Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Page 9 of about 756,017 results (2.205 seconds)

Feb 07 2020 (SC)

m/s.rajankumar and Brothers (Impex) Vs. Oriental Insurance co.ltd.

Court : Supreme Court of India

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.971 OF2014M/s Rajankumar and Brothers (Impex) .Appellant(s) Versus Oriental Insurance Company Ltd. .Respondent(s) JUDGMENT MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR, J.1. This appeal arises out of judgement of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) dated 12.11.2013, dismissing the consumer complaint filed by the Appellant herein.2. The timeline of events giving rise to the present appeal is as follows: The Appellant is a partnership firm in the business of importexport of various commodities, including steel coils. The 1 Respondent insurance company issued a Marine Cargo Cover Note (hereinafter Cover Note) dated 14.5.2010 for a sum of 12,63,712.50 US Dollars, covering voyage from any port in China to Mumbai Port. It was stated in the aforesaid Cover Note that a policy document would be issued once the Appellant furnished the requisite particulars of the vessel in which the cargo was being carried. ...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 07 2020 (SC)

c.s.venkatesh Vs. A.s.c.murthy (D) by Lrs..

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8425 OF2009C.S. VENKATESH APPELLANT VERSUS A.S.C. MURTHY (D) BY LRS. & ORS. RESPONDENTS JUDGMENT S. ABDUL NAZEER, J.1. This appeal is directed against the judgment and decree in RFA No.626 of 2001 dated 21.08.2006 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bangalore, whereby the High Court has allowed the appeal and set aside the judgment and decree in O.S. No.3308 of 1988 passed by the Civil Judge, Bangalore City.2. A.S.C. Murthy was the plaintiff in the suit. He died during the pendency of the suit. Therefore, his wife Smt. Jayashree was brought on record as his legal representative. She is the first respondent in this appeal. C.S. Venkatesh, the appellant herein, was defendant No.2 in the suit. C. Sethurama Rao, was the defendant No.1 in the suit. He also died during the pendency of the suit, 2 therefore, his wife Smt. C.S. Lalithamma was brought on record as his legal representative. She is arra...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 07 2020 (SC)

Union of India Vs. Deepak Niranjan Nath Pandit

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 Reportable IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.1236 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP(C) No 1867 of 2020) Union of India & Anr Versus .... Appellant(s) Deepak Niranjan Nath Pandit ....Respondent(s) JUDGMENT Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J12 Leave granted. The respondent, who is an Assistant Commissioner of Customs, GST and Central Excise was transferred from Mumbai to Bhubaneshwar on 5 September 2019. Challenging the order of transfer, the respondent moved the Central Administrative Tribunal1 in OA No 627 of 2019. By an order dated 17 September 2019, the CAT granted an ad interim stay of the order of transfer. Eventually, after the OA was heard, it was dismissed by the CAT by an order dated 5 November 2019. Aggrieved by the order of the CAT, the respondent moved the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. On 11 November 2019, at the production stage, the High Court continued the ad interim order. By the impugned judgment and order of the High Court 1CAT 2 ...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 07 2020 (SC)

M/S. Skj Coke Industries Ltd. Vs. Coal India Ltd and Ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

(Non-Reportable) IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL No.8153 OF2009M/s. S.K.J.Coke Industries Ltd.& Anr. ...Appellants Versus Coal India Ltd. & Ors. ..Respondents JUDGMENT ANIRUDDHA BOSE, J.The core dispute in this appeal involves the question as to whether the appellants were required to pay the price of coal consumed in their manufacturing process at a preferential rate, known in the trade parlance as linked price, or the price under a Liberalised Sales Scheme (LSS). The latter pricing mechanism is similar to open market price of coal. The predecessor in title of the first appellant were a firm under the trade name Mahabir Coke Industries. At the material time, they were engaged in production of low ash metallurgical coal at a location close to Guwahati. They wanted to be under the preferential pricing regime on the strength of an Page 1 of 19 arrangement with the respondent coal companies agreed upon in the year 1989. Under such arrangement Mahabi...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 07 2020 (SC)

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd. (Earlier Known as Maruti Udyog Ltd.) Vs. Comm ...

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.11923 OF2018MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD. (EARLIER KNOWN AS MARUTI UDYOG LTD.) ...APPELLANT(S) VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI ...RESPONDENT(S) WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO.11924 OF2018JUDGMENT ASHOK BHUSHAN,J.By these appeals the assessee has challenged the judgment of the High Court of Delhi dated 07.12.2017 deciding the Income Tax Appeal No.31 of 2005. ITA No.31 of 2005 related to Assessment year 19992000 and ITA No.442 of 2005 related to Assessment year 20002001, in both the appeal 2 similar questions were answered against the assessee. For deciding these two appeals it is sufficient to notice the facts in CA No.11923 of 2018 for Assessment Year 19992000. The High Court by the impugned judgment has affirmed the views of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on the questions which have been raised in this appeal. The Assessing Officer as well as the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has not accepted the c...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 06 2020 (HC)

Ganesh Kumar Vs. State

Court : Karnataka

R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE6H DAY OF FEBRUARY2020BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE K. SOMASHEKAR CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1203 OF2010BETWEEN : GANESH KUMAR AGED26YEARS S/O ANNUDAS R/A DEOGO DSOUZA COMPOUND DEVINAGAR, KONCHADY POST PADAVINANGADY MANGALORE (BY SRI. MOHAMMED FARUKE, ADV.) AND: STATE BY UDUPI TOWN POLICE. ...APPELLANT RESPONDENT (BY SRI. M. DIVAKAR MADDUR, HCGP) THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL IS FILED U/S.374(2) CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED2426.8.2010 PASSED BY THE P.O., FTC, UDUPI IN S.C.NO.9/2008 CONVICTING THE APPELLANT/ ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S120B AND307R/W511OF IPC. THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence rendered by the trial Court in S.C.No.9/2008 dated 24/26.08.2010, whereby the accused is convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 307 r/w 511 of IPC and 120-B of IPC. The appellant said to be ar...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 06 2020 (SC)

Chhota Ahirwar Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Court : Supreme Court of India

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL No.238 OF2011CHHOTA AHIRWAR ..Appellant versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH .Respondent JUDGMENT Indira Banerjee, J.This appeal is against a judgment and order dated 5th November, 2008 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur, dismissing Criminal Appeal No.1050 of 1994 filed by the appellant, and upholding the judgment dated 26th August, 1994 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, District Panna, Madhya Pradesh in Sessions Case No.13/1993, inter alia, convicting the accused appellant of offence under Section 307 read with Section 2 34 of the Indian Penal Code.2. The accused appellant was tried by the Sessions Court, on charges under Section 307/34 of the Indian Penal Code, for attempt, with common intent along with the main accused Khilai, to murder the complainant and for instigating the said accused Khilai to fire at the complainant with a country made pistol, in furtherance of a...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 2020 (HC)

K Lenin Vs. Nithyananda Swamy

Court : Karnataka

1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE05H DAY OF FEBRUARY2020R BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.594 OF2020BETWEEN : K LENIN @ SRI NITHYA DHARMANANDA AGED44YEARS S/O (LATE) SRI L KARUPANNAN R/O VEPPAMPOONDI VILLAGE SALEM DISTRICT TAMIL NADU. (BY SRI. ASHWIN VAISH, ADVOCATE) AND: 1 . NITHYANANDA SWAMY @ A RAJASHEKARAN NITHYANAND DHYANAPEETA KALLUGOPAHALLI VILLAGE BIDADI HOBLI, RAMANAGARA DISTRICT KARNATAKA56210 2 . STATE OF KARNATAKA BY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE SPECIAL ENQUIRIES, CID, CARLTON HOUSE, NO.1, PALACE ROAD BANGALORE56000. (BY SRI.V.S.HEGDE, SPP-II FOR R2) ...PETITIONER ...RESPONDENTS2THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S4392) CR.PC PRAYING TO CANCEL THE BAIL GRANTED TO RESPONDENT NO.1/ACCUSED NO.1 IN CR.NO.141/2010 (CRL.P.NO.2328/2010) REGISTERED AT POLICE STATION SECTIONS376377,506,417,201,212,120B OF IPC WHICH IS ANNEXED AS ANNEXURE-A. RAMANAGARA BIDADI, UNDER THIS CRL.P COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE ...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 2020 (HC)

G B Jagadeesh Vs. State of Karnataka

Court : Karnataka

1 R IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE5H DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2020 BEFORE THE HONBLE MR. JUSTICE K. SOMASHEKAR CRIMINAL APPEAL No.384 OF2011BETWEEN G B JAGADEESH S/O BISTAPPA EDUCATIONAL CO-ORDINATOR (HIGH SCHOOL CADRE) B.E.O. OFFICE, MAYAKONDA CENTRE SOUTHERN RANGE DAVANAGERE. (BY SRI S. S. KOTI- ADVOCATE FOR SRI VINAYAKA S. KOTI-ADVOCATE) AND STATE OF KARNATAKA REP. BY S.P.P BY LOKAYUKTA POLICE DAVANAGERE. (BY SRI. B. S. PRASAD SPL.P.P.)... APPELLANT... RESPONDENT THIS CRL.A. IS FILED UNDER SECTION3742) OF THE CR.P.C PRAYING TO, SET ASIDE THE JUDGMENT OF CONVICTION AND SENTENCE DATED243.2011 PASSED IN SPL. C. BY THE SPL. JUDGE, DAVANAGERE (LOKAYUKTHA) NO.9/2007 THE CONVICTING2APPELLANT / ACCUSED FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S7 13(1)(d) R/W132) OF PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT, 1988 AND ETC., THIS CRIMINAL APPEAL COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JUDGMENT This appeal is directed against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence render...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 05 2020 (SC)

Brahma Singh Vs. Union of India

Court : Supreme Court of India

NONREPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) No.59 OF2019BRAHMA SINGH AND OTHERS PETITIONER(S) Versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS RESPONDENT(S) JUDGMENT DEEPAK GUPTA, J.The short issue involved in this case is whether the service rendered by the petitioners in the Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee and Supreme Court Legal Services Committee prior to the promulgation of the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee Rules, 2000 is to be counted while calculating their qualifying service for determination of pension.2. The petitioners are serving and retired employees of the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee in various capacities. They claim that the entire service rendered by them should be 1 treated as qualifying service for the purpose of fixing the retiral benefits. The respondent no.1Union of India has rejected their claim on 11.09.2017 and 08.12.2017, leading to the filing of this petition. The case of the petitioners is that their cla...

Tag this Judgment!


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