Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Page 5 of about 727,677 results (3.622 seconds)

Nov 27 2018 (SC)

Alok Kumar Singh Vs. State of u.p .

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.11370 OF2018(Arising out of SLP(Civil) No.12538 of 2016) Alok Kumar Singh & Others Appellants VERSUS State of U.P. & Others ... Respondents WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.11372 OF2018S.L.P. (C) No.31192 of 2018 (CC No.22932/2016) CIVIL APPEAL NO.11373 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) No.34047/2016) CIVIL APPEAL NO.11374 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) No.16723/2017) CIVIL APPEAL NO.11375 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) No.16669/2017) CIVIL APPEAL NO.11371 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) No.9028/2018) CIVIL APPEAL NO.11377 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) No.9033/2018) CIVIL APPEAL NO.11378 OF2018(Arising out of SLP(C) No.9026/2018) 2 CIVIL APPEAL No.11380 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (C) No.31199 of 2018) (Diary No.22129/2017) CIVIL APPEAL NOS.11381-11382 OF2018(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) Nos.31202-31203 of 2018) (Diary No.22319/2017) CIVIL APPEAL NO.11383 OF2018(Arising out of Special Leave Petition (C) No.3...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 27 2018 (SC)

Cci Projects (P) Ltd. Vs. Vrajendra Jogjivandas Thakkar

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 6784-6785 OF2018CCI Projects (P) Ltd. Appellant VERSUS Vrajendra Jogjivandas Thakkar ... Respondent WITH CIVIL APPEAL Nos. 6786-6787 OF2018(CCI Projects (P) Ltd. vs. Vrajendra Jogjivandas Thakkar) JUDGMENT Uday Umesh Lalit, J.1. These appeals under Section 23 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 are directed against the common order dated 23.01.2018 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi (Commission for short) in Consumer Case Nos.975 and 976 of 2016.2. In Consumer Case No.976 of 2016, Vrajendra J.Thakkar, HUF had booked a residential flat with the appellant in a project named White Spring 2 Building, which the appellant was to construct at Village Magathane Dattapada Road, Borivali (East), Mumbai, for a consideration of Rs.90,38,850/- and flat No.6A in the building was allotted to said Vrajendra J.Thakkar, HUF. The parties entered into an agreement dated 30.10.20...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 27 2018 (SC)

Babloo Singh Vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.31222 OF2018(@ D.NO.39715 OF2018 DR. BABLOO SINGH AND ORS. Petitioners VERSUS STATE OF U.P. AND ORS. Respondents WITH SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.31223 OF2018(@ D.NO.40201 OF2018 (Amar Singh Goutam and Ors. vs. State of U.P. & Ors.) AND SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) NO.31225 OF2018(@ D.NO.41516 OF2018 (Ravinder Kumar & Ors. vs. State of U.P. & Ors.) ORDER Uday Umesh Lalit, J.1. Permission to file special leave petition granted in all matters. Heard Mr. Shekhar Naphade, Mr. Salman Khurshid and Mr. S.G. Hasnain, learned Senior Advocates in support of the petitions.2. These petitions are directed against the order dated 10.10.2018 passed by a bench of five learned Judges of the High Court of Allahabad in Writ Petition No.51212 of 2010 and other connected matters turning down the reference made to a larger bench and directing that the 2 concerned matters be placed before an appropriate cou...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 27 2018 (SC)

Dinesh Kumar Kashyap Vs. South East Central Railway

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 1136011363 OF2018(Arising out of SLP (Civil) Nos.2966829671/2017 DINESH KUMAR KASHYAP & ORS. ETC. APPELLANT(S) Versus SOUTH EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY & ORS. ETC. RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL No.11364 OF2018(@SLP (C) No.6165 OF2018 JUDGMENT Deepak Gupta, J.Leave granted. Respondent No.1, South East Central Railway (for 2. short the SECR) issued an advertisement on 15.12.2010 inviting applications for filling up 5798 posts in the pay scale of Rs.5200Rs. 20,200 + Grade Pay of Rs.1800/ in Raipur, Bilaspur and Nagpur divisions and workshops. The claim of the original writ petitioners who filed applications 1 before the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short CAT) was that as per the existing instructions the select list was prepared with 20% extra candidates. Therefore, the result of 6995 candidates was declared who were successful. The appellants fall in the category of extra 20%. The SECR did not make...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 27 2018 (SC)

