Home / Library

Library

Facebook Comments

INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD Vs. T NATARAJAN

Constitution of India, Articles 226 and 227. This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 08.10.2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in W.A. No.589 of 2015 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court allowed the writ appeal filed by the respondent herein and set aside the order dated 17.04.2014 passed by the Single Judge of the High Court in Writ Petition No. 10026 of 2013 by which the writ petition filed by the respondent herein was dismissed. The appeal allowed.

Abhay Manohar Sapre and Uday Umesh Lalit, JJ.

17/7/2018 View judgement PDF

THE STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. NAVINBHAI CHANDRAKANT JOSHI

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Sections 7 and 13(1)(d). These appeals arise out of the judgment dated 16.04.2015 passed by the High Court of Gujarat in Criminal Appeal Nos. 477-78 of 2000 in and by which the High Court reversed the verdict of conviction passed by the trial court in Special (ACB) Case No.10 of 1992 and thereby acquitting the respondents under Section 7 and Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (`the Act\'). The appeal allowed.

Ranjan Gogoi and R. Banumathi, JJ.

17/7/2018 View judgement PDF

UDITA NABHA Vs. RANJEET NABHA

Special Marriage Act, 1954, Section 27(1)(d). These appeals are filed against the interim order dated 25.04.2017 in Civil Application No. 78 of 2017 in FCA No. 216 of 215 along with Civil Application No. 178 of 2016 in FCA No. 232 of 2015 and order dated 06.07.2017 in Review Petition No. 5 of 2017 in Civil Application 78 of 2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay. Appellant (wife) and respondent (husband) were married under the provisions of the Special Marriage Act, 1954 way back in the year 1995. The couple was blessed with a girl child in the year 2003. As there was matrimonial discord between appellant (wife) and respondent (husband), appellant (wife) filed a petition under Section 27(1)(d) of the Special Marriage Act, 1954, being M.J. Petition No. A-2400 of 2011 before the Family Court in Mumbai. These appeals disposed of.

N.V. Ramana and S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ.

16/7/2018 View judgement PDF

M. AAMIRA FATHIMA AND ORS. Vs. ANNAMALAI UNIVERSITY AND ORS.

Annamalai University Act, 1928 - Tamil Nadu Educational Institutions (Prohibition of Collection of Capitation Fee) Act, 1992 - State Legislature vide Tamil Nadu Educational Institutions (Prohibition of Collection of Capitation Fee) Amendment Act, 2007. These appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 26.09.2016 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Writ Appeal No.1637 of 2014 and other connected matters. Matter arising from Writ Appeal No.1637 of 2014 which in turn arose from Writ Petition No.20720 of 2014, namely M. Aamira Fathima and others v. Annamalai University and others is taken to be the lead matter and the facts leading to the filing of the said writ appeal are set out in detail hereunder. Appeal allowed.

Arun Mishra and Uday Umesh Lalit, JJ.

13/7/2018 View judgement PDF

NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA THROUGH DIRECTOR Vs. M/S GWALIOR JHANSI EXPRESSWAY LIMITED THROUGH DIRECTOR

Appeal emanates from the decision of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi dated 21st August, 2017 in Appeal ARB.A (Comm.) No.20 of 2017 whereby the appeal filed by the appellant under Section 37(2)(b) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (for short, \"the Act\") seeking to quash the order dated 24th May, 2017 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal under Section 17 of the Act came to be dismissed. The Arbitral Tribunal vide order dated 24th May, 2017 allowed the application preferred by the respondent (claimant) under Section 17 of the Act seeking a direction to the appellant to allow the respondent to exercise an option to match the lowest bid in terms of the order dated 23rd July, 2016 passed by the Arbitral Tribunal and including to exercise Right of First Refusal (\"ROFR\") and for other consequential reliefs. Appeal allowed.

Dipak Misra, CJI, A.M. Khanwilkar and Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, JJ.

