Recent Judgement

[Criminal Appeal No. of 2014 arising out of Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No.814 of 2014] K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal arises out of the judgment of the Kerala High Court in Crl. Appeal No.1104 of 2004, by which the High Court modified the sentence awarded by the trial Court to that […]

[Civil Appeal No. 4126 of 2013] SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR, J. 1. This statutory appeal under Section 125 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as the “Act”) is directed against the final judgment and order dated 22nd February, 2013 passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity (hereinafter referred to as “APTEL” or “Appellate Tribunal”),

[Civil Appeal No.4383 of 2014 arising out of Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No.4926 of 2006] Chelameswar, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Aggrieved by the common judgment dated 28th January 2006 in Writ Petition No.8063 of 2004 and Writ Appeal No.1035 of 2004 of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad, the third respondent

[Criminal Appeal No.735 of 2014 @Special Leave Petition (CRL.) No.9184 of 2008] Chandramauli Kr. Prasad Before we proceed to consider the case, we must remind ourselves the maxim “judex damnatur cum nocens absolvitur” which means that a Judge is condemned when guilty person escapes punishment. But, at the same time, we cannot forget that credibility

[Civil Appeal Nos. 4255-58 of 2014] Dr. B.S. CHAUHAN, J. 1. These appeals arise out of the common judgment and order dated 5.4.2013, passed by the High Court of Calcutta, Circuit Bench at Port Blair in W.P.C.T. Nos.607-610 of 2012 partly allowing the appeals against the judgment and order dated 24.8.2012, passed by the Central

[Writ Petition (C) No. 19 of 2012] R.M. LODHA J. 1. The petitioner – Bharatkumar Shantilal Thakkar joined judicial service in the State of Gujarat in 1995. Prior to his joining judicial service, the petitioner had done post-graduation in law. By this writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, inter alia,

[Civil Appeal No. 4294 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No.27829 of 2012] [Civil Appeal No. 4295 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No.28259 of 2012] [Civil Appeal No. 4296 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No.28410 of 2012] [Civil Appeal No. 4297 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No.28542 of

[Civil Appeal No. 4270 of 2014 arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.10964 of 2010] [Civil Appeal No. 4271 of 2014 arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.12527 of 2010] [Civil Appeal No. 4272 of 2014 arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.17421 of 2010] [Civil Appeal No. 4273 of 2014 arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.23850 of

[Civil Appeal No. 3056 of 2008] N.V.RAMANA, J. 1. The short question to be answered in this appeal is whether the amount deposited by the judgment debtor in a decree is to be adjusted first towards interest or towards principal decretal amount. 2. The facts of the case are – On account of demise of

[Civil Appeal Nos. 4266-4267 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) Nos.5990-5991 of 2011] Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya, J. Delay condoned. 1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals have been preferred by the appellant-landlord against the judgment and decree dated 23rd February, 2010 passed by the Single Judge of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Nagpur