL APPEAL No.2346 OF2017JUDGMENT B.R. GAVAI, J.Leave granted in S.L.P.(C) No.36926 of 2012.2. The question of law that arises for consideration in these appeals is, as to whether, by invoking the doctrine of promissory estoppel, can the Union of India be estopped from withdrawing the exemption from payment of Excise Duty in respect of certain products, which exemption is granted by an earlier notification; when the 2 Union of India finds that such a withdrawal is necessary in the public interest.3. Since the factual position as well as the question of law arising in the present three appeals are common, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment. The appellant, Union of India, in exercise of powers ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1046 OF2010SMT. GARGI ... APPELLANT(S) VS. STATE OF HARYANA Dinesh Maheshwari, J.JUDGMENT RESPONDENT(S) Preliminary 1. This appeal by special leave is directed against the common judgement and order dated 05.03.20081 whereby, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh has partly affirmed the judgment and order dated 09.06.1998 in Sessions Case No.63 of 1997 by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ambala; and has upheld the conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code ('IPC') even while acquitting the co-accused persons of the charge under Section 302 read with Section 120-B IPC. 1.1. In a brief outline of the material aspects, it may be noticed that in the present case, the appellant was charged with the imputations that 1 in Criminal Appeal Nos. 341-DB of 1998 and 359-DB of 1998. 1 she killed her husband by strangulation and, with the help...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE1IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1429 OF2011ILLOTH VALAPPIL AMBUNHI (D) BY LRS. Appellant(s) VERSUS KUNHAMBU KARANAVAN Respondent(s) JUDGMENT INDIRA BANERJEE J.1. This Appeal is against a Judgment dated 12th March, 2009 in Second Appeal No.229 of 1996 passed by a Single Bench of the Kerala High Court, whereby the High Court has set aside the concurrent decisions of the Trial Court and the First Appellate Court and declared that the suit property belongs to the Chuzhali Bhagavathi Dharmadeva Bhandaram (hereinafter referred to as the Bhandaram).2. The High Court further declared that the deed of assignment dated 31st July, 1971 executed by Raman Aithan Ashari in favour of the appellant in respect of the suit property was null and void and not 2 binding on the respondents and allowed the respondents to recover possession of the suit property for and on behalf of the the Bhandaram.3. The facts giving rise to this Appeal are very briefly ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4952 OF2019REPORTABLE GAURAV HARGOVINDBHAI DAVE Appellant(s) VERSUS ASSET RECONSTRUCTION COMPANY (INDIA)LTD.& ANR.Respondent(s) R.F. Nariman, J.JUDGMENT1 In the present case, the Respondent No.2 was declared NPA on 21.07.2011. At that point of time, the State Bank of India filed two O.As in the Debt Recovery Tribunal in 2012 in order to recover a total debt of 50 Crores of rupees. In the meanwhile, by an assignment dated 28.03.2014, the State Bank of India assigned the aforesaid debt to Respondent No.1. The Debt Recovery Tribunal proceedings reached judgment on 10.06.2016, the Tribunal holding that the O.As filed before it were not maintainable for the reasons given therein.2) As against the aforesaid judgment, Special Civil Application Nos. 10621-10622 were filed before the Gujarat High Court which resulted in the High Court remanding the aforesaid matter. From this order, a Special Leave Petition was dismiss...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 293294 OF2009ITC LIMITED APPELLANT(S) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, KOLKATA IV RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.2960 OF2010CIVIL APPEAL NO.5878 OF2011CIVIL APPEAL NO.310 OF2011CIVIL APPEAL NOS.44324434 OF2011CIVIL APPEAL NO.6407 OF2011CIVIL APPEAL NOS.15751582 OF2012CIVIL APPEAL NO.1585 OF2012CIVIL APPEAL NO.1571 OF2012CIVIL APPEAL NO.5490 OF2011CIVIL APPEAL NO.5491 OF2011CIVIL APPEAL NO.5489 OF2011CIVIL APPEAL NO.6054 OF2011CIVIL APPEAL NO.7710 OF20142 CIVIL APPEAL NO.5960 OF2016CIVIL APPEAL NO.96 OF2016CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 738486 OF2019(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOS.1611416116 OF2017 CIVIL APPEAL No.7387 OF2019(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.25193 OF2016 CIVIL APPEAL No.7388 OF2019(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.26530 OF2016 CIVIL APPEAL No.20852 OF2017CIVIL APPEAL No.7389 OF2019(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NO.4294 OF2017 CIVIL APPEAL No.7391 OF2019(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) N...