Judgments - Supreme Court of India
VIVEK RAI & ANR. Vs. HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND THR.REG.GEN & OR
This writ petition has been filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India seeking to declare Rule 159 of the High Court of Jharkhand Rules, 2001 as violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution and provisions of Sections 397 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C.").- It Full Judgment
DR.VINOD BHANDARI Vs. STATE OF M. P.
It is well settled that at pre-conviction stage, there is presumption of innocence. The object of keeping a person in custody is to ensure his availability to face the trial and to receive the sentence that may be passed. The detention is not supposed to be punitive or preventive. Seriousness of the allegation or the availability of material in support thereof Full Judgment
M/S CONSTRUCTION & DESIGN SERVICES Vs. DELHI DEVT.AUTH
Once it is held that even in absence of specific evidence, the respondent could be held to have suffered loss on account of breach of contract, and it is entitled to compensation to the extent of loss suffered, it is for the appellant to show that stipulated damages are by way of penalty - The Full Judgment
KANDIVALI CO-OP. INDUSTRIAL ESTATE & ANR Vs. MUNICIPAL CORP. OF GREATER MUMBAI & ORS.
-Elaborating the distinction between the tax and a fee, this Court in number of decisions held that the element of compulsion or coercion is present in all impositions, though in different degrees and that it is not totally absent in fees. The compulsion lies in the fact that payment is enforceable by law against a man in spite of his unwillingness or want of consent Full Judgment
S.T. SADIQ Vs. STATE OF KERALA & ORS.
It is well-settled that if a statute requires an authority to exercise power, when such authority is satisfied that conditions exist for exercise of that power, the satisfaction has to be based on the existence of grounds mentioned in the statute. The grounds must be made out on the basis of the relevant material. If the existence of the conditions required for the exercise of the power is challenged, the courts Full Judgment
SUBHAS DATTA Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
This petition has been filed as public interest litigation on the issue of protection of historical objects preserved at different places in the country particularly in various museums. Prayer in the petition is for a direction for adequate security arrangements and for proper investigation into the incidents of theft and damage to several historical objects and also for making an inventory of available articles for future. It can hardly be gainsaid Full Judgment
JITENDRA KHIMSHANKAR TRIVEDI & ORS. Vs. KASAM DAUD KUMBHAR & ORS.
Even assuming Jayvantiben Jitendra Trivedi was not self- employed doing embroidery and tailoring work, the fact remains that she was a housewife and a home maker. It is hard to monetize the domestic work done by a house-mother. The services of the mother/wife is available 24 hours and her duties are never fixed. Courts have Full Judgment
INDIAN BANK Vs. MANILAL GOVINDJI KHONA
The issue raised by the respondent in the present case strikes at the very authority of the High Court in permitting the Court Receiver by its order dated 3.12.1999 to auction the mortgaged property of the respondent in public auction pursuant to the decree passed by the High Court in favour of the appellant-Bank. The above said important aspect of the case Full Judgment
SARVESH BANSAL & ANR Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS
Oshiar Prasad and Others VERSUS The Employers in relation to Management of Sudamdih Coal Washery of M/s BCCL, Dhanbad, Jharkhand
BALU S/O ONKAR PUND & ORS. Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
DEFENCE ESTATE OFFICER Vs. SYED ABDUL SALEEM & ORS.
Ajay Ramdas Ramteke and Anr. Versus Mahanagar Sudhar Samiti, Akola & Ors.
SAHOO BABA (D) TR.LRS.& ANR Vs. HARYANA URBAN DEVL.AUTH.& ANR
M.V.JAYARAJAN Vs. HIGH COURT OF KERALA & ANR.
CELLULAR OPERATORS ASSCN. OF INDIA & ORS Vs. TELECOM REGULATORY AUTHY.OF INDIA & ORS.
MOUNT MARY ENTERPRISES Vs. M/S.JIVRATNA MEDI TREAT PVT LTD
C SUKUMARAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA
It has been continuously held by this Court in a catena of cases after interpretation of the provisions of Sections 7 and 13(1)(d) of the Act that the demand of illegal gratification by the accused is the sine qua non for constituting an offence under the provisions of the Act. In the present case, as has been rightly held by the High Court, there Full Judgment