⚖
Loading…
Loading…
Indian case law by case name, citation, provision or legal issue, with the case summary, the judgment text where we hold it and the provisions it applies.
6,781–6,800 · Page 340 of 500
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1177 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1257
Disposing of the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 The order of the Single Judge was exclusively F based on the earlier decision dated 29.02.2012. The judgment of the Single Judge indicates that the earlier case also dealt with persons who were working as contract employees who were appointed after a regular selection. In so…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1176 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1236
Indian case law by case name, citation, provision or legal issue, with the case summary, the judgment text where we hold it and the provisions it applies.
6,781–6,800 · Page 340 of 500
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1177 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1257
Disposing of the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1 The order of the Single Judge was exclusively F based on the earlier decision dated 29.02.2012. The judgment of the Single Judge indicates that the earlier case also dealt with persons who were working as contract employees who were appointed after a regular selection. In so…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1176 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1236
the earlier termination until re-engagement – Said order upheld by the Division Bench – On appeal, held: Single Judge without having regard to the facts of the individual cases, mechanically issued the directions exclusively relying on the earlier decision – Single Judge and the Division Bench materially erred in not a…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1175 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1263
by the High Court was misconceived. Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. Single Judge of High Court without having regard to the facts of the individual cases, mechanically issued the directions exclusively relying on the earlier decision. The F Single Judge and the Division Bench both have materially erred in not a…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1174 · [2018] 13 S.C.R. 614
re-engagement – Grant of continuity by the Single Judge was not sustainable unless the order of termination and/or the fresh appointment were challenged and adjudicated upon, seniority would necessarily have to count with effect from the date of the fresh appointment – As a matter of principle, continuity can be grante…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1173 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 316
of the High Court set aside. Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. The Single Judge of the High Court without having regard to the facts of the individual cases, mechanically H 316 APSRTC & ORS. v. G. KONDAL RAO 317 issued the directions exclusively relying on the earlier decision A dated 29.02.2012 in Writ Petition …
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1172 · [2018] 13 S.C.R. 275
E Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1. The workman did not choose to assail either the termination of his services following the enquiry or the fresh appointment. All that was sought was that he should have the benefit of continuity of service from the date of the earlier F termination until re-engagement. The gran…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1171 · [2018] 13 S.C.R. 1216
– Order passed by the Single Judge and the Division Bench quashed – Practice & Procedure. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 The Division Bench refused to review and recall the order passed in appeal solely on the ground that in the similar G facts and circumstances the Division Bench has dismissed the appeals. …
Supreme Court of India8 Feb 2018Full text
2018 INSC 117 · [2018] 2 S.C.R. 521
proceeding to decide with the substantive issues involved in the case, first and foremost, shall decide who is the legal representative of the deceased. It is also well settled that when a party dies at the stage of second appeal and there are rival contenders claiming to be the legal representatives of the C deceased,…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1169 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1141
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Miscellaneous Application No. 2597 of 2018 in Criminal Appeal No. 895/2018 (@ Criminal Appeal Nos. 895-896/2018). F From the Judgment and Order dated 16.04.2015 of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal Nos. 477 and 478 of 2000. Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Ms. Jesal Wahi, Ms…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1168 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1131
of the land, allowed by the Authority and the said order set aside by the High Court – Thereafter, order by the Deputy Commissioner that cancellation of the auction was proper and confirmed the allotment made in favour of the appellants – Said order attained finality – Thereafter, suit by respondents seeking declaratio…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1167 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1118
– Sections 12(1)(c) and 13(6) are not independent but are to be read together and they form part of the same machinery – Thus, in E consumer complaints by one or more consumers where there are numerous consumers having the same interest, it is mandatory to give notice of the institution of the suit to all persons so in…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1166 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1181
Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 There was no dispute about the fact that the demolition was carried out under the authority of the Municipal H 1181 1182 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 14 S.C.R. A Corporation. As the averments in the consumer complaint indicate, the insured proceeded on the basis that the Mu…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1165 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1268
