Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.6890 OF2022[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) No.8393 OF2022 JEETUBHA KHANSANGJI JADEJA ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS KUTCHH DISTRICT PANCHAYAT ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J.1. Leave granted. With consent, learned counsels for the parties were heard finally. This appeal is directed against an order of the Gujarat High Court1.2. Aggrieved by the termination from employment, the appellant raised an industrial dispute which was referred to the Labour Court, Bhuj, Kutchh District of Gujarat. The appellant was appointed as a Watchman on 05.10.1992 by the respondent society (hereafter referred to as the management), and lastly, he 1 Dated 05.07.2021 in LPA No.896/2011 in Special Civil Application No.5620/2011. 1 was working as a watchman at the Shirai Dam at the Beraja Village of Mundra Taluk, Gujarat, with the respondent. After rendering continuous employment, he was terminated from the services on...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2741 OF2009ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) No.15685 OF2008USHA GOPIRATHNAM & ORS. ..APPELLANT(S) VERSUS P.S.RANGANATHAN (D) THR. LRs. & ORS. ..RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT1 This appeal is directed against the final judgement and order dated 22.01.2008 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore, whereby the High Court dismissed an appeal filed by the Appellants herein and affirmed the order of the II Additional Civil Judge (Senior Division), Bangalore Rural, Bangalore dated 16.09.2006, which had dismissed a civil suit filed by the Plaintiff/Appellants seeking dissolution of Respondent No.4/Partnership Firm, M/s. High Clere Stud and Agricultural Farm.2. Parties before this Court: The Appellants before this Court are the legal heirs of late Mr. Gopirathnam. Mr. Gopirathnam 1 was one of the partners of the Respondent No.4 Firm. The partnership firm originally comprised of Mr. P.S. Ranganathan, Mr. Lavakumar and Mr. Basanth...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 6897-6898 OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NOS. 19314-19315 OF2021 OWNERS AND PARTIES INTERESTED IN THE VESSEL M.V. POLARIS GALAXY Appellant (s) Versus BANQUE CANTONALE DE GENEVE Respondent (s) JUDGMENT Indira Banerjee, J.Leave granted.2. These appeals are against a judgment and order dated 28th October 2021 passed by the Commercial Appellate Division of the High Court of Judicature at Madras allowing Commercial Appeal being O.S.A (CAD) No.88 of 2021 filed by the Respondent, and setting aside an order dated 24th September 2021 passed by the Commercial Division (Single Bench) of the High Court, adding Gulf Petroleum FZC as defendant in the Admiralty Suit filed by the Respondent, Banque Nationale De Geneve being CS (Commercial Division) No.96 of 2021. 13. The Appellant, M/s Galaxy Marine Services Limited is the registered owner of the Vessel, M. V. Polaris Galaxy, a sea-going oil tanker, flying the fla...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.4911 OF2021ASHOK G. RAJANI ....Appellant (s) Versus BEACON TRUSTEESHIP LTD. & ORS. .Respondent (s) JUDGMENT Indira Banerjee, J.This Appeal under Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) is against an interim order dated 18th August 2021 passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), Principal Bench at New Delhi in Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.598 of 2021, filed by the Appellant, whereby the NCLAT issued notice of the Appeal, but did not restrain the Interim Resolution Professional (IRP) from proceeding with Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of M/s Seya Industries Limited (hereinafter referred to as Corporate Debtor). The NCLAT, however, restrained the IRP from 1 constituting a Committee of Creditors (CoC) till the next date of hearing. In the meanwhile, the Appellant and the Respondents were given the opportunity to settle their disputes before t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S).16991723 OF2015BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD. AND OTHERS ETC. .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S TATA COMMUNICATIONS LTD. ETC. .RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT Ajay Rastogi, J.1. The instant batch of appeals has been preferred by the appellant, Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. assailing the judgment dated 20th August, 2014 passed by the Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi, followed with the order dated 14th October, 2014 rejecting the application filed by the appellant seeking clarification of judgment dated 20th August, 2014 to the extent that the rate of infrastructure charges for Active Links of Licensed Telecom Service Providers to be charged in terms of the 1 circular dated 12th June, 2012 has been made effective from 1st April, 2013 instead of 1st April, 2009 taking note of increase of 10% per annum between 1st April, 2009 to 31st March, 2013 as payable on 1st April, 2013. As consequence