Started by Anonymous User at 11:12 a.m. on 25 Feb. 13
Started by Anonymous User at 12:43 p.m. on 20 Feb. 13
Started by Anonymous User at 10:05 p.m. on 02 Feb. 13
tribunal judgement dated 22.02.2012 of ahmedabad bench in OA No. 78 of 2011
Started by Anonymous User at 11:58 a.m. on 01 Feb. 13
Rao Bahadur Y Mahabaleshwarappa
Started by Anonymous User at 9:43 a.m. on 22 Jan. 13
sister in law filed 498a 406 323 342. Also alleged i was trying to make relations with her. also reported i was asked by my wife,mother in law to force her for relations & in doing so she fell down . does this case attracts any sexual offence. she is falsely implicating for property. because after the formal report to police station , she put pressure on us & signed an agreement on stamp paper for property. but want of more money which we refused, she filed a false fir as narrated brifly. kindly suggest
Started by jagdeepjain at 8:31 p.m. on 12 Jan. 13
I am in need of feeds which has all IPC sections listed through RSS or a web service which provides complete list.
Started by Anonymous User at 6:42 p.m. on 09 Jan. 13
There are some errors in a judgement posted.
whom should I contact/email with the corrections.
Also wondering why it is tagged/indexed at high
rank, showing at top of search results.
Started by msmishraassoc at 7:17 p.m. on 07 Jan. 13
ITEM NO.110 COURT NO.8 SECTION XIIA
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
CIVIL APPEAL NO(s). 8472 OF 2003
GUSANI STEELS (PVT.) LTD. & ORS. Appellant (s)
SHANTHA BAI & ORS. Respondent(s)
(With office report)
Date: 13/12/2012 This Appeal was called on for hearing today.
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE B.S. CHAUHAN
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
For Appellant(s) Mr. Manu Shanker Mishra,Adv.
Mr. Anshuman Upadhyay,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mrs. Anjani Aiyagari,Adv.
Ms. C.K. Sucharita,Adv
Mr. Y. Raja Gopala Rao,Adv
Mr. Vismai Rao,Adv.
Mr. Hitendra Nath Rath,Adv.
Mr. Sridhar Potaraju,Adv
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order.
(O.P. Sharma) (M.S. Negi)
Court Master Court Master
(Signed order is placed on the file)
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO.8472 OF 2003
GUSANI STEELS (PVT.) LTD. & ORS. Appellants
SHANTHA BAI & ORS. Respondents
O R D E R
This appeal is directed against the common judgment of the High
Court dated 29.3.2000 wherein Writ Petition No.6065/1992 was also dealt
with alongwith other writ petitions and resultantly, the writ petition
No.6065/1992 was dismissed by the High Court.
The appellants were respondents 16,3,15, 18 and 38 before the
Special Court constituted under the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing
(Prohibition) Act, 1982 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The
appellants were declared as land grabbers and an order of eviction was
granted in favour of the contesting private respondents.
Aggrieved by the order of the Special Court, the appellants went
before the High Court challenging the order of the Tribunal. The challenge
was to Sections 7 and 8 of the Act apart from assailing the decision of the
Special Court on merits. While dealing with the vires of Sections 7 and 8
of the Act, the Division Bench of the High Court noted that those very
provision which were the subject matter of challenge, was decided by this
Court in State of A.P. VS. Mohanlal 1998 (5) SCC 468. The counsel for the
appellants admitted that the said challenge which came to be dealt with by
the Division Bench was covered by the decision of this Court and
consequently the Division Bench held that there was no scope to entertain
the challenge. Hence this appeal.
As regards the merit of the order of the Special Court was
concerned, it was common ground that as against the order of the Special
Court there is no further appeal before any other forum and the only remedy
available to the appellants was to challenge the same before the High Court
by filing a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
On a perusal of the impugned order, we do not find any discussion
at all as regards the merits of the case namely, the issue dealt with
by the Special Court and as to its correctness or validity. At pages 50 to
56 of the impugned judgment, we find that the various grounds raised by the
Advocate for the appellants as against the correctness of the Special
Court order, the Division Bench rejected those challenges on the simple
ground that those challenges cannot be entertained while exercising its
discretionary power under Article 226 of the Constitution. In fact,there is
absolutely no consideration at all as regards the merits viz the reasoning
which weighed with the Special Court while passing the order of eviction.
Be that as it may. We also find that the impleaded respondents herein were
not added as parties before the High Court and those respondents claim to
be the protected tenants and that their rights stated to have already been
dealt with in their favour by the Joint Collector, Rangareddy District vide
proceedings dated 29.6.2004. In the circumstances, while examining the
correctness of the order of the Tribunal as regards the merits of the order
of eviction passed against the appellants herein, in the event of any order
ultimately being passed, the impleaded respondents being necessary parties
should have been impleaded before the High Court and the High Court ought
to have heard them, in as much as the ultimate decision will have a bearing
on their rights as protected tenants. Having regard to our above
conclusion the order impugned cannot be sustained. We set aside the
judgment impugned and remit the matter back to the High Court for disposing
of the case on merit after giving due opportunities to the impleaded
respondents as well.
Having regard to the fact that the issue relates to the year 1988,
we request the High Court to dispose of the matter expeditiously preferably
within a period of six months from the date of production of the copy of
The appeal is allowed accordingly.
[ DR. B.S. CHAUHAN ]
NEW DELHI .................................J.
DECEMBER 13, 2012 [FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA]
Started by Anonymous User at 3:54 p.m. on 06 Jan. 13
Employees Provident Fund Matter
Started by Anonymous User at 5:42 p.m. on 05 Jan. 13
this is a supreme court judgement dated 20-11-2012 delivered by D-B- consisting of Radhakrishan J and Madan B Lokur J.It relates to death sentence/capital punishment in