Judgments - Supreme Court of India
JIBAN KRISHNA MONDAL & ORS. Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.
ARUNBHAI KALYANBHAI SUTARIYA Vs. NUTAN NAGRIK SAHAKARI BANK LTD.& ANR
V.KRISHNASWAMY & ANR. Vs. KARNATAKA RAJYA KAIGARIKA SAHAKARI &ANR.
ST.MARY'S HOTEL(P) LTD.& ANR Vs. KOTTAYAM DIST.COOP.BANK LTD.& ORS.
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. RAM PAL
Only question raised for consideration is whether the sentence imposed in the facts and circumstances is fair and just. Moreover, in an appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution, this Court does not re-appreciate the evidence, in absence of perversity or patent legal error, merely because a different view was also possible. We are thus, not inclined to reopen Full Judgment
MOHD. AKBAR Vs. ASHOK SAHU & ORS.
Broadly, it is in the above-mentioned background the instant SLP came to be filed complaining that notwithstanding the mandate of Section 86, sub- Section (7) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951, the High Court has not disposed of the election petition so far. It was the pious hope of the Parliament that election disputes under the Representation of the People Act, 1951 should be resolved expeditiously. The purpose is obvious. The tenure of the members of the Parliament as well as the Legislature of Full Judgment
M/S SHERALI KHAN MOHAMED MANEKIA Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.
The short question, therefore, that falls for consideration is as to whether after the disposal of the appeal, the Court Receiver stands discharged or whether he continues in his office till an order of discharge is passed by the Court? In our view, when a Receiver is appointed pending suit or appeal, the prime objective is to preserve the property by taking possession Full Judgment
SHYAM LAL Vs. DEEPA DASS CHELA RAM CHELA GARIB DASS
The question that arises for consideration is as to whether the plaintiff-appellant became a trespasser after expiry of the lease period or continued to be a tenant having protection for eviction under the tenancy laws. Taking into consideration the various tenancy laws applicable in the State of Punjab and the law discussed by this Court and the High Court, in our considered opinion the trial court, the appellate court Full Judgment
GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS Vs. JAGJIT SINGH AND ORS
Any determination under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, must proceed sequentially. First, the factum of an Award under Section 11 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, must be clearly established. The said Award must predate the commencement of the Act, i.e., Full Judgment
RAMAKANT MISHRA @ LALU ETC. Vs. STATE OF U.P.
Succinctly stated, it had been held therein that the use of word 'shown' instead of 'proved' in Section 304B indicates that the onus cast on the prosecution would stand satisfied on the anvil of a mere preponderance of probability. In other words, 'shown' will have to be read up to mean 'proved' but only to the extent of preponderance of probability. Thereafter, the word 'deemed' Full Judgment
SURYA VADANAN Vs. STATE OF TAMILNADU & ORS
The question before us relates to the refusal by the Madras High Court to issue a writ of habeas corpus for the production of the children of Surya Vadanan and Mayura Vadanan. The appellant sought their production to enable him to take the children with him to the U.K. since they were wards of the court in the U.K. to enable the foreign court to decide the issue of their custody. The principle Full Judgment
K.P. Manu Versus Chairman, Scrutiny Committee for Verification of Community Certificate
As we perceive, the controversy fundamentally has three arenas, namely, (1) whether on conversion and at what stage a person born to Christian parents can, after reconversion to the Hindu religion, be eligible to claim the benefit of his original caste; (ii) whether after his eligibility is accepted and his original community on a collective basis takes him within its fold, he still can be denied the Full Judgment
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. Vs. DILEEP KUMAR SINGH
These appeals raise an interesting question as to the interpretation of a proviso contained in Section 47 of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 (in short the "1995 Act"). It is well settled that the provisions of a statute must be read harmoniously together. However, if this is not possible then it is settled law that where there is a conflict between two Sections, and you cannot reconcile the two, you have to determine which is the leading provision Full Judgment
DHIRENDRA KUMAR @ DHIROO Vs. STATE OF UTTARKHAND
As far as reliability of evidence on record is concerned, we are of the view that re-appreciation of evidence is not called for in an appeal under Article 136 of the Constitution in absence of patent illegality or perversity merely because a different view could also be taken. Question whether a case falls under Section 302 or 304 has to be decided from Full Judgment
TEJRAM PATIL Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
The decision of this appeal will rest on the answers to the following two questions : (i) Reliability of DD Exhibit 45 recorded by PSI Sunil Eknadi Wanjari PW 4 made by deceased Savita; (ii) Admissibility and reliability of DDs made by Prabhabai recorded by SJM, Rajiv Babarao Raut Exhibit 41) and PSI Bhila Narayan Bachao (Exhibit 43). However, the Court must be satisfied that the deceased was in a fit mental condition to make the DD and that the statement was faithfully recorded and was otherwise reliable. Full Judgment