Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7764 OF2014Ravinder Kaur Grewal & Ors. ...Appellant(s) Versus Manjit Kaur & Ors. ...Respondent(s) JUDGMENT A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. This appeal emanates from the judgment and decree dated 27.11.2007 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh1 in R.S.A. No.946/2004, whereby the second appeal filed by the respondent Nos. 1 to 3 (heirs and legal representatives of Mohan Singh original defendant No.1) came to be allowed by answering the substantial question of law formulated as under: Whether the document Ex.P6 required registration as by way of said document the interest in immovable property worth more than Rs.100/ was transferred in favour of the plaintiff?. 1 For short, the High Court 2 2. Briefly stated, the suit was filed by the predecessor of the appellants herein Harbans Singh, son of Niranjan Singh, resident of Sangrur, Punjab against his real brothers Mohan Singh (original de...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2255 OF2010PREM CHAND APPELLANT Versus STATE OF HARYANA RESPONDENT JUDGMENT N. V. RAMANA, J.1. The present appeal arises out of the impugned judgment dated 09.12.2009 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Appeal no.492DBA of 1996, whereby the High Court set aside the judgment of the trial court acquitting the appellant herein and convicted him for the offences under Section 2 (1a) (f) of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (in short, the Act) punishable under Section 16(1A) and Section 16(1)(a)(ii) 1 of the Act for selling adulterated Haldi Powder and selling it without licence.2. The case of the prosecution is that, on 18.8.1982, at about 11 A.M., the Food Inspector, along with Medical Officer, inspected the shop of the accusedappellant in the presence of the witnesses and found 10 kgs of Haldi Powder in his shop. The Food Inspector purchased 600 ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2834 OF2020(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) No.11697 OF2019 B.B.M ENTERPRISES APPELLANT VERSUS THE STATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ANR. RESPONDENTS WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.2835 OF2020(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) No.11775 OF2019 JUDGMENT R.F. Nariman, J.1) Leave granted.2) We have heard learned counsel for the parties at great length.3) Mr. Sidharth Luthra, learned Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of the respondent, painstakingly took us through the records, including the Award, in order to point out various deficiencies which, according to him, fell within the parameters of a Section 34 petition as a result of which we should not therefore disturb the judgment of the High Court, which has merely remanded the matter and directed that the matter be disposed of in six months. 24) This matter has a chequered history. The Award that was made by the learned Arbitrator was on 16.09.2009. Five claims were made before him amoun...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2796 OF2020(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.17734 OF2019 REPORTABLE DR. ASWATHY R.S. KARTHIKA & ORS. .....APPELLANT(S) DR. ARCHANA M. & ORS. VERSUS W I T H .....RESPONDENT(S) CIVIL APPEAL No.2797 OF2020(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.8652 OF2020 JUDGMENT HEMANT GUPTA, J.1. The four appellants in these two appeals before us, were the original applicants before the Kerala Administrative Tribunal1 who invoked its jurisdiction under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985. The Tribunal allowed the Original Application2 filed by the appellants on 15th November, 2017 directing the Kerala Public Service Commission3 to make the shortfall in reservations from the succeeding rank list. It is the said order and the order passed in review by the Tribunal on 15th October, 2018 which were challenged before the High Court by the private respondents herein. The High Court set aside the order of the Tribunal and dismiss...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7865 OF2009REPORTABLE SHREE CHOUDHARY TRANSPORT COMPANY Appellant(s) Vs INCOME TAX OFFICER Dinesh Maheshwari, J.Preliminary Respondent(s) JUDGMENT1 By way of this appeal, the assessee-appellant has called in question the order dated 15.05.2009 passed in Income Tax Appeal No.164 of 2008 whereby, the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan at Jodhpur has summarily dismissed the appeal against the order dated 29.08.2008 passed in ITA No.117/JU/2008 by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench at Jodhpur; and thereby, the High Court has upheld the computation of total income of the assessee-appellant for the assessment year 2005-2006 with disallowance of payments to the tune of Rs. 57,11,625/-, essentially in terms of Section 40(a)(ia) of the Income Tax Act, 19611, for failure of the assessee- appellant to deduct the requisite tax at source2. 