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.11774 OF2018Versus Vasant Ganpat Padave (D) By LRs & Ors. Anant Mahadev Sawant (D) Through LRs & Ors. Appellants Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS.11775-11798 OF2018JUDGMENT R.F. Nariman, J.1. This case has been referred to a Three Judge Bench by a detailed judgment of a Division Bench of this Court reported as Vasant Ganpat Padave v. Anant Mahadev Sawant (2019) 2 SCC788 The relevant facts that are necessary for determination of the controversy before us are set out in paragraphs 3 to 5 of the referral order as follows: 3. One Balwant Sawant was landlord of Survey No.92/2, corresponding to new Survey No.31 Hissa No.2/10, 1 admeasuring about 0.01.3 H.R. at Village Padavewadi, Taluka & District Ratnagiri. Balwant Sawant died on 10-5- 1950 leaving behind Smt Indirabai Balwant Sawant, his widow as his legal heir and representative. Smt Indirabai Balwant Sawant, widow became the owner of the said propert...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Civil Appeal No.7358 of 2019 @ SLP(C) No.27072 of 2016 M/s Tecnimont Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly known as Tecnimont ICB Pvt. Ltd.) vs. The State of Punjab and Others and with other connected matters 1 Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.7358 OF2019(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil)No.27072 of 2016) M/s Tecnimont Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly known as Tecnimont ICB Private Limited) Appellant Versus State of Punjab & Others Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.7379 OF2019CIVIL APPEAL NO.7382 OF2019CIVIL APPEAL NO.7362 OF2019CIVIL APPEAL NO.7359 OF2019CIVIL APPEAL NO.7360 OF2019CIVIL APPEAL NO.7373 OF2019CIVIL APPEAL NO.7378 OF2019CIVIL APPEAL NO.7372 OF2019SLP(C) No.8491/2016 SLP(C) No.26177/2016 SLP(C) No.2151/2017 SLP(C) No.1738/2017 SLP(C) No.967/2017 SLP(C) No.1737/2017 SLP(C) No.4405/2017 SLP(C) No.30829/2016 SLP(C) No.29203/2016 SLP(C) No.36303/2016 SLP(C) No.1742/2017 SLP(C) No.36300/2016 SLP(C) No.36305/2016 SLP(C) No.36306/2016 CIVIL APPEA...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2607 OF2013Janardan Dagdu Khomane and Another ... Appellants versus Eknath Bhiku Yadav & Ors. ... Respondents JUDGMENT Indira Banerjee, J.1. This appeal is against a final judgment and order dated 6th February, 2006, whereby a Division Bench of Bombay High Court allowed Writ Petition No.1442 of 1987 filed by the Respondent Nos.1,2 and 3, and directed the concerned authorities to hold proceedings under Section 32(G) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 [hereinafter referred to as the 1948 Act to fix the purchase price of 6 acres and 19 gunthas of lands at Pimpli Village in the Baramati Taluk in Pune district, hereinafter referred to as the said land. 2 2. The appellants are the trustees of Shree Maruti Deo Trust Pimpli Limtek, registered as a public trust under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950, hereinafter referred to as the Public Trusts Act. By amendment in 2012, the Public Trus...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2452 OF2010RAMBHAU GANPATI NAGPURE APPELLANT(S) VERSUS GANESH NATHUJI WARBE & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT DEEPAK GUPTA, J.This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 28.01.2009 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur Bench whereby the second appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed on the ground that no substantial question of law arose.2. Brief facts of the case are that the parties owned agricultural land adjoining each other in Mouza Sirsi. The plaintiffs (Respondents before us) filed a suit claiming that the ancestral land of the plaintiffs was about 6.07 hectares, and to the south of the field of the plaintiffs lay the defendants (Appellant before us) field and the area of the land owned by the defendant was 4.23 hectares. A resurvey was done in 1 the year 1991 and in the resurvey the land of the defendant was shown to be 5.3 hectares, which was in ex...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5277 OF2010MAHESHWARY HANDLING AGENCY PRIVATE LIMITED .. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF KANDLA PORT TRUST AND OTHERS .. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT SANJIV KHANNA, J.The appellant, Maheshwary Handling Agency Private Limited, is a private limited company engaged in the business of clearing, forwarding and transporting of cargo for import and export as a steamer agent.2. During the course of their business, the appellant had used facilities at the Kandla Port, Gujarat for storing imported/ exported cargo, for which it was liable to pay charges as per schedule/scales of rates framed by the Board of Trustees of Kandla Port Trust, the first respondent before us (the Board, for short) published in the Official Gazette in terms of Section Civil Appeal No.5277 of 2010 Page 1 of 17 52 of the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 (Port Trusts Act, for short), which prior to its omission in 1997 read as under: 52. Pri...
Tag this Judgment!