D S. B. Upadhyay, Sr. Adv., Ms. Sunita Rani Singh, Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Advs. for the Appellants. Mani Bhushan Sinha, Pranab Prakash, Gopal Singh, Advs. for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by E DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, J. 1. Personnel belonging to the Armed Forces serve the nation in chall…
Supreme Court of India6 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1164 · [2018] 13 S.C.R. 942
– There was no good ground warranting interference with the impugned order – In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the H 942 THE CHAIRMAN V. O. CHIDAMBARANAR PORT TRUST v. 943 CAPT. PAUL NADAR BENNET SINGH instant case, the respondent having not worked with the appellants A from 2012 till date, the order of the Hi…
Supreme Court of India6 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1163 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1107
examine the question as to whether the reasoning given by the Court below is factually and legally sustainable. The said exercise was not done by the High Court while passing the impugned order and hence interference is called for. Such disposal of the application by the High Court cannot be concurred with and C impugn…
Supreme Court of India6 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1162 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1111
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 11907 of 2018. E From the Judgment and Order dated 09.03.2015 of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Execution Petition No. 337 of 2014. With Contempt Petition (C) Nos. 747 of 2017,1058 of 2018 and Contempt F Petition (C) D. No. 24803 of 2018. P. S.Narasimha, ASG, Dus…
Supreme Court of India6 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1161 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 689
K. LAKSHMINARAYANAN v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. 691 s. 12 – Nominated members in the Legislative Assembly – Right A to vote in the matter of budget and no-confidence motion against the Government – Held: Section 12(1) provides that all questions at any sitting of the Legislative Assembly of the Union territory shall be de…
Supreme Court of India5 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1160 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 893
– Orders of Single Judge as well as Division Bench of High Court are liable to be set aside – Writ Petition is dismissed. H 893 894 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 14 S.C.R. A Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 In proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the High Court does not adjudicate, upon af…
Supreme Court of India5 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1159 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1082
ZAHOOR AHMAD RATHER AND ORS v. SHEIKH IMTIYAZ AHMAD 1083 AND ORS. was right in holding that the appellants did not meet the prescribed A qualification – However, since the appellants have spent nearly four years in pursuing their quest for the job and might have become age barred, they are granted age relaxation to the…
Supreme Court of India5 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1158 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 676
676 SUPREME[2018]COURT14REPORTSS.C.R. 676 [2018] 14 S.C.R. A M/S SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LTD v. UNION OF INDIA (Civil Appeal No. 11866 of 2018) B DECEMBER 05, 2018 [DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND VINEET SARAN, JJ.] Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: C s. 34 – Application under – Delay of 514 days in filing – Cond…
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis
the earlier termination until re-engagement – Said order upheld by the Division Bench – On appeal, held: Single Judge without having regard to the facts of the individual cases, mechanically issued the directions exclusively relying on the earlier decision – Single Judge and the Division Bench materially erred in not a…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1175 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1263
by the High Court was misconceived. Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. Single Judge of High Court without having regard to the facts of the individual cases, mechanically issued the directions exclusively relying on the earlier decision. The F Single Judge and the Division Bench both have materially erred in not a…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1174 · [2018] 13 S.C.R. 614
re-engagement – Grant of continuity by the Single Judge was not sustainable unless the order of termination and/or the fresh appointment were challenged and adjudicated upon, seniority would necessarily have to count with effect from the date of the fresh appointment – As a matter of principle, continuity can be grante…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1173 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 316
of the High Court set aside. Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. The Single Judge of the High Court without having regard to the facts of the individual cases, mechanically H 316 APSRTC & ORS. v. G. KONDAL RAO 317 issued the directions exclusively relying on the earlier decision A dated 29.02.2012 in Writ Petition …
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1172 · [2018] 13 S.C.R. 275
E Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD : 1. The workman did not choose to assail either the termination of his services following the enquiry or the fresh appointment. All that was sought was that he should have the benefit of continuity of service from the date of the earlier F termination until re-engagement. The gran…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1171 · [2018] 13 S.C.R. 1216
