Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Page 10 of about 727,598 results (2.509 seconds)

Oct 11 2018 (SC)

Gajanan Marotrao Nimje Vs. The Reserve Bank of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 10396/2018 (ARISING FROM SLP (C) NOS. 13011/2018) GAJANAN MAROTRAO NIMJE & ORS. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE RESERVE BANK OF INDIA & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) WITH C.A. NO(S). 10402/2018 @ SLP(C) No.18557/2018 C.A. NO(S).10397-10398/2018 @ SLP(C) No.15818-15819/2018 C.A. NO(S). 10399-10400/2018 @ SLP(C) No.15820-15821/2018 C.A. NO(S).10401/2018 @ SLP(C) No.16125/2018 C.A. NO(S).10403-10404/2018. @ SLP(C) No.18746-18747/2018 JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Leave granted.2. The appellants have been in the service of respondent/Reserve Bank of India for about two decades or more and majority of them are in the fag end of their service. We are informed that some of 1 them have even superannuated. The appellants are before this Court, aggrieved by the judgment dated 13.04.2018 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court has issued a direction to terminate them from service and also to recover all the benefits they have ea...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 2018 (SC)

Pinku Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 1277-1278 OF2018[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NOs. 4565-4566 OF2018 PINKU ETC. Appellant (s) VERSUS THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s) WITH CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 1279 OF2018[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NOs. 5587 OF2018 JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. Leave granted.2. The appellants are aggrieved since their application(s) for suspension of sentence/for grant of bail has/have been rejected by the High Court. Their appeals filed in the year 2007 are still pending consideration before the High Court. There is no dispute that the appellants are in custody since 2005.3. On a specific query, the learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State has submitted that there are cases involving the appellants prior to the incident and the accused are otherwise facing trial in those cases. 2 4. We are also informed that one of the accused arising out of the same FIR has been released ...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 2018 (SC)

Iqbal Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1280 OF2018[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) No.8855 OF2018 [DIARY No.20227 OF2018 IQBAL Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.1. 2.3. Delay condoned. Leave granted. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.4. The appellant has been convicted under Sections 399 and 402 IPC read with Section 25 of the Arms Act, 1959 by the Assistant Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur in ST No.153 of 1984 and ST No.154 of 1984. He was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for a period of four years.5. The conviction and sentence was confirmed by the District and Sessions Judge, Shahjahanpur. The 2 appellant filed a Revision before the High Court. As per the impugned order dated 20.11.2014, the Revision has been dismissed. It is seen from the Judgment that none appeared on behalf of the appellant in the High Court. The appellant has given in detail the circumstances w...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 2018 (SC)

Mehboob Vs. The State of Maharashtra

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S). 277 OF2016MEHBOOB & ANR. Appellant(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondent(s) KURIAN, J.JUDGMENT1 The appellants have been convicted under Section 302 IPC. The deceased was the wife of the first appellant and the second appellant was his concubine. The conviction is mainly based on two dying declarations made by the deceased. The oral statement (Exhibit19) given by the deceased to the police personnel shows that the first appellant had poured kerosene on her and the second appellant had set her on fire.2. However, it is the vehement submission of Mr.Chanchal Kumar Ganguly, learned counsel appearing for the appellants, that the deceased had clearly stated in the first dying declaration that the second appellant had poured water and extinguished the fire. In the second dying declaration (Exhibit 28), which is recorded by Naib Tehsildar, it has come out that 2 both the appellants ha...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 11 2018 (HC)

Sardar Veerangouda Patil Mahila Vidya Peeth Vs. Basantkumar S/O. Thimm ...

Court : Karnataka Dharwad

R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA DHARWAD BENCH DATED THIS THE11T H DAY OF OCTOBER, 2018 PRESENT THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE B.VEERAPPA AND THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE H.T. NARENDRA PRASAD WRIT APPEAL No.100192/2018 [GM-R/C]. BETWEEN: SARDAR VEERANGOUDA PATIL MAHILA VIDYA PEETH, VIDYA NAGAR, HUBLI, R/BY TRUSTEE AND AUTHORISED PERSON SRI PREMANAND VEERANAGOUDA PATIL, AGE:84 YEARS, OCC:INDUSTRIALIST, R/O. VIDYA NAGAR, HUBLI DHARWAD. (BY SRI. S.S. NAGANAND, SENIOR ADV. FOR SRI. SHRIKANT T PATIL, ADV.) AND: BASANTKUMAR S/O. THIMMANAGOUDA PATIL, AGE:64 YEARS, OCC:BUSINESS, C/O. BASANT RESIDENCY NO.3, 4TH MAIN, GANDHINAGAR, BENGALURU-560009. ... APPELLANT ... RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M.T. NANAYYA, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR SRI. K L PATIL, ADV. FOR C/R) THIS WRIT APPEAL IS FILED U/S.4 OF KARNATAKA HIGH COURT ACT, 1961, PRAYING THIS HON'BLE COURT TO ALLOW THIS APPEAL AND SET ASIDE THE ORDER PASSED BY LEARNED SINGLE NO.85687/2013 IN WRIT PETITION JUDGE :2. : DATED:29.05.2018 AND DISMISS THE SAID WIRT PETITON, WITH COS...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 2018 (SC)

Mohd. Sahid Vs. Raziya Khanam (Died) Thr. Lrs

Court : Supreme Court of India

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL No.10379 OF2018(Arising out of SLP(C) No.8586 of 2016) MOHD. SAHID AND OTHERS .Appellants VERSUS RAZIYA KHANAM (D) THR. LRs AND ANOTHER .Respondents JUDGMENT R. BANUMATHI, J.Leave granted.2. This appeal arises out of the order dated 15.10.2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Second Appeal No.819 of 2015 in and by which the High Court affirmed the order of the First Appellate Court dismissing the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and declining to condone the delay of 349 days in filing the appeal.3. Respondent No.1-Raziya (since dead) filed a Civil Suit No.591 of 1979 against the appellants No.1 to 3 for cancellation of sale deeds dated 17.02.1979 and 17.05.1979 in favour of the appellants and for relief of permanent injunction against them over the suit land. Respondent No.1-Raziya (since dead) contended that appellants No.1 1 to 3 forged documents and execute...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 2018 (SC)

Pradeep Bisoi @ Ranjit Bisoi Vs. The State of Odisha

Court : Supreme Court of India

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1192 OF2018(arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.6225 of 2017) PRADEEP BISOI @ RANJIT BISOI APPELLANT(S) VERSUS THE STATE OF ODISHA RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN, J.This appeal has been filed by the accused against the judgment of Orissa High Court dated 25.01.2017. The Orissa High Court vide the impugned judgment has dismissed the criminal appeal filed by the appellant questioning his conviction under Section 304 Part II of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of five years rigorous imprisonment awarded by the trial court.2. The prosecution case as is revealed from the record is that Bhaskar Sahu (deceased) on 28.11.1990 in the morning at 7.00 A.M. was going near Belapada by a bicycle. Near the Belapada bridge, the accused threw a bomb towards the deceased, which hit the right leg of Bhaskar Sahu, the deceased, due to which he fell down on 1 the road. Bhaskar Sahu when started running to save hi...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 2018 (SC)

Bilal Hajar @ Abdul Hameed Vs. State Rep. By the Inspector of Police

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1305 OF2008Bilal Hajar @ Abdul Hameed .Appellant(s) VERSUS State Rep. by the Inspector of Police Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 08.11.2006 passed by the High Court of Madras in Criminal Appeal No.1200 of 2003 whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by appellant herein. 2 2. In order to appreciate the issues involved in this appeal, it is necessary to set out the facts of the case in detail hereinbelow.3. The case of the prosecution may be briefly stated as follows.4. In all nine persons were tried for commission of various offences in Session Trial No.239 of 2000 by the Additional Court of Sessions (Fast Track No.111) Coimbatore.5. The details of the offences under the Indian Penal Code (for short IPC) for which the accused were tried are set out herein below: (1) A 1 to A 9 Section 120B, IPC (2) A1...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 2018 (SC)

Subhash Malhari Muneshwar . Vs. Arvinde Anandrao Kadam .

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6254 OF2010SUBHASH MALHARI MUNESHWAR & ANR. ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS ARVINDE ANANDRAO KADAM & ANR. ...RESPONDENT(S) R. BANUMATHI,J.JUDGMENT1 This appeal arises out of the Judgment dated 08.04.2005 in Second Appeal No.360 of 1988 passed by the High Court of Bombay, Nagpur Bench, in and by which the High Court reversed the judgment of the First Appellate Court holding that the Exhibit P-33/document in question was a sale with condition to repurchase.2. The case of the appellants-plaintiff(s) is that an amount of Rs.3,000/- was borrowed from the respondent and in security the property was mortgaged under Exhibit P-33 (15.02.1975) with condition that if the amount is paid on or before 15.03.1980, the property can be redeemed. The appellantsplaintiff(s) filed the suit for redemption of the mortgage alleging that the document (Exhibit P-33) was a mortgage by conditional sale and not a sale with conditio...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 10 2018 (SC)

s.g. Barapatre Vs. Ananta Gajanan Gaiki

Court : Supreme Court of India

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 10387-10388/2018 (ARISING FROM SLP (C) NOS. 18555-18556/2018) S.G. BARAPATRE & ORS. APPELLANT(S) VERSUS SHRI ANANTA GAJANAN GAIKI & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Leave granted.2. Permission to file special leave petition(s) is granted.3. The appellants are before this Court, aggrieved by the orders dated 13.04.2018 in Writ Petition No.6740/2016 and dated 4.5.2018 in Review Application No.491 of 2018 in W.P. No.6740 of 2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Nagpur.4. Some of the appellants are parties before the High Court. The appellants had declined to subject themselves to caste scrutiny and, therefore, pursuant to the directions of the High Court their services are to be discontinued and their payments or dues are not to be released. The High Court further directed to recover the payments already made. The relevant 1 paragraphs are set out below:- 65. The Fo...

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //