Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA2024INSC256CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 743-744 OF2017THE ORISSA STATE FINANCIAL ..... APPELLANT(S) CORPORATION & ANR. VERSUS SMT. SUKANTI MOHAPATRA & ORS. ..... RESPONDENT(S) ORDER Having heard learned counsel for the parties at length, we are of the view that the impugned judgment passed by the Division Bench of the High Court, allowing Writ Petition (Civil) nos. 7220/2007 and 8405/2007 filed by respondent nos. 1 and 2 Sukanti Mohapatra and Prasanta Kumar Mohapatra, is unsustainable, both on facts and in law.2. The appellant before us Orissa State Financial Corporation1 had granted a loan of Rs.3,26,258.78 (Rupees three lakhs twenty six thousand two hundred fifty eight and seventy eight paisa only) to respondent No.2 - Prasanta Kumar Mohapatra. The loan was payable in 24 monthly installments commencing from 31.01.1997 and ending on 31.12.1998.3. It is an undisputed and accepted position that respondent No.1 Corporation, ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC240Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.3774 OF2011Saree Sansar Appellant versus Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors. Respondents JUDGMENT ABHAY S. OKA, J.FACTUAL ASPECTS1 The appellant assessee has taken exception to the judgment dated 19th October 2006 passed by a Division Bench of Delhi High Court. In the exercise of powers under Section 4(1) of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 (the DST Act), the Government of Delhi issued a notification on 31st March 1999 stating that the rate of the State sales tax on silk fabrics was fixed at 3%. On 15th January 2000, another notification was issued by which silk fabric was included in Schedule I of the DST Act. Therefore, the State sales tax on silk fabric was increased to 12%. On 31st March 2000, silk fabric was shifted from Schedule I to Schedule II of the DST Act by amending the Civil Appeal no.3774 of 2011 Page 1 of 11 Schedules. Therefore, the sales tax became payable on silk fabric at 4%...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC243IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1891-1966 OF2024UNION OF INDIA ...APPELLANT(S) ROMIT NANDAN SAHAI VERSUS M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA, J.: For the convenience of the exposition, this judgement is divided in the following parts: - INDEX A. FACTUAL MATRIX ................................................................................ 2 B. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ... 8 C. IMPUGNED ORDER ............................................................................. 11 D. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANT ....................... 13 E. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT .................... 16 Civil Appeal No(s). 1891-1966 of 2024 Page 1 of 95 F. ANALYSIS .............................................................................................. 22 i. Relevant Statutory Scheme and Provisions .............................................. 22 ii. Sco...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC280Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION Writ Petition (Civil) No.838 of 2019 M K Ranjitsinh & Ors. Petitioners Versus Union of India & Ors. Respondents And with Civil Appeal No.3570 of 2022 JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI Table of Contents A. The Great Indian Bustard ....................................................................................................... 3 B. The judgment dated 19 April 2021 and subsequent developments .................................... 6 C. The mission to combat climate change............................................................................... 12 I. Indias commitment under international conventions .................................................... 12 II. The right to a healthy environment and the right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change .......................................................................................................................... 17 III. Imp...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC279REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.5525 OF2016BINA BASAK & ORS. APPELLANTS VERSUS SRI BIPUL KANTI BASAK & ORS. RESPONDENTS ORDER VIKRAM NATH, J.1. This matter pertains to right to title and possession of a property that was allotted by the Relief and Rehabilitation Department of Government of West Bengal to a family which had come to Siliguri from the then East Pakistan in 1950. Before moving forward with the facts of the case, it is imperative for us to mention that such rehabilitation programmes are introduced by the government with the sole aim of re-establishment of the displaced/ migrant families and not for the benefit of any individual. As a part of such welfare policies, the property is usually recorded in the name of Civil Appeal No.5525 of 2016 Page 1 of 18 one family member for the purpose of convenience even though the ensuing welfare is meant to be enjoyed by the all the family members equally. However unfortuna...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC237REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 2032/2011 M/S. DIVGI METAL WARES LTD. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S. DIVGI METAL WARES EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION & ANR. RESPONDENT(S) WITH C.A. No.2035/2011 C.A. No.2033/2011 JUDGMENT B.R. GAVAI, J.1. These appeals challenge the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka, Circuit Bench at Dharwad dated 02.02.2009, vide which the appeal filed by the M/s. Divgi Metal Wares Employees Association, which is respondent No.1 herein, came to be allowed. Similarly, by the said order, the Writ Petition No.31808/2003 1 filed by Respondent No.1 was also allowed and the Writ Petition No.7993/2006 filed by M/s Divgi Metal Wares Ltd., the appellant herein, came to be dismissed.2. The facts leading to the filing of the present appeals are as under:- 2.1 The appellant is a company which manufactures automobile gears at two factories, one in Pune, Maharashtra and the other at S...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA2024INSC254CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1753/2023 PANKAJ SINGH APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF HARYANA RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ABHAY S.OKA, J1 Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.2. The Trial Court convicted the appellant-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 342, 376 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, the IPC). The maximum sentence imposed is life imprisonment for the offence punishable under Section 376 of the IPC with a fine of Rs.1,00,00/-. We must note that charges were also framed against the appellant-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 365, 354D(1)(ii) and 506 of the IPC. The Trial Court acquitted the appellant-accused as far as these offences are concerned. Apart from the appeal against conviction filed by the appellant-accused, an appeal against his acquittal for the three offences mentioned above was filed by the Prosecutrix (victim). The High Court d...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC239REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NOS. 1738-39 OF2024(ARISING OUT OF SLP(CRL.) NOS. 3390-91 OF2024 NENAVATH BUJJI ETC. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT J.B. PARDIWALA, J.: - For the convenience of the exposition, this judgement is divided in the following parts: - INDEX A. FACTUAL MATRIX .................................................................................... 3 B. IMPUGNED JUDGMENT OF THE HIGH COURT ............................. 15 C. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE APPELLANTS ........................ 17 D. SUBMISSIONS ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENTS .................... 20 E. ANALYSIS ................................................................................................... 21 Page 1 of 55 i. Extraneous Considerations that weighed with the Detaining Authority thereby vitiating the Order of Preventive Detention. ........................... 34 ii. Summary of the Fi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE2024INSC238IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.OF2024(Arising out of SLP(Criminal) No.6112 of 2022) RAGHUNATHA AND ANOTHER APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF KARNATAKA RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT B.R. GAVAI, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal challenges the judgement dated 14th July, 2021, passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in Criminal Appeal No.1389 of 2019, thereby partly allowing the appeal filed by the appellants, namely, Raghunatha (Accused No.1) and Manjunatha (Accused No.2) and modifying the order of conviction and sentence awarded to them by the Court of III Additional District & Sessions Judge, Kolar (sitting at K.G.F.) (hereinafter referred to as trial court) in S.C. No.276 of 2014 on 17th June, 2019. 13. Shorn of details, brief facts leading to present appeal are as under:3. 1. On 7th July 2014, upon complaint being lodged by Sri R. Lokanathan (PW-1), Kaamasamudram police registered Crim...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE2024INSC234IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 7966 OF2022M/S. KOZYFLEX MATTRESSES PRIVATE LIMITED ..APPELLANT(S) VERSUS SBI GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND ANR. ..RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT Mehta, J.1. This appeal under Section 67 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 (hereinafter being referred to as Act of 2019) has been preferred by the appellant herein for assailing final order dated 24th August, 2022 rendered by National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (hereinafter being referred to as National Commission), rejecting the Consumer Case No.754 of 2015 filed by M/s. Kozyflex Mattresses Private Limited(hereinafter being referred to as the insured-appellant) praying for a direction to the SBI General Insurance Company(hereinafter being referred to as 1 the insurer-respondent) to indemnify it for the loss caused by fire in the insured premises being the manufacturing unit of the insured-appellant company situated at Sy. N...
Tag this Judgment!