Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC354REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1121 OF2016COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE BELAPUR APPELLANT(S) VERSUS JINDAL DRUGS LTD. RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 788-790 OF2022JUDGMENT UJJAL BHUYAN, J.Heard learned counsel for the parties.2. Issue raised in the present batch of appeals is identical. Therefore, the civil appeals were heard together and are being disposed by this common judgment and order. 23. However, Civil Appeal No.1121 of 2016 was argued as the lead appeal. Therefore, for the sake of convenience, we would refer to the facts of this appeal.4. This is an appeal by the revenue under Section 35L (1)(b) of the Central Excise Act, 1944 (referred to hereinafter as the Central Excise Act) against the order dated 16.04.2015 passed by the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal, West Zonal Bench at Mumbai (briefly CESTAT hereinafter) in Appeal No.E/86389/13-Mum. (Jindal Drugs Limited Vs. Commissioner of Ce...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE2024INSC538IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6837 OF2023BANK OF INDIA & ORS APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PANKAJ SRIVASTAVA RESPONDENT(S) ORDER1 Being aggrieved by the judgment of Single Bench, allowing the writ petition of the respondent and directing the bank to consider his claim for appointment on compassionate ground; confirmed in appeal by the Division Bench, this appeal has been preferred.2. The facts in shorn are, the respondent filed a writ petition seeking directions to consider his case being eligible and grant compassionate appointment on the post of Clerk with immediate effect on account of death of his father during course of employment. Prayer was also made to quash the order dated 20.06.2002 issued by the bank.3. In the short counteraffidavit filed by the bank, the scheme prevalent for grant of compassionate appointment 2 vide Branch Circular No.92/64 dated 17.03.1999 was referred, in particular, Clause 10(iv) thereof. Further ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
REPORTABLE2024INSC356IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.2759 OF2009New India Assurance Company Ltd. Appellant (s) Through its Manager Versus M/s Tata Steel Ltd. ...Respondent(s) with Civil Appeal No._______ of 2024 (@ SLP (C) No.10001 of 2009) C.A. Nos. 5242-5243 of 2009 JUDGMENT K.V. Viswanathan, J.1. Leave granted in SLP (Civil) No.10001 of 2009.2. I.A. No.48152 of 2022 in Civil Appeal No.2759 of 2009 is filed by the Respondent [earlier known as M/s Bhushan Steel and Strips Ltd, hereinafter referred to as the Complainant or the Insured]. seeking change of its name in the proceedings to Tata Steel Ltd. The Complainant/Insured has filed similar IAs in the 1 connected appeals filed by it. It is stated that the name of the Complainant/Insured was changed to Bhushan Steel Ltd in the year 2007. Thereafter while these appeals were pending, the company underwent a Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process and was successfully taken over by Tata Steel Lt...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC358REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.3391 OF2011LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS. RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.3849 OF2011CIVIL APPEAL No.3393 OF2011CIVIL APPEAL No.3394 OF2011CIVIL APPEAL No.3395 OF2011JUDGMENT PAMIDIGHANTAM SRI NARASIMHA, J.1. The issue for consideration is whether the state of Rajasthan has the power and jurisdiction to levy and collect stamp duty on policies of insurance issued within the state. For the reasons to follow, we have rejected the contention of the Life Insurance Corporation, the appellant herein, regarding the lack of legislative competence of the state and have also affirmed the power to levy and collect stamp duty under the Rajasthan Stamp Law 1 (Adaptation) Act, 19521 and the rules made thereunder. While dismissing the appeal, we have however set aside certain findings of the High Court and granted relief to the appellant in th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
NON-REPORTABLE2024INSC351IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 2044 OF2010FIRDOSKHAN KHURSHIDKHAN .APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR. .RESPONDENT(S) WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 2045 OF2010JUDGMENT Mehta, J.1. These two appeals arise out of a common judgment dated 30th November, 2009 rendered by the Division Bench of the High Court of Gujarat whereby Criminal Appeal Nos. 1865 of 2006 and 1866 of 2006 preferred by the appellants herein i.e. Anwarkhan Jahilkhan Pathan and Firdoskhan Khurshidkhan Pathan, respectively were dismissed. By way of the said appeals, the appellants herein had assailed the judgment dated 6th June, 2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Nadiad(hereinafter being referred to as the trial Court) in 1 Special Case(NDPS) No.5 of 2003 convicting the appellants for the offences punishable under Section 21 read with Section 