– Order passed by the Single Judge and the Division Bench quashed – Practice & Procedure. Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 The Division Bench refused to review and recall the order passed in appeal solely on the ground that in the similar G facts and circumstances the Division Bench has dismissed the appeals. …
Supreme Court of India8 Feb 2018Full text
2018 INSC 117 · [2018] 2 S.C.R. 521
proceeding to decide with the substantive issues involved in the case, first and foremost, shall decide who is the legal representative of the deceased. It is also well settled that when a party dies at the stage of second appeal and there are rival contenders claiming to be the legal representatives of the C deceased,…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1169 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1141
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Miscellaneous Application No. 2597 of 2018 in Criminal Appeal No. 895/2018 (@ Criminal Appeal Nos. 895-896/2018). F From the Judgment and Order dated 16.04.2015 of the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad in Criminal Appeal Nos. 477 and 478 of 2000. Ms. Hemantika Wahi, Ms. Jesal Wahi, Ms…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1168 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1131
of the land, allowed by the Authority and the said order set aside by the High Court – Thereafter, order by the Deputy Commissioner that cancellation of the auction was proper and confirmed the allotment made in favour of the appellants – Said order attained finality – Thereafter, suit by respondents seeking declaratio…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1167 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1118
– Sections 12(1)(c) and 13(6) are not independent but are to be read together and they form part of the same machinery – Thus, in E consumer complaints by one or more consumers where there are numerous consumers having the same interest, it is mandatory to give notice of the institution of the suit to all persons so in…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1166 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1181
Disposing of the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 There was no dispute about the fact that the demolition was carried out under the authority of the Municipal H 1181 1182 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 14 S.C.R. A Corporation. As the averments in the consumer complaint indicate, the insured proceeded on the basis that the Mu…
Supreme Court of India7 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1165 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1268
D S. B. Upadhyay, Sr. Adv., Ms. Sunita Rani Singh, Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Advs. for the Appellants. Mani Bhushan Sinha, Pranab Prakash, Gopal Singh, Advs. for the Respondent. The Judgment of the Court was delivered by E DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD, J. 1. Personnel belonging to the Armed Forces serve the nation in chall…
Supreme Court of India6 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1164 · [2018] 13 S.C.R. 942
– There was no good ground warranting interference with the impugned order – In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the H 942 THE CHAIRMAN V. O. CHIDAMBARANAR PORT TRUST v. 943 CAPT. PAUL NADAR BENNET SINGH instant case, the respondent having not worked with the appellants A from 2012 till date, the order of the Hi…
Supreme Court of India6 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1163 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1107
examine the question as to whether the reasoning given by the Court below is factually and legally sustainable. The said exercise was not done by the High Court while passing the impugned order and hence interference is called for. Such disposal of the application by the High Court cannot be concurred with and C impugn…
Supreme Court of India6 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1162 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1111
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 11907 of 2018. E From the Judgment and Order dated 09.03.2015 of the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Execution Petition No. 337 of 2014. With Contempt Petition (C) Nos. 747 of 2017,1058 of 2018 and Contempt F Petition (C) D. No. 24803 of 2018. P. S.Narasimha, ASG, Dus…
Supreme Court of India6 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1161 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 689
K. LAKSHMINARAYANAN v. UNION OF INDIA & ANR. 691 s. 12 – Nominated members in the Legislative Assembly – Right A to vote in the matter of budget and no-confidence motion against the Government – Held: Section 12(1) provides that all questions at any sitting of the Legislative Assembly of the Union territory shall be de…
Supreme Court of India5 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1160 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 893
– Orders of Single Judge as well as Division Bench of High Court are liable to be set aside – Writ Petition is dismissed. H 893 894 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2018] 14 S.C.R. A Allowing the appeals, the Court HELD: 1.1 In proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India the High Court does not adjudicate, upon af…
Supreme Court of India5 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1159 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 1082
ZAHOOR AHMAD RATHER AND ORS v. SHEIKH IMTIYAZ AHMAD 1083 AND ORS. was right in holding that the appellants did not meet the prescribed A qualification – However, since the appellants have spent nearly four years in pursuing their quest for the job and might have become age barred, they are granted age relaxation to the…
Supreme Court of India5 Dec 2018Full text
2018 INSC 1158 · [2018] 14 S.C.R. 676
676 SUPREME[2018]COURT14REPORTSS.C.R. 676 [2018] 14 S.C.R. A M/S SIMPLEX INFRASTRUCTURE LTD v. UNION OF INDIA (Civil Appeal No. 11866 of 2018) B DECEMBER 05, 2018 [DR. DHANANJAYA Y CHANDRACHUD AND VINEET SARAN, JJ.] Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: C s. 34 – Application under – Delay of 514 days in filing – Cond…
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis