Recent Judgement

[Civil Appeal No. 4510 of 2006] RANJAN GOGOI, J. 1. This appeal, against the judgment and order dated 26.05.2006 and 25.07.2006 passed by the Appellate Tribunal for Electricity, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Appellate Tribunal”) was initially filed by the Punjab State Electricity Board (PSEB). Pursuant to a statutory scheme of transfer, vide […]

[Civil Appeal No.1662 of 2015 arising out of SLP (C) No.5097 of 2012] ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal has been preferred against final judgment and order dated 1st March, 2011 of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in W.A. No.36738 of 2008. 3. The question raised for consideration relates

[Civil Appeal No. 1651 of 2015 @ Special Leave Petition (C) No. 27080 of 2013] PER ANIL R. DAVE, J. Leave granted. Looking at the peculiar facts of the case, in the interests of justice, we direct that upon payment of Rs. 25,000/- by way of costs to the sole respondent within two months from

[Civil Appeal No.8224 of 2012] SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellant against the impugned judgment dated 1st March, 2012 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No.2547 of 2010. By the impugned judgment, the High Court dismissed the writ petition, upheld

[Criminal Appeal No.593 of 2012] Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. 1. This criminal appeal is filed by the accused against the judgment and final order dated 24.05.2011 passed by the High Court of Karnataka in Criminal Appeal No.1792 of 2004. 2. By impugned judgment, the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant (accused) and

[Civil Appeal No.3962 of 2007] [Civil Appeal No.3963 of 2007] R.F. NARIMAN, J. 1. These petitions raise questions as to the constitutional validity of the Kerala Cashew Factories (Acquisition) Act, 1974 (hereinafter referred to as “the said Act”), which has been placed in the 9th Schedule to the Constitution of India, being entry 148 thereof.

[Civil Appeal No.1431 of 2015 arising out of SLP (C) No. 30485 of 2013] Bulwark Warehousing Company and others Vs. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai and others [Civil Appeal No.1433 of 2015 arising out of SLP(C) No. 33545 of 2013] Wadi Bunder Cotton Press Co. Vs. Brihan Mumbai Mahanagar Palika and others [Civil Appeal No.1436

[Civil Appeal Nos. 1440-1441 of 2015 arising out of SLP (C) Nos.35365-35366 of 2012] ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals have been preferred against final judgment and order dated 10th February, 2012 in RFA(OS) No.35 of 2010 and dated 1st June, 2012 in R.P. No.369 of 2012 in RFA (OS) No.35

[Criminal Appeal No. 220 of 2015 arising out of SLP (CRL.) No.7506 of 2014] ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal has been preferred against final judgment and order dated 11th August, 2014 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Misc. Criminal Case No.10371 of 2014 whereby a

[Writ Petition (Criminal) No.61 of 2012] ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. 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