Judgments
M/s Hindalco Industries Ltd., Mahan Aluminum Project vs. State of M.P.
M/s National Steel and Agro vs. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission
Ultratech Cement Ltd. vs. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission
Century Textiles and Industries Ltd. vs. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission
Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. vs. Madhya Pradesh Electricity Regulatory Commission
PRAGNA PARAMITA PRAHARAJ Vs. STATE OF ORISSA
SUBHAN TOURS AND TRAVEL SERVICES Vs. UNION OF INDIA
LAND ACQUISITION OFFICER, A.P. Vs. RAVI SANTOSH REDDY (D) BY LRS.
NIRMAL DASS Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB
Held First, it is not in dispute that appellant No. 1 is aged around 75 years; Second, out of three accused two have expired; Third, litigation is pending for quite some time; Fourth, appellant No. 1 has undergone five months in jail. The impugned order is modified insofar as it relates to awarding of the sentence to appellant no. 1. Appellant no. 1 is accordingly awarded rigorous imprisonment for 1 (one) year with a fine amount of Rs.10,000/-. In default of payment Full Judgment
Km. Ekisha Singhal Thru Father Amit Singhal And Anr V/s State Of U.P.Thru Prin.Secy.Home Civil Sectt.Lko.& Ors.
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Vs. FIROZ KHAN @ ARIF KHAN
Held We are constrained to observe that the High Court grossly erred in passing the impugned order without assigning any reason. In our considered opinion, it was a clear case of total non application of mind to the case by the learned Judges because the order impugned neither sets out the facts nor the submissions of the parties nor the findings and nor the reasons as to why the leave to file appeal is declined to the appellant. We, therefore, disapprove Full Judgment