thereto, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6613 OF2021MAITREYA DOSHI ....Appellant (s) Versus ANAND RATHI GLOBAL FINANCE LTD. AND ANR. ...Respondent (s) JUDGMENT Indira Banerjee, J.This appeal under Section 62 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016, hereinafter referred to as the IBC, is against a Judgement and Order dated 25th August 2021, passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT), dismissing the Company Appeal (AT) (Insolvency) No.191 of 2021 filed by the Appellant, against an order dated 19th February 2021, passed by the Adjudicating Authority (National Company Law Tribunal), NCLT, Mumbai Bench admitting a Company Petition C.P. (IB) No.1220/MB/2020 filed by the Respondent No.1 - Anand Rathi Global Finance Limited as Financial Creditor, for initiation of the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of M/s Doshi 2 Holdings Pvt. Ltd., hereinafter referred to as Doshi Holdings, under Section 7 of the IBC. The App...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6856 of 2022 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) No.920 of 2021) K. Priyadharshini & Ors. Appellant(s) VERSUS M/s Gammon India Limited & Anr. Respondent(s) ORDER1 This appeal is of the Claimants which arises out of the Impugned Judgement dated 30.01.2019 by the High Court of Madras in an appeal against the order of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal, Chennai (for short, the Tribunal) dated 23.02.2018.2. The accident occurred on 15.01.2013 when S. Karthikeyan (hereafter, deceased) was on his motorcycle on the Anna Salai Road from North to South Direction. The vehicle being driven by S. Karthikeyan, crashed with a crane, belonging to Respondent No.1 which was duly insured with Respondent No.2 which resulted in grievous injuries to the body of the deceased. He was taken to the hospital but he succumbed to his injuries. The claim petition was filed on behalf of the Appellants. The High Court as well as the Tribunal were of the opin...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6855 OF2022(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO.1797 OF2018 NARAYAN & ORS. ... APPELLANTS Versus MANAGER ROYAL SUNDARAM ALLIANCE INSURANCE CO. LTD.& ANR. ... RESPONDENTS ORDER1 This appeal is of the claimants, which arises out of the Impugned Judgment dated 05.04.2017 by the High Court of Karnataka at Kalaburagi Bench in an appeal against the order of Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (for short, the Tribunal) dated 28.06.2014.2. The accident occurred on 30.03.2010 when the deceased Kiran was riding on a two-wheeler from Sholapur to Pandharpur, Maharashtra. During the journey an accident occurred when a Heavy Goods Vehicle crashed into the two-wheeler and caused fatal injuries to Kiran, who died on the spot. The claim petition was filed on his behalf by his parents and younger brother. The Tribunal was of the opinion that the accident did occur due to the rash and negligent driving by driver of the Heavy Goods Vehicle. The v...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.20417 OF2017M/s. DAIICHI SANKYO COMPANY LIMITED PETITIONER VERSUS OSCAR INVESTMENTS LIMITED & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS WITH CONTEMPT PETITION (C) No.2120 OF2018IN SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.20417 OF2017AND SUO MOTU CONTEMPT PETITION (C) No.4 OF2019JUDGMENT Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI.1. The present proceedings arise out of an action initiated by Daiichi Sankyo Company Limited (hereinafter referred to as Daiichi) for enforcing a Foreign Arbitral Award dated 29.04.2016 made in Singapore and passed in favour of Daiichi and against 20 Respondents i.e. Respondent 1:2. Malvinder Mohan Singh, Respondent 2: Malvinder Mohan Singh as Karta of HUF, Respondent No.3: Malvinder Mohan Singh as Trustee of Bhai Hospital Trust, Respondent No.4: Japna M. Singh, Respondent 5: Nimrita Singh, Respondent 6: Shivinder Mohan Singh, Respondent 7: Shivinder Mohan Singh as Karta of HUF, Respondent 8: Aditi Singh, Respond...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION Miscellaneous Application No 2279 of 2018 in Writ Petition (Civil) No 328 of 2022 Narmada Bachao Andolan and Ors .... Petitioner(s) Versus Union of India & Ors ....Respondent(s) WITH Miscellaneous Application No 610 of 2020 in Writ Petition (Civil) No 328 of 2022 JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J Miscellaneous Application No 2279 of 2018 1 The Miscellaneous Application for clarification/modification has been filed by Ms. Archana, a resident of Village Bhawariya, Tehsil Kukshi, District Dhar in the State of Madhya Pradesh. 2 2 Before we proceed to analyze the application for clarification/modification, it is necessary to extract the relief which is specifically sought, at this stage: a) Clarify/Modify that the order dated 08.02.2017 passed by this Hon'ble Court in IA No.42, 43, 50, 51 and 52, 53 in WP (C) No.328 of 2002 read with terms of NWDTA, MP R&R Policy 1989, judgments of this Hon'ble Court reported in 2000...
Tag this Judgment!