admin

[Contempt Petition (C) No. 421 of 2014 in Civil Appeal No. 4831 of 2014] [Contempt Petition (C) No.428/2014 in C.A. No.4815/2014] [Contempt Petition (C) No.431/2014 in C.A. No.4823/2014] [Contempt Petition (C) No.427/2014 in C.A. No.4836/2014] [Contempt Petition (C) No.424/2014 in C.A. No.4824/2014] [Contempt Petition (C) No.432/2014 in C.A. No.4828/2014] [Contempt Petition (C) No.423/2014 in C.A. […]

[Review Petition (CRL.) No.474 of 2013 in Criminal Appeal No.1728 of 2007] We have heard the learned senior counsel appearing for the review petitioner and the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent, at length. We have gone through the judgment sought to be reviewed and we have considered the arguments advanced on both sides.

[Civil Appeal No. 2957 of 2007] AMITAVA ROY,J. The oft encountered debate on the extent of tax liability based on the classification of the determinants of a levy in law seeks judicial scrutiny in the attendant factual conspectus. The appellant being aggrieved by the determination made by the High Court of Gujarat on the issue

[Civil Appeal No.3391 of 2015 arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.19487 of 2014] M. Y. EQBAL, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment and order dated 04.04.2014 of the Gauhati High Court whereby the revision petition filed by the respondents was allowed and the eviction suit filed

[Civil Appeal Nos.9049-9051 of 2003] [Civil Appeal Nos.4645-4646 of 2004] [Civil Appeal Nos.6166-6168 of 2004] [Civil Appeal No.7495 of 2004] R.F. Nariman, J. 1. These four sets of appeals relate to the correct construction of Section 4(1)(a) proviso (iii) and Section 4(4)(c) of the Central Excise and Salt Act as they stood prior to the

[Civil Appeal No.3410 of 2007] Ganeshram Vs. Dhannulal and Others [Civil Appeal No.3411 of 2007] JUDGMENT M. Y. EQBAL, J. 1. Aggrieved by the judgment and order passed by the High Court, partly dismissing First Appeal No.92 of 2001, both the plaintiff and the defendant have filed the aforementioned two appeals. While confirming judgment and

[Criminal Appeal No. 1145/2012] R. BANUMATHI, J. 1. This criminal appeal has been preferred against the judgment dated 20.8.2010 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in Criminal Appeal No.S-1029-SB of 1998 whereby the High Court confirmed the conviction of the appellants under Section 304B IPC and the sentence of imprisonment of seven