Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Page 3 of about 727,858 results (2.788 seconds)

Feb 18 2019 (SC)

Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai Vs. Rafiqunnisa M. Khalifa (De ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos.17271732 OF2019(Arising out of S.L.P.(C) Nos.2497124976 of 2018) Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. .Appellant(s) VERSUS Rafiqunnisa M. Khalifa(Deceased) Through His Legal Heir Mr. Mohd.Muqueen Qureshi & Anr. .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.1. 2. Leave granted. These appeals are directed against the final judgment and order dated 12.06.2018 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Writ Petition(c) 1 Nos.2639, 2184, 2642, 2641, 2644 and 2746 of 2016 whereby the High Court allowed the writ petitions filed by the respondents herein.3. A few facts need mention hereinbelow to appreciate the short controversy involved in these appeals.4. Respondent No.1 in all the appeals (total6) were the writ petitioners and the appellants (1 to6) herein were the respondents in the six writ petitions out of which these appeals arise.5. The six respondents individually filed six separate wri...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 18 2019 (SC)

S. Kumar(dead) Vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

NON-REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.6038 OF2003S. Kumar (Dead) Appellant(s) VS. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Dinesh Maheshwari., J This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 21.06.2001, as passed in C.M.A. No.1101 of 1995 and Cross Objection No.70 of 1996, whereby the High Court of Judicature at Madras has modified the award dated 27.04.1995, as made by the Motor Accidents Claims Tribunal, Chennai (II Judge, Court of Small Causes, Chennai) in MACT O.P. No.2932 of 1992.2. In the impugned judgment and order dated 21.06.2001, the High Court has made substantial downward revision of the amount of compensation awarded by 1 the Tribunal to the injured claimant-appellant; and in place of the amount awarded by the Tribunal to the tune of Rs. 4,58,060/- together with interest @ 15% p.a., has awarded a sum of Rs. 2,11,060/- together with interest @ 9% p.a. from the date of fi...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 2019 (SC)

Kripal Singh Vs. The State of Rajasthan

Court : Supreme Court of India

NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 2100 OF2008KRIPAL SINGH .Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF RAJASTHAN .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Rastogi, J.1. This appeal has been filed against the judgment and order dated 4th February, 2008 passed by the High Court of Judicature of Rajasthan at Jaipur Bench confirming the conviction of the appellant for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC passed by the learned trial Court under the impugned judgment dated 22nd November, 2002.2. The brief facts as per the prosecution case are that on 28th July, 2001, at 9.15 p.m. informant Sunil Kumar Goyal(PW13) submitted a written report(Exh. P1) at Police Station Dug 1 wherein it was stated that around 6.30 p.m., he was going along with his brother Yashwant and Paras Mal on motor cycle bearing No.RJ20 8M9309to their agricultural farm situated at village Doodhlai. Yashwant was on the driving seat, Paras Mal(PW1) was in the middle and the informant Su...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 2019 (SC)

Ejazhusen Sabadarhusen . Vs. State of Gujarat

Court : Supreme Court of India

NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 2007 OF2008EZAJHUSSAIN SABDARHUSSAIN & ANR. .Appellant(s) VERSUS STATE OF GUJARAT .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Rastogi, J.1. The appellants are assailing their conviction under Section 302 read with section 34 IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment for life passed by the learned trial Court and confirmed by the High Court under the impugned judgment.2. On dismissal of appeal upholding conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC, accused nos. 1 and 2 have not challenged their conviction and sentence and accused nos. 3 and 4(present appellants) have approached this Court assailing the 1 said judgment and conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC.3. The brief facts necessary for disposal of the appeal are as follows: According to the case of the prosecution, accused no.1 Iftekharhussain Sabdarhussain was having a long pending civil dispute about his flat with the deceased...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 2019 (SC)

Anjali Bhardwaj Vs. Union of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.436 OF2018ANJALI BHARDWAJ AND OTHERS .....PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS .....RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.This writ petition is filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, as a Public Interest Litigation. The petitioners state that it is filed with the aim to have effective implementation of the Right to Information Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as RTI Act) so that fundamental rights of citizens to access information from public authorities are secured. Under the RTI Act, the Central Information Commission (for short, CIC) and State Information Commissions (for short, SICs) have been created as statutory bodies to decide appeals and complaints against public authorities for non-compliance with the RTI law. On that basis, the petitioners assert that it is essential to have proper functioning Writ Petition (Civil) No.436 of 2019 Page 1 of 52 of these instituti...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 2019 (SC)