Gagandeep Singh Vs. The State of Punjab

Court : Supreme Court of India

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REPORTABLE CIVIL APPEAL No.11365 OF2018(Arising from S.L.P. (C) No.13676 of 2017) GAGANDEEP SINGH APPELLANT (S) VERSUS THE STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. RESPONDENT (S) JUDGMENT KURIAN, J.Leave granted. Appellant was No.3 in the select list for appointment to the 2. post of District Programme Officer. He belongs to the reserved category of Balmiki/Majbhi Sikh. The selection commenced with the advertisement by the Punjab Public Service Commission on 21.12.2010. The written examination was conducted in the year 2012. One Gurpreet Singh was appointed against the reserved vacancy (Balmiki/Majbhi Sikh). After one year he resigned from 1 the post on 25.04.2014. According to the appellant the vacancy thus created should be filled up by the next available person from the same community. It is also the case of the appellant that though the appellant is No.3 in the select list, No.2 (Manjinder Singh) not being interested and not having pursued...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 2018 (SC)

Ahmed Abdulla Ahmed Al Ghurair (Through Their Power of Attorney Holder ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NOS. 9786-9799 OF2018(ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NOS. 22057-22070 OF2018 AHMED ABDULLA AHMED AL GHURAIR(THROUGH THEIR POWER OF ATTORNEY MR. BARTHOLOMEW KAMYA) & ANR. HOLDER .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STAR HEALTH AND ALLIED INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED & ORS. .....RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT A.K. SIKRI, J.This group of thirteen appeals was heard together and is being disposed of by this common judgment as an identical issue is involved therein.2) At the outset, we may mention that the dispute between the parties pertain to the shares of Respondent No.1, Star Health Insurance Company, standing in the name of the Respondent Nos. 3-7. As per the 2 appellants/plaintiffs, it is Respondent No.2 which has the beneficial interest in those shares. In this behalf, the appellants/plaintiffs filed the suit through their Power of Attorney holder (C.S. No.33 of 2018) before the High Court of Madras seeking, inter alia, the relief ...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 26 2018 (SC)

The State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors. Vs. Abhijit Singh Pawar

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.11356 OF2018(Arising out of SLP(C) No.17404 of 2016) State of Madhya Pradesh and others Appellants VERSUS Abhijit Singh Pawar ... Respondent JUDGMENT Uday Umesh Lalit, J.1. Leave granted. This appeal challenges correctness of the judgment and order dated 22.09.2015 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Indore in Writ Appeal No.132 of 2015.2. In 2012, the Professional Examination Board, Madhya Pradesh invited applications for filling up the posts of Subedars, Platoon Commanders and Inspectors of Police. Clause 1.13 of the advertisement dealt with character verification of the candidates. True translation of said clause 1.13 along with Note appended thereto was to the following effect:2. 1.13 Appointment: The character verification shall be carried out about the selected candidates and the appointment only of the candidates found in the selection list upon finding them fit in character. The me...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 23 2018 (HC)

