⚖
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.
3,801–3,820 · Page 191 of 382
Supreme Court of India14 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 413 · [2015] 10 S.C.R. 1
M/S. SARVOTHAM CARE LTD. Laboratory. Thus, the judgment of the tribunal does not A call for any interference. As regards the other appeal, for the reasons recorded in C.A. No. 4480 of 2005, the order of the High Court as well as respondent No.2 demanding differential duty is quashed. [Paras 19, 20, 22] [25-C-D, B E; 26…
Supreme Court of India14 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 412 · [2015] 4 S.C.R. 974
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.
3,801–3,820 · Page 191 of 382
Supreme Court of India14 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 413 · [2015] 10 S.C.R. 1
M/S. SARVOTHAM CARE LTD. Laboratory. Thus, the judgment of the tribunal does not A call for any interference. As regards the other appeal, for the reasons recorded in C.A. No. 4480 of 2005, the order of the High Court as well as respondent No.2 demanding differential duty is quashed. [Paras 19, 20, 22] [25-C-D, B E; 26…
Supreme Court of India14 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 412 · [2015] 4 S.C.R. 974
F Partly allowing the appeal and remitting the matter to the High Court, the Court HELD: 1. It is well settled that rules of procedure are intended to be a handmaid to the administration G of justice. A party cannot be refused just relief merely because of some mistake, negligence, inadvertence or even infraction of ru…
Supreme Court of India14 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 411 · [2015] 7 S.C.R. 132
1.2 The tribunal's judgment proceeded on the H 134 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 7 S.C.R. A basis that even though the samples were drawn contrary to law, the appellants would be estopped because their representative was present when the samples were drawn and they did not object immediately. This is a completely perver…
Supreme Court of India14 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 410 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 638
ss. 409, 411- President and Members of the NCLT F and Chairman and Members of the NCLAT - Prescription of qualifications including term of their office and salary allowances etc. - Challenge to, as regards technical members of the tribunal and the appellate tribunal - Held: As pers. 409(3)(a) to (e) ands. 411 prescribi…
Supreme Court of India14 Jan 2015Full text
2015 INSC 41 · [2015] 1 S.C.R. 700
17. 9. 2012 showed the presence of appellant-husband and wife - High Court framed the question as to whether the impugned judgment and decree called for interference - High E Court doubted the filing of the Vakalatnama signed by the wife with her affidavit and in view of such doubt, set aside the divorce decree - Held:…
Supreme Court of India14 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 409 · [2015] 7 S.C.R. 512
64. 7% and directed allotment of developed abadi Land to F the extent of 10% of the acquired land- However, notification in respect of three villages was quashed where no development work had been carried out-Appeal of the Land-holders - Held: In the facts of the case, the cases may not have been maintainable on the gr…
Supreme Court of India13 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 407 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 807
5. There is no basis, whatsoever, for coming to the G conclusion that there was possibility of manipulation of the records. Suspicion ought not to be the basis of any judicial order and this is where the High Court seems to have erred. [par…
Supreme Court of India13 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 406 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 1
2 SUPREME GOURT REPORTS (2015) 6 S.C.R. A the operative period of the Scheme came to an end on 30. 11. 2000 and that there could be no further extension of time limit, set aside - State Level Committee to assess whether appellants could justifiably have claimed extension under clause 10 of the Scheme - Gujarat Entertai…
Supreme Court of India13 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 405 · [2015] 8 S.C.R. 283
WITH C.A.· NO. 3611AND4387-4392 OF 2005 283 H 284 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 8 S.C.R. A R. Venkataramani, Satya Mitra· Garg, Mahaboob Fazil, Manju Aggarwal, Neelam Singh, R. Anand Padmanabhan, Romil Pathak, Krishna Porchetan, Shashi Bhushan Kumar, for the Appellant. B K. Radhakrishnan, Arijit Prasad, Aruna Gupta, B. …
Supreme Court of India13 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 404 · [2015] 5 S.C.R. 29
30 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 5 S.C.R. A and there should be an exception only in the case of the President, Prime Minister and Chief Justice of the country who may themselves decide the question - Remaining recommendations of the Committee appear to be comprehensive, based on an analytical approach, are B accepted -…
Supreme Court of India12 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 402 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 192
(2015] 6 S.C.R. 192 A UNION OF INDIA & ORS. v. MANJEET SINGH (Civil Appeal Nos. 4357-4358 of 2015) B MAY 12, 2015 [M.Y. EQBALANDAMITAVAROY, JJ.] Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961: Regulation C 173; Army Rules, 1954: rr. 5, 9 and 14 - Disability pension -Entitlement for- Held: There is a statutory presumption, that…
Supreme Court of India12 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 401 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 348
Allowing the appeal, the Court G HELD: 1.1 The High Court and the trial court relied on three points to decide the matter against the State-no independent witness; husband could not have fled in presence of five police officers; and the link evidence H of the possession of seal "RP" transferring from ASI to 348 .. 'STA…
Supreme Court of India12 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 400 · [2015] 7 S.C.R. 1046
WITH G C.A. NO. 1034 OF 2007 C.A. NOs. 262-263 OF 2010 C.A. NO. 4264 OF 2011 Yashank Adhyaru, K. Radhakrishnan, Nisha Bagchi, H 1048 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015)7 S.C.R. A Rupesh Kumar, Arijit Prasad, Sujeeta Srivastava, Pooja Sharma, B. Krishna Prasad for the Appellant. S. K. Bagaria, V Lakshmikumaran, M.P. Devanath, …
Supreme Court of India6 Jan 2015Full text
2015 INSC 4 · [2015] 1 S.C.R. 305
Dhruv Mehta, Mahabir Singh, Shobha, Sameer P. A., Jyoti, Gagan Deep Sharm, Preeti Singh, Nikhil Jain with them, F for the Appellants. Neeraj Kumar Jain, Pratham Kant, Umang Shankar, Dr. Kailash Chand, Ashok Kumar Sharma, Devashish Bharuka for the Respondents. G The Judgment of the Court was delivered by. Madan B. Lokur…
Supreme Court of India11 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 398 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 825
HELD: 1. The procedure for selection of departmental candidates for the promotion to the rank of Sub-inspectors was changed and was amended by 825 H 826 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2015) 6 S.C.R. A every Government Order viz. the Government Order dated 23.01.1999 and 22.02.1999. Thus, the prior Government Order was impliedl…
Supreme Court of India11 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 397 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 321
• PW3 only saw the accused fleeing away and the alleged eye witness, was never produced before the Court nor her statement was recorded u/s.161 Cr.P.C. -Also, no medical E examination of the prosecutrix was conducted- The offence of attempt to rape was, therefore, not proved beyond reasonable doubt - However, he was ri…
Supreme Court of India11 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 396 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 331
.j 332 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 6 S.C.R. A was co-owner with PVofthe property in the said survey and was authorize by PV to initiate• all subsequent proceedings - Writ petitions allowed by the High Court- Said order upheld by the Division Bench - On appeal, held: Unless the Declaration uls. 6 or the Notification ul…
Supreme Court of India8 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 395 · [2015] 5 S.C.R. 122
SANJEEV KUMAR GUPTA v. STATE OF U. P. (NOW 123 STATE OF UTIARAKHAND) HELD: 1.1 The appellants raised the defense that A there was an improvement by the prosecution witnesses with respect to the place of occurrence of the incident. However, from a perusal of the site map it became clear that the incident originally took…
Supreme Court of India8 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 394 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 302
G Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. The writ petitioners in the earlier round of adjudication were applicants under the Scheme alike H the respondents. They promptly approached the High 302 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. v. SHRI HANUMAN 303 INDUSTRIES & ANR. Court with a batch of writ petitions in the year 2007 itself A a…
Supreme Court of India8 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 393 · [2015] 10 S.C.R. 27
Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. In view of the reply to the show cause notice and the statements of the two employees of the F assessee-company, the findings arrived at by the CESTAT which are accepted by the Hi.gh Court are ~otally perverse and there is no such admission made by these two persons which has bec…
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis
F Partly allowing the appeal and remitting the matter to the High Court, the Court HELD: 1. It is well settled that rules of procedure are intended to be a handmaid to the administration G of justice. A party cannot be refused just relief merely because of some mistake, negligence, inadvertence or even infraction of ru…
Supreme Court of India14 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 411 · [2015] 7 S.C.R. 132
1.2 The tribunal's judgment proceeded on the H 134 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 7 S.C.R. A basis that even though the samples were drawn contrary to law, the appellants would be estopped because their representative was present when the samples were drawn and they did not object immediately. This is a completely perver…
Supreme Court of India14 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 410 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 638
ss. 409, 411- President and Members of the NCLT F and Chairman and Members of the NCLAT - Prescription of qualifications including term of their office and salary allowances etc. - Challenge to, as regards technical members of the tribunal and the appellate tribunal - Held: As pers. 409(3)(a) to (e) ands. 411 prescribi…
Supreme Court of India14 Jan 2015Full text
2015 INSC 41 · [2015] 1 S.C.R. 700
17. 9. 2012 showed the presence of appellant-husband and wife - High Court framed the question as to whether the impugned judgment and decree called for interference - High E Court doubted the filing of the Vakalatnama signed by the wife with her affidavit and in view of such doubt, set aside the divorce decree - Held:…
Supreme Court of India14 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 409 · [2015] 7 S.C.R. 512
64. 7% and directed allotment of developed abadi Land to F the extent of 10% of the acquired land- However, notification in respect of three villages was quashed where no development work had been carried out-Appeal of the Land-holders - Held: In the facts of the case, the cases may not have been maintainable on the gr…
Supreme Court of India13 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 407 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 807
5. There is no basis, whatsoever, for coming to the G conclusion that there was possibility of manipulation of the records. Suspicion ought not to be the basis of any judicial order and this is where the High Court seems to have erred. [par…
Supreme Court of India13 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 406 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 1
2 SUPREME GOURT REPORTS (2015) 6 S.C.R. A the operative period of the Scheme came to an end on 30. 11. 2000 and that there could be no further extension of time limit, set aside - State Level Committee to assess whether appellants could justifiably have claimed extension under clause 10 of the Scheme - Gujarat Entertai…
Supreme Court of India13 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 405 · [2015] 8 S.C.R. 283
WITH C.A.· NO. 3611AND4387-4392 OF 2005 283 H 284 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 8 S.C.R. A R. Venkataramani, Satya Mitra· Garg, Mahaboob Fazil, Manju Aggarwal, Neelam Singh, R. Anand Padmanabhan, Romil Pathak, Krishna Porchetan, Shashi Bhushan Kumar, for the Appellant. B K. Radhakrishnan, Arijit Prasad, Aruna Gupta, B. …
Supreme Court of India13 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 404 · [2015] 5 S.C.R. 29
30 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 5 S.C.R. A and there should be an exception only in the case of the President, Prime Minister and Chief Justice of the country who may themselves decide the question - Remaining recommendations of the Committee appear to be comprehensive, based on an analytical approach, are B accepted -…
Supreme Court of India12 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 402 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 192
(2015] 6 S.C.R. 192 A UNION OF INDIA & ORS. v. MANJEET SINGH (Civil Appeal Nos. 4357-4358 of 2015) B MAY 12, 2015 [M.Y. EQBALANDAMITAVAROY, JJ.] Pension Regulations for the Army, 1961: Regulation C 173; Army Rules, 1954: rr. 5, 9 and 14 - Disability pension -Entitlement for- Held: There is a statutory presumption, that…
Supreme Court of India12 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 401 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 348
Allowing the appeal, the Court G HELD: 1.1 The High Court and the trial court relied on three points to decide the matter against the State-no independent witness; husband could not have fled in presence of five police officers; and the link evidence H of the possession of seal "RP" transferring from ASI to 348 .. 'STA…
Supreme Court of India12 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 400 · [2015] 7 S.C.R. 1046
WITH G C.A. NO. 1034 OF 2007 C.A. NOs. 262-263 OF 2010 C.A. NO. 4264 OF 2011 Yashank Adhyaru, K. Radhakrishnan, Nisha Bagchi, H 1048 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015)7 S.C.R. A Rupesh Kumar, Arijit Prasad, Sujeeta Srivastava, Pooja Sharma, B. Krishna Prasad for the Appellant. S. K. Bagaria, V Lakshmikumaran, M.P. Devanath, …
Supreme Court of India6 Jan 2015Full text
2015 INSC 4 · [2015] 1 S.C.R. 305
Dhruv Mehta, Mahabir Singh, Shobha, Sameer P. A., Jyoti, Gagan Deep Sharm, Preeti Singh, Nikhil Jain with them, F for the Appellants. Neeraj Kumar Jain, Pratham Kant, Umang Shankar, Dr. Kailash Chand, Ashok Kumar Sharma, Devashish Bharuka for the Respondents. G The Judgment of the Court was delivered by. Madan B. Lokur…
Supreme Court of India11 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 398 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 825
HELD: 1. The procedure for selection of departmental candidates for the promotion to the rank of Sub-inspectors was changed and was amended by 825 H 826 SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2015) 6 S.C.R. A every Government Order viz. the Government Order dated 23.01.1999 and 22.02.1999. Thus, the prior Government Order was impliedl…
Supreme Court of India11 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 397 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 321
• PW3 only saw the accused fleeing away and the alleged eye witness, was never produced before the Court nor her statement was recorded u/s.161 Cr.P.C. -Also, no medical E examination of the prosecutrix was conducted- The offence of attempt to rape was, therefore, not proved beyond reasonable doubt - However, he was ri…
Supreme Court of India11 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 396 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 331
.j 332 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 6 S.C.R. A was co-owner with PVofthe property in the said survey and was authorize by PV to initiate• all subsequent proceedings - Writ petitions allowed by the High Court- Said order upheld by the Division Bench - On appeal, held: Unless the Declaration uls. 6 or the Notification ul…
Supreme Court of India8 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 395 · [2015] 5 S.C.R. 122
SANJEEV KUMAR GUPTA v. STATE OF U. P. (NOW 123 STATE OF UTIARAKHAND) HELD: 1.1 The appellants raised the defense that A there was an improvement by the prosecution witnesses with respect to the place of occurrence of the incident. However, from a perusal of the site map it became clear that the incident originally took…
Supreme Court of India8 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 394 · [2015] 6 S.C.R. 302
G Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. The writ petitioners in the earlier round of adjudication were applicants under the Scheme alike H the respondents. They promptly approached the High 302 UNION OF INDIA & ORS. v. SHRI HANUMAN 303 INDUSTRIES & ANR. Court with a batch of writ petitions in the year 2007 itself A a…
Supreme Court of India8 May 2015Full text
2015 INSC 393 · [2015] 10 S.C.R. 27
Allowing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. In view of the reply to the show cause notice and the statements of the two employees of the F assessee-company, the findings arrived at by the CESTAT which are accepted by the Hi.gh Court are ~otally perverse and there is no such admission made by these two persons which has bec…
Also on Law on Tips: Bare Acts · Legal news and analysis