The State of Gujarat Vs. Pwd and Forest Employees Union

Court : Supreme Court of India

NON REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 1684-1686 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No.5028-5030 OF2019 ARISING OUT OF DIARY No.43592 OF2018 THE STATE OF GUJARAT .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS PWD AND FOREST EMPLOYEES UNION & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S) W I T H CIVIL APPEAL NOs. 1687-1689 of 2019 (ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) NOs. 5031-5033 OF2019 ARISING OUT OF DIARY No.36182 OF2018 JUDGMENT A.K.SIKRI, J.Leave granted.2. In these appeals filed by the State of Gujarat, challenge is laid to the common judgment dated June 14, 2018 passed by the High Court of Gujarat in contempt proceedings which were initiated by the respondents herein. To mention here, in nutshell, the appellant Government had passed Resolution dated October 17, 1988 whereby certain benefits were given to its daily wage Civil Appeal No.of 2019 & Anr. (arising out of SLP (C) No.43592 of 2018) & Anr. Page 1 of 18 workers, who have been working for numbe...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 2019 (SC)

Mehboob-Ur-Rehman (Dead) Through Lrs. Vs. Ahsanul Ghani

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8199 OF2009MEHBOOB-UR-REHMAN (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. Appellant(s) VS. AHSANUL GHANI Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Dinesh Maheshwari, J.The appellant herein (since deceased and represented by his legal representatives) had filed the suit for specific performance of Agreement to Sell, being O.S. No.392 of 1979, that was decreed by the Court of II Additional Civil Judge, Kanpur Nagar by the judgment and decree dated 10.12.1981. However, the decree so passed by the Trial Court was reversed by the Court of IX Additional District Judge, Kanpur Nagar in its judgment and decree dated 03.07.1995 in Appeal No.54 of 1982, essentially on the ground that the plaintiff had failed to aver and prove his continuous readiness and willingness to perform his part of the contract. The High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, in its impugned judgment dated 10.12.2007 in R.S.A. No.931 of 1995, while 2 dismissing the second appeal file...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 15 2019 (SC)

Prof. r.k. Vijayasarathy Vs. Sudha Seetharam

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.238 OF2019SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) No.1434 OF2018PROF R K VIJAYASARATHY & ANR .... APPELLANTS Versus SUDHA SEETHARAM & ANR ....RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J12 Delay condoned. The present appeal arises from the judgment and final order dated 1 January 2016 of the High Court of Karnataka, rejecting the prayer of the appellants to quash the criminal proceedings instituted by the first respondent against them. The High Court stayed the criminal proceedings till the disposal of a pending civil suit instituted by the son of the appellants against the first respondent. 3 The facts relevant to the present dispute are thus: Rajiv Vijayasarathy Ratnam, (the son of the appellants) and Savitha Seetharam (the daughter of the first respondent) were married on 24 May 2002. They moved 1 to the United States of America and a child was born to them in 2009. Savitha was involved in a car ...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 2019 (SC)

m.revanna Vs. Anjanamma (Dead) by Lrs.

Court : Supreme Court of India

NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1669 OF2019(@ S.L.P. (Civil) No.19188 of 2010) M. REVANNA ...APPELLANT VERSUS ANJANAMMA (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS. ...RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, J.2. Leave granted. The order dated 09.04.2010 passed in Writ Petition No.2266 of 2009 (GMCPC) by the High Court of Karnataka is called in question in this appeal.3. The appellant herein was Plaintiff No.1 in the suit being O.S No.2611/1993 filed seeking partition and separate possession of joint family properties. Plaintiff Nos. 1 to 5, including the appellant herein, filed the said suit seeking partition and separate possession of joint family properties to the extent of 1/6th share to Plaintiff Nos. 1 to 3, 1/6th share to 1 Plaintiff No.4 and 1/6th share to Plaintiff No.5. Initially, only three defendants were made parties to the suit. Immediately upon the appearance of Defendant Nos. 1 to 3, a compromise petition was filed on behalf of Pl...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 14 2019 (SC)

Sunita Vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.1665 OF2019(Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.33757 of 2018) Sunita & Ors. Appellants :Versus: Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation & Anr. .Respondents JUDGMENT A.M. Khanwilkar, J.1. 2. Leave granted. The captioned appeal assails the decision of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, dated 25th July, 2018 in S.B. Civil Miscellaneous Appeal No.521 of 2017, whereby the appeal filed by respondent No.1 (The Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation) owner of the offending vehicle, was allowed. The High Court was pleased to set aside the Award passed by the Motor Accident Claims 2 Tribunal, Sawai Madhopur (for short the Tribunal) in favour of the appellants/claimants for the death of their family member, Sitaram and consequently dismissed the SBCMA No.581/2017 filed by the appellants for enhancement of the compensation amount granted by the Tribunal.3. Briefly stated, on 28th Octobe...

Tag this Judgment!


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