13/7/2018 View judgement PDF

PARAKH VANIJYA PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. BAROMA AGRO PRODUCT

Appeal arises out of the order dated 01.03.2017 passed by the High Court of Calcutta in AOPT No.349 of 2016 affirming the order of the Single Judge in and by which it was held that the respondent-defendant is entitled to use the word \'MALABAR\' in conjunction with the mark \'BAROMA\' for selling its product - Biryani Rice. By the impugned order, the Division Bench has also affirmed the findings of the Single Judge that subject to the outcome of the suit, the respondents can pursue their application for registration of their label. Appeal dismissed.

Ranjan Gogoi and R. Banumathi, JJ.

12/7/2018 View judgement PDF

OM PRAKASH SINGH Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR

Criminal Procedure Code, Section 482 - Indian Penal Code, Section 420, 406, 379, 448, 307, 427 and 506 read with Section 34. This appeal is directed against the judgment dated 16.10.2017 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 52088/2013 allowing the petition filed by respondent nos. 2 and 3 herein under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. By the impugned judgment, the High Court has set aside the order dated 10.09.2013 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Siwan, Bihar in Siwan (M) P.S. Case No. 288/2012, taking cognizance of the offence under Section 420/406/379/448/307/427 and 506 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the accused-respondent nos. 2 and 3 herein. Appeal disposed of.

N.V. Ramana and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ.

11/7/2018 View judgement PDF

N.N. GODFRED Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.( FOR RESPONDENT NO. 2

Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 Section 30 - Navy (Pension) Regulations, 1964, Regulation 86. The present Civil Appeal has been filed under Section 30 of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 to challenge the judgment and order dated February 25, 2010 passed by the Principal Bench of the Armed Forces Tribunal, New Delhi. Appeal allowed.

S. Abdul Nazeer and Indu Malhotra, JJ.

11/7/2018 View judgement PDF

HETAL CHIRAG PATEL Vs. THE STATE OF GUJARAT

Appeals filed against the common final judgment and order dated 29.06.2018 passed by the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Civil Application No.3 of 2018 in F/LPA No.36 of 2018 in SCA No.11163 of 2012 & other allied matters. The Division Bench dismissed the applications filed by the appellants under Section 5 of the Limitation Act for condonation of delay in filing the appeals holding inter alia that there was no sufficient cause made out by the appellants in filing the appeals which were delayed by 233 days. Appeal allowed.

Abhay Manohar Sapre and Uday Umesh Lalit, JJ.

11/7/2018 View judgement PDF

MOTIRAM PADU JOSHI Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Indian Penal Code, Sections Sections 147, 148, 302 read with 149. This appeal arises out of the judgment dated 30.07.2015 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Appeal No.174 of 1994 in and by which the High Court reversed the judgment of the acquittal of the appellants/accused Nos. 3, 5, 7 and 8 and convicted them under Sections 147, 148, 302 read with 149 IPC and sentenced them to undergo life imprisonment. Appeal dismissed.

Ranjan Gogoi and R. Banumathi, JJ.

10/7/2018 View judgement PDF

Latest CaseLaw

Latest laws Helping good people to do good things.

Monday

23 July 2018

High Court questions Govt: Are Kids & Lactating Mothers in Tribal belt getting Nutritious Food?

Supreme Court asks AIIMS to formulate National Action Plan to combat Drug Menace

HC asks Govt:”When will they make Ravana Effigies? After Dusshera? Go and allot them Land”

In a First, this Court has awarded Death to 19-year-old for Raping 7-month-old infant

All About Mergers and Amalgamations By: Lavina Bhargava

Acid Attacks Scarring Indian Souls: A Legal Overview By: Jigyasa Agrawal

Sting Operations: Legal or Illegal By: Vedangini Bisht

All about the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act,1956 By: Akanksha Yadav

What are Non-Performing Assets? By: Maahi Mayuri

Analysis of Patentability of Medicines and Drugs By: Varun Gupta

All about Commencement of Proceedings under Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 By Sakshi Rewaria

Library

Get Latest Laws News Alert

Get Latest Laws News Alert