Recent Judgement

[Civil Appeal Nos.6071-6072 of 2007] PRAFULLA C.PANT,J. 1. These two appeals are directed against the common judgment and order dated 15th June, 2007 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Appeal Suit Nos.2652 and 2052 of 1996. 2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the papers on record. 3. […]

[Civil Appeal No.8546 of 2014 arising out of S.L.P. (C) No.20066 of 2008] PRAFULLA C.PANT,J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The question before us in this appeal is whether the Division Bench of High Court has erred in law in setting aside the order of learned Single Judge quashing the First Information Report (for short, ‘FIR’)

[Civil Appeal No. 9282 of 2010] [Civil Appeal No. 9286 of 2010] [Civil Appeal No. 7004 of 2012] RANJAN GOGOI, J. 1. All the three appeals being directed against the common judgment and order of the High Court dated 18.08.2009 were heard analogously and are being disposed of by this order. 2. In the present

[Civil Appeal No. 8487 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 31026 of 2011] [Civil Appeal No. 8489-8490 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 33518-33519 of 2011] [Civil Appeal No. 8488 of 2014 arising out of SLP (C) No. 4686 of 2012] [Civil Appeal No. 8491 of 2014 arising out of SLP

[Criminal Appeal No.47 of 2014] Harminder Singh Vs. State of Punjab [Criminal Appeal No.1929 of 2014 arising out of S.L.P. (CRL.) No.4071 of 2013] A.K. SIKRI, J. 1. Leave granted in Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No.4071 of 2013. 2. By these appeals, the two appellant challenge the veracity of the judgment of the High Court

[Civil Appeal No.534 of 2007] ANIL R. DAVE, J. 1. Aggrieved by the judgment dated 9th September, 2005 delivered by the High Court of Judicature, Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad, in CMA No.476 of 2005, this appeal has been filed by M/s Harsha Constructions, a contractor, against Union of India and its authorities. Hereinafter, the appellant

[Civil Appeal Nos. 8479-8482 of 2014 arising out of S.L.P. (C) Nos.19220-19223 of 2007] SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, J. Leave granted. These appeals are further additions to the long list of service matters decided by High Courts and this Court resolving disputes between “Diploma Holder” and “Degree Holder” Engineers in the matter of eligibility for further

[Civil Appeal No. 1331 of 2001] R.M. LODHA, CJI : 1. It is not necessary to answer the reference for two reasons. 2. In the first place, there is already a three-Judge Bench decision, namely, U.D. Lama and Ors. Vs. State of Sikkim and Ors.1 on the issue referred by the two-Judge Bench. In U.D.

[Civil Appeal No. 3380 of 2010] [Civil Appeal No. 3381 of 2010] [Civil Appeal No. 3383 of 2010] [Civil Appeal No. 3384 of 2010] [Civil Appeal No. 3385 of 2010] [Civil Appeal No. 3386 of 2010] [Civil Appeal No. 3387 of 2010] [Civil Appeal No. 3388 of 2010] [Civil Appeal No. 3389-3392 of 2010] Dipak

[Civil Appeal No(S). 8103/2009] [Civil Appeal No. 8104/2009] [Civil Appeal No. 8105/2009] [Civil Appeal No. 8106/2009] [Civil Appeal No. 8107/2009] [Civil Appeal No. 8108/2009] [Civil Appeal No. 8109/2009] [Civil Appeal No. 8110/2009] A.K. SIKRI, J. 1. The question of law that arises for consideration in all these appeals which are filed by the Commissioner of