admin

[Civil Appeal No. 5852 of 2014 arising out of SLP(C) No.29792 of 2013] SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants against the order dated 21st August, 2012 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Delhi, New Delhi in Writ Petition (Civil) No. 3004/2000. […]

[Civil Appeal Nos. 6169-6171 of 2013] [Civil Appeal Nos.6172-6174 of 2013] [Civil Appeal No. 7122 of 2003] [Civil Appeal Nos.7123-7124 of 2003] [Civil Appeal No. 7125 of 2003] [Civil Appeal Nos.7126-7129 of 2003] Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. In these appeals the dispute relates to payment of compensation pursuant to acquisition of land of respondent-M/s.

[Civil Appeal No. 5854 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No.31621 of 2012] Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 8th November, 2011 passed by the High Court of Karnataka, Bangalore in Writ Appeal No.1030 of 2006. By the impugned judgment, the High

[Civil Appeal No.5853 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No.16638 of 2012] Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 2nd February, 2012 passed by the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur in D.B. Civil Special Appeal

[Criminal Appeal No.1251 of 2014 arising out of SLP (CRL.) No.7104 of 2013] SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA,J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is directed against the order dated 12th July, 2013 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-1834 of 2010 (O & M). By the impugned order,

[ CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1331 OF 2014  Arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 1565 of 2013] Dipak Misra, J. Leave granted. The two issues  that  pronouncedly emanate in this appeal by  special  leave are whether the Family Court while deciding an application under Section   7 of the Family Court Act, 1984   (for  brevity,  “the  Act”)  which 

[Criminal Appeal No. 357 of 2005] Madan B. Lokur, J. 1. The question for consideration is whether the facts and circumstances of the case require the application of Section 106 of the Evidence Act, 1872 and if so, whether the respondent/accused is guilty of the murder of his wife Dhapu Kunwar. In our opinion, both

[Civil Appeal No. 5846 of 2014 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.8394 of 2013] C. NAGAPPAN, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is preferred against the judgment and order dated 12.9.2012 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Writ-C no.45914 of 2012. 3. The respondent herein was employed as

[Criminal Appeal No. 5847 of 2014 arising out of SLP (CRL.) No.27614 of 2011] C. NAGAPPAN, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 16.3.2009 passed by the Guwahati High Court, Agartala Bench, in MFC (W.C.) 03 of 2009 dismissing the appeal of the appellants herein against the

[Civil Appeal No(S). 5848-49 of 2014 arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.29550-29551 of 2010] C. NAGAPPAN, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals are preferred by the appellant who was working as Assistant Engineer with respondent No.2. A disciplinary proceeding was initiated under Rule 85 of the Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Employees Service Regulations,