Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Page 4 of about 728,744 results (5.050 seconds)

Oct 04 2019 (SC)

M/S Madhoor Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. Through Its Director Vs. Yeola Municip ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.7798 OF2019(ARISING OUT OF SLP (CIVIL) No.13626 OF2018 M/S. MADHOOR BUILDWELL PVT. LTD. .....APPELLANT(S) YEOLA MUNICIPAL COUNCIL & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S) VERSUS JUDGMENT HEMANT GUPTA, J.1)2) 3) 1 The order dated November 16, 2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay is the subject matter of challenge in the present appeal. Vide the aforesaid order, the writ petition filed by the appellant to seek direction to Government of India and Government of Maharashtra to disburse the alleged approved funds under Urban Infrastructure Development Scheme for Small and Medium Towns1 was dismissed. The respondent No.1 Yeola Municipal Council issued a public notice for providing underground sewer Scheme in Yeola city under the aforementioned centrally sponsored Scheme. The appellant is a contractor who was assigned the work of laying of sewer system after being successful in the tender process. The gri...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 2019 (SC)

Ravi Setia Vs. Madan Lal

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 2837 OF2011RAVI SETIA ...APPELLANT(S) MADAN LAL AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENT(S) VERSUS NAVIN SINHA, J.JUDGMENT The plaintiff assails correctness of the order allowing the second appeal of the defendants. By the impugned order, the High Court set aside the concurrent orders of the courts below decreeing the plaintiffs suit for specific performance.2. The plaintiff filed a suit for specific performance of agreement for sale dated 10.11.1989 with regard to 2/3rd of the lands owned by defendants 1 and 2 as Defendant No.3 declined to sign the agreement. Rs. 50,000/ was paid as earnest money 1 and the balance consideration of Rs.3,10,490/ was to be paid at the time of execution. The agreement provided for execution of the sale deed on or before 30.04.1990. The Trial Court decreed the suit holding that the plaintiff had remained present in the office of the SubRegistrar for registration of the sale documents...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 2019 (SC)

Pruthvirajsinh N Jadeja(d) by Lrs. Vs. Jayeshkumar Chhakaddasm Shah .

Court : Supreme Court of India

NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.10521 OF2013PRUTHVIRAJSINH NODHUBHA JADEJA (D) BY LRS. VERSUS APPELLANT(S) JAYESHKUMAR CHHAKADDAS SHAH & ORS. RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT Deepak Gupta, J.By means of this appeal, the appellants who are defendants in the suit, have challenged the order of the High Court dated 26.03.2009 whereby the order of the trial court has been set aside and the respondent No.1 herein has been permitted to be added as plaintiff No.2 in the suit. 1 2. One Mafaji Motiji Thakor (for short MMT), who is the father and predecessorininterest of respondent nos. 2(A) to 2(D), was the owner of the suit land. He had executed a power of attorney in favour of respondent No.3, Avnish Raman Lal (for short ARL). It is alleged that on 29.01.2005, ARL exercising his power under the power of attorney, sold the land to Pruthvirajsinh Nodhubha Jadeja (deceased), predecessorininterest of the appellants herein. MMT filed a civil suit (No.8...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 2019 (SC)

C/M Kisan Inter College Manager Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

Non-Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal Nos. 7532-7533 of 2019 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos.17450-17451 of 2017) C/M Kisan Inter College Manager .... Appellant(s) versus The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. .Respondent (s) JUDGMENT L. NAGESWARA RAO, J.The regularization of the service of Respondent No.5- 1. Shri Ram Mani Pandey as L.T. Grade Teacher in the Appellant-College is the subject matter of the above Appeals. The Appellant-College is an aided College which is 2. recognized by the State of Uttar Pradesh. The post of L.T. Grade Assistant Teacher (Maths) fell vacant due to the promotion of Shri Hari Prasad Pathak as Lecturer (Civics) from L.T. Grade Assistant Teacher. Respondent No.5 was appointed as L.T. Grade Assistant Teacher on 1 | P a g e 31.12.1984 in the resultant vacancy caused by the promotion of Shri Hari Prasad Pathak. The appointment of Respondent No.5 as L.T. Grade Assistant Teacher was not approved as the procedure prescr...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 2019 (SC)

r.srinivas Kumar Vs. r.shametha

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.4696 OF2013R. Srinivas Kumar Appellant Versus R. Shametha Respondent JUDGMENT M.R. SHAH, J.Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 06.02.2012 passed in C.M.A. No.4142 of 2003 by the High Court of Judicature Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad, by which the High Court has dismissed the said appeal preferred by the appellanthusband and has confirmed the judgment and order passed by the learned Family Court refusing to pass a decree of divorce against the respondentwife, the appellanthusband has preferred the present appeal. 1 2. That the marriage of the appellant and the respondent took place on 09.05.1993. That out of the said wedlock, the respondent gave birth to a male child on 29.08.1995. It appears that there were differences of opinion between the parties and according to the appellanthusband, cruelty was meted out to him. Up to 1997, many a times, the respondentwife ...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 2019 (SC)

The State of Arunachal Pradesh Vs. Ramchandra Rabidas @ Ratan Rabidas ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.905 of 2010 THE STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH APPELLANT Versus RAMCHANDRA RABIDAS @ RATAN RABIDAS & ANR. RESPONDENTS WITH Criminal Appeal No.906 of 2010 THE STATE OF TRIPURA APPELLANT Versus RAMCHANDRA RABIDAS @ RATAN RABIDAS RESPONDENT JUDGMENT INDU MALHOTRA, J.1. The issue which has arisen for consideration in the present Criminal Appeals is whether the Gauhati High Court was justified in issuing directions that road traffic offences shall be 1 dealt with only under the provisions of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (M.V. Act), and in holding that in cases of road traffic or motor vehicle offences, prosecution under the provisions of Indian Penal Code,1860 (IPC) is without sanction of law, and recourse to the provisions of the IPC would be unsustainable in law?.2. The Gauhati High Court, Agartala bench vide the impugned judgment dated 22.12.2008 held that: i. Sections 183 and 184 of the M.V. Act, whi...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 2019 (SC)

Raj Kumar Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1541 OF2019(@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO.6687 of 2017) RAJ KUMAR APPELLANT(S) Versus THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT Deepak Gupta, J.Leave granted.2. On 30.10.1995 a sample of milk was collected from the appellant by the Food Inspector. The same was sent to the Public Analyst who received the same on 02.11.1995. The sample was analysed and Milk Fat (MF for short) was found to be 4.6% and Milk Solid NonFat (MSNF for short) was 7.7%, against 1 the prescribed standard of 8.5%. The appellant was prosecuted after obtaining consent of the Chief Medical Officer, and was convicted by trial court, which conviction was upheld by the Sessions Court and the High Court.3. Learned counsel for the appellant raised number of issues. The first was that there was delay in analysing the sample and, therefore, marginal shortfall in MSNF should be overlooked, since it would have been caused b...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 2019 (SC)

Duncans Industries Ltd. Vs. A.j. Agrochem

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.5120 OF2019Duncans Industries Ltd. .. Appellant Versus A. J.Agrochem .. Respondent JUDGMENT M. R. Shah, J.1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 20.06.2019 passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (for short NCLAT) by which the learned Appellate Tribunal has allowed the said appeal preferred by the respondent herein and has quashed and set aside the order dated 05.10.2018 passed by the National Company Law Tribunal, Kolkata (for short NCLT), holding that the respondents application under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (for short IBC) would be maintainable, the original respondent has preferred the present appeal. 2 2. The facts of the case in nutshell are as under:2. 1 That the appellant is a Corporate Debtor. It is a company which owns and manages 14 tea gardens. Out of 14 tea gardens, the Central Government vide notifica...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 2019 (SC)

Vidhi Himmat Katariya Vs. The State of Gujarat

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (C) No.885/2019 Vidhi Himmat Katariya and others ..Petitioners Versus The State of Gujarat and others ..Respondents WITH WRIT PETITION(C) No.900/2019 WRIT PETITION(C) No.1026/2019 JUDGMENT M.R. SHAH, J.In all the writ petitions, the respective petitioners students have prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction directing 1 the respondents State Government to treat the petitioners eligible for reservation under Persons with Disability (PwD category) and grant them admission in MBBS Course for the academic year 201920. It is the case on behalf of the respective petitioners that all of them are eligible to pursue MBBS Course and they shall be granted admission under the PwD category as they are suffering from locomotor disability. All of them are seeking admission to MBBS Course in the reserved category under PwD quota.2. That Section 32 of the Right of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 (hereinafter r...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 04 2019 (SC)

Fainul Khan Vs. State of Jharkhand

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 937 OF2011FAINUL KHAN ...APPELLANT(S) STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER VERSUS WITH ...RESPONDENT(S) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 938 OF2011SAINUL KHAN ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF JHARKHAND AND OTHERS ...RESPONDENT(S) CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 939 OF2011MIR SHAUKAT ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER ...RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT NAVIN SINHA, J.The appellants are aggrieved by their conviction under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) sentencing them to rigorous imprisonment for life, along with conviction 1 under Sections 323/149 and 147 IPC, sentencing them to varied terms of imprisonment under the same. The sentences have been directed to run concurrently.2. The occurrence is said to have taken place on 01.11.1983 at about 06.30 PM. The accused were variously armed with spears and lathis. P.W. 7 and 8 are stated to be injured eye witnesses. P.W6also claimed to be an eye wi...

Tag this Judgment!


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