Kotak Securities Ltd Vs. Mr Chethan Bhandary

Court : Karnataka

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BENGALURU DATED THIS THE23D DAY OF NOVEMBER, 20BEFORE: THE HONBLE MR.JUSTICE K.N. PHANEENDRA REVIEW PETITION No.52/2017 IN RFA NO.1199/2012BETWEEN : KOTAK SECURITIES LTD A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT, 1956 HAVING TIS REGISTERED OFFICE AT27BKC, C27 G BLOCK BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX BANDRA(E), MUMBAI400061 REGIONAL OFFICE NO.10UMIYA LAND MARK LAVELLE ROAD BANGALORE-560 001 REP. BY MR BOJOY BOSE M (BY SRI. S. R. KRISHNA KUMAR, ADV.) AND:1. MR CHETHAN BHANDARY S/O SUBBAYYA BHANDARY R/A NALINI CLINIC NO.714 BILEKAHALLI BANNERGHATTA ROAD BANGALORE-560 076 (PARTY-IN-PERSON) 2. NATIONAL STOCK EXCHANGE OF INDIA LTD., EXCHANGE PLAZA BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX PETITIONER2BANDRA(EAST), MUMBAI-400 051 REP. BY ITS MANAGER... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. CHETHAN BHANDARY, RESPONDENT NO.1 IS PARTY-IN-PERSON, R2 SERVED [ABSENT].) THIS REVIEW PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION114READ WITH ORDER XLVII RULE1OF THE CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, 1908 PRAYING TO REVIEW THE IMPUGNED JU...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 23 2018 (HC)

United India Insurance Co. Ltd Vs. Sri Rajendra

Court : Karnataka

1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE23D DAY OF NOVEMBER2018BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S. SUNIL DUTT YADAV M.F.A. No.7203/2013 (MV) c/w M.F.A.No.8282/2013 (MV) In M.F.A.No.7203/2013: BETWEEN : United India Insurance Co.Ltd, T.P.Hub, Bangalore Branch Office, Through its Regional Office, No.18, Krishibhavan, Hudson Circle, Bangalore - 560 001. (By Sri Janardhan Reddy, Advocate) And:1. ... Appellant Sri Rajendra, S/o Sri Marappa, Aged about 32 Years, R/at No.4/84-1, Iruthalam Village, Bodichipalli, Denkanikote Taluk, Krishnagiri District, Tamil Nadu - 635 113.2. Sri Krishnappa, Varadanayakanhalli, Sidlaghatta Taluk, Kolar District, Karnataka - 562 102. ...... RESPONDENTS (By Sri M.H.Prakash for C/R-1; Notice to R-2 is held sufficient) 2 (SCCH-16), awarding a compensation This MFA is filed under Section 173(1) of MV Act against the judgment and award dated 4.5.2013 passed in MVC No.7146/2011 on the file of the X Additional Small Causes Judge, XXXV ACMM, MACT, Ba...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 23 2018 (HC)

Mr Manohar Shetty Vs. The Deputy Commissioner

Court : Karnataka

1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE23D DAY OF NOVEMBER2018BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK ARADHE WRIT PETITION NO.8786 OF2013C/W WRIT PETITION NO.11978/2013 (GM-KEB) WP NO.8786/2013BETWEEN : MR MANOHAR SHETTY SON OF M SANJEEVA SHETTY AGED ABOUT49YEARS RESIDING AT MANJALAPADPU KABAKA VILLAGE PUTTUR TALUK DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT PETITIONER (BY SRI.SHRIDHAR PRABHU, ADV.) AND:1. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER AND THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE DAKSHINA KANNADA DISTRICT D.C. OFFICE COMPOUND MANGALORE-575001 2. KARNATAKA POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS EXECUTIVE ENGINEER (ELE) MAJOR WORKS DIVISION KAVOOR, MANGALORE-575015 DAKSHINA KANNADA (BY SRI.M.JYOTHI AGA FOR R1 RESPONDENTS2SRI.S.SRIRANGA ADV. FOR R2) - - - THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, PRAYING to DECLARE THAT THE ORDER DT.15.1.2013 PASSED BY R-1 IS ARBITRAY, ILLEGAL, WITHOUT JURISDICTION, VOID AB INITIO, PASSED WITHOUT FOLLOWING THE PRINCIPLES OF NATU...

Tag this Judgment!


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