1 Hereinafter referred to as the Act of 1961 or simply the Act. 2 Ta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.13 of 2013 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .... Appellants Versus LT. COL. S. S. BEDI . Respondent (s) W I T H Criminal Appeal No.997 of 2013 LT. COL. S. S. BEDI Versus .... Appellants UNION OF INDIA & ORS. . Respondent (s) JUDGMENT L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.These Appeals have been preferred against the 1. judgment of the Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter, the Tribunal) by which the conviction of Ex. Lt. Col. S. S. Bedi by the General Court Martial was affirmed. However, the sentence of cashiering from service was converted into a fine of Rs.50,000/- by the Tribunal. An application filed by Ex. Lt. Col. S. S. Bedi 1 for granting permission to file an Appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal. The Appellant has filed Criminal Appeal No.997 of 2013 aggrieved by the judgment of the Tribunal upholding the conviction ordered by the General Court Martial and imposition of fine of Rs.50,000...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.283 of 2011 Parminder Kaur @ P.P. Kaur @ Soni ..... Appellants(s) VERSUS State of Punjab .....Respondents(s) JUDGMENT SURYA KANT, J.1. The present Criminal Appeal has been preferred by Parminder Kaur, impugning the judgment dated 30.11.2009 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana through which her challenge to a judgment dated 27.02.1999 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Barnala was turned down, thereby confirming her conviction of three years rigorous imprisonment and fine of Rs. 2000 under Sections 366A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC). FACTS & CASE HISTORY2 The prosecution story, as recorded in the FIR at around noon on 24.02.1996, was that the appellant was a single lady living with her child, mother and a young boy as her tenant in the neighbourhood of Page | 1 the prosecutrixs1 house. About a week prior to registration of the police complaint, the appellant called the pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 2811-2812 OF2020[Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.8495-8496 of 2018]. ERUDHAYA PRIYA APPELLANT VERSUS STATE EXPRESS TRANSPORT CORPORATION LTD. .RESPONDENT JUDGMENT SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, J.1. Leave granted.2. On the fateful day of 16.08.2011, the appellant was travelling from Chennai to Bangalore in a bus owned by the respondent State Corporation bearing registration No.TN-01-N-7531. At about 5.40 a.m., while the bus was moving on the Kolar Bangalore National Highway, it ran into a stationary lorry. The collision resulted in multiple injuries to numerous passengers 1 including the appellant, and caused death of the bus conductor on the spot. The appellant was rushed to R.L. Jallappa Research & Medical College Hospital, Tamak, Kolar and further treatment was administered at the Manipal Hospital, Bangalore where she remained admitted for 8 months. The injuries to the appellant were grievous including fractures...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2463 OF2014... APPELLANT ... RESPONDENT VERSUS SHAILENDRA SWARUP THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR, ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.This appeal has been filed against the judgment of Delhi High Court dated 18.11.2009 dismissing the Criminal Appeal filed by the appellant by which appeal the judgment dated 26.03.2008 of the Appellate Tribunal for Foreign Exchange in Appeal No.622 of 2004 filed by the appellant was challenged.2. Brief facts of the case giving rise to this appeal are:2. 1 Modi Xerox Ltd.(MXL) was a Company registered under the Companies Act 1956 in the year 1983. Between the period 12.06.1985-21.11.1985, 20 2 remittances were made by the Company-MXL through its banker Standard Chartered Bank. The Reserve Bank of India issued a letter stating that despite reminder issued by the Authorised Dealer, MXL had not submitted the Exchange Control copy of the custom bills of Entry/Posta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Special Leave Petition (C) No.6439 of 2020 R. PALANISAMY & ORS. ... Petitioners Versus THE REGISTRAR GENERAL HIGH COURT OF MADRAS & ORS. ... Respondents ORDER1 Aggrieved by the dismissal by the High Court, of their claim for promotion to the post of Junior Bailiff, persons working as Office Assistants/Record Clerks in various courts in Erode District of the State of Tamil Nadu have come up with this special leave petition.2. We have heard Mr. Purushottam Sharma Tripathi, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners. 2 3. 22 persons, of whom 3 are working as Record Clerks and the rest working as Office Assistants in various courts in Erode District filed a writ petition on the file of the High Court of Judicature at Madras, seeking a Mandamus to consider their claim for promotion to the post of Junior Bailiff, without insisting on the educational qualification of a pass in SSLC. Their claim was based upon (1) a pre...
Tag this Judgment!