8(c) and Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC350NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.OF2024[Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.1414 of 2021]. SURESH @ UNNI @ VADI SURESH ...APPELLANT (S) VERSUS THE STATE OF KERALA ...RESPONDENT (S) JUDGMENT B.R. GAVAI, J.1. Leave granted.2. This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 06th December, 2012 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam (High Court for short) in Criminal Appeal No.871 of 2011 wherein the High Court partly allowed the said Criminal Appeal preferred by Suresh @ Unni @ Vadi Suresh, the present Appellant, and set aside the conviction of the present Appellant under Sections 3(a) and 4(a)(i) of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908 and Section 1 27(1) of the Arms Act, 1958 while confirming the conviction of the present Appellant under Sections 302, 307,143, 147, 148, 324, 326, 427 and 449 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC for short) as re...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
Non-Reportable 2024 INSC357IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.2344 of 2024 (@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) No.10668 OF2022 PRIYANKA JAISWAL APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT Aravind Kumar, J.1. Heard.2. Leave granted 3. The complainant/informant is calling in question the order dated 16.06.2022 passed by the High Court of Jharkhand in Cr.M.P No.1291 of 2021 whereby the proceedings initiated against respondent Nos. 3 to 8 herein, for the offences punishable under Sections 323, 498A, 504 and 506 IPC read with Section 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 (hereafter referred to as DP Act) and the non-bailable warrants issued against them came to be quashed. 14. Facts in brief leading to filing of this appeal can be crystallised as under:5. The marriage between the appellant and the respondent No.8 came to be solemnised under the Special Marriages Act on 05.10.2018 at Kolkata and as per the preval...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
1 REPORTABLE2024INSC352IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 5569-5570 OF2024(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOS.1717-1718 OF2020 SWAMI VEDVYASANAND JI MAHARAJ (D) THR LRS. APPELLANT(S) Versus SHYAM LAL CHAUHAN & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) ORDER Leave granted.2. The present appeals arise out of an order in a pending Second Appeal before the High Court of Judicature at Patna. The necessary facts for our consideration are as follows:3. Respondent Nos.1 to 4 were plaintiffs in a civil suit where Swami Shivdharmanand Ji Maharaj @ Deo Shankar Tiwary (hereinafter referred to as Swami Shivdharmanand) was one of the defendants. It was a title suit seeking declaration regarding the suit property which is situated in Bihar. The suit was dismissed by the Trial Court on 26.03.1991. The First Appellate Court allowed the appeal and 2 decreed the suit. Consequently, the defendant Swami Shivdharmanand filed a second appeal, which is still pending before the Patna High Cour...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC349NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.493 OF2022JASOBANTA SAHU ...APPELLANT (S) VERSUS STATE OF ORISSA ...RESPONDENT (S) JUDGMENT B.R. GAVAI, J.1. The present criminal appeal challenges the final judgment and order dated 17th July, 2014, passed by the Orissa High Court, Cuttack (High Court for short), in Jail Criminal Appeal No.213 of 2000. Vide the impugned judgment, the High Court affirmed the judgment dated 26th August, 2000, passed by the Sessions Judge, Dhenkanal (Trial Court for short) in Sessions Trial No.2-A of 1989, whereby the appellant was convicted under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC for short) and sentenced to imprisonment for life. 12. The facts, in brief, leading to the present appeal, are as follows:2. 1 On 9th October, 1988, the Police Station Jarapada, Angul, District Dhenkanal, received oral information at 3 PM from Hemanta Kumar Sahu (PW-4) and Maheswar Pradhan, to the effect tha...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
2024 INSC353REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4786 OF2024AJAY ISHWAR GHUTE & ORS. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS MEHER K. PATEL & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ABHAY S. OKA, J.1. The main issue that arises in this case is whether the High Court was justified in passing a drastic order in the exercise of writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India permitting the 1st and 2nd respondents (writ petitioners) to construct a compound wall under police protection. The order passed by a Division Bench of the High Court on 16th March 2022 is in terms of the Minutes of Order tendered to the Court by the advocates representing the parties duly signed by them. The practice of passing orders based on Minutes of Order submitted by the advocates representing the parties prevails perhaps only in the High Court of Judicature at Bombay (for short, the Bombay High CIVIL APPEAL No.4786 OF2024Page 1 of 26 Court). The present appellants applied for ...
Tag this Judgment!