|
 Supreme
Court Judgments - January 2008 |
Bijoy Das v State
of West Bengal
28/1/2008.
Indian Penal
Code, 1860 - section 302
- conviction under - upheld by the High Court - appeal - if a dying
declaration is found to be reliable then there is no need for
corroboration by any witness, and conviction can be sustained on its
basis alone.- Leave granted |
Shanti Devi v
State of Sikkim and another
25/1/2008.
Decision
impugned -
this is one of those rare cases in which the decision impugned in the
appeal not only merits intervention but also calls for certain
observations to be made in respect of the order itself - Leave granted |
Balasaheb
Dayandeo Naik (Dead) through LRs and others v Appasaheb Dattatraya Pawar
24/1/2008.
Specific
performance -
this appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 11.01.2005
passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in First Appeal No. 743
of 1993 in and by which the High Court set aside the decree for specific
performance granted by the trial Court and consequently dismissed the
suit of the plaintiffs - Leave granted |
Vishnu Dev Sharma
v State of U.P. & others
23/1/2008.
Seniority -
fixation - writ petition - seniority challenged
- seniority
has been given from the date if confirmation - learned counsel for the
appellant submitted that such summary dismissal of writ petition was not
warranted as several issues of considerable importance were involved,
more particularly whether the norms for fixing seniority in the
background facts of the case were to be considered - Leave granted |
Shaikh Ratiq and
another v State of Maharashtra
22/1/2008.
Indian Penal
Code, 1860 -
sections 302 read with section 34 - conviction under - appeal -
considering the dying declaration and the manner in which it was
recorded, court cannot rely upon the dying declaration recorded by PW 1.
Apart from this fact, there is no other evidence on record to implicate
the appellants in the incident |
Vidyadhari &
others v Sukhrana Bai & others
22/1/2008.
Indian
Succession Act
- section 372 - 2 separate applications filed for obtaining succession
certificate - Merely because Sukhrana Bai was the legally wedded wife
that by itself did not entitle her to a Succession Certificate in
comparison to Vidhyadhari who all through had stayed as the wife of
Sheetaldeen, had born his four children and had claimed a Succession
Certificate on behalf children also - Leave granted |
Ramesh Singh & another v Satbir Singh & another
21/1/2008.
Motor accident - compensation - multiplier
-- applicability - choice of multiplier is determined by the age of the
deceased or claimants whichever is higher. Admittedly, the age of the
father was 55 years. The question of mother's age never cropped up
because that was not the contention raised even before the Trial Court
or before this Court.- Leave granted |
State of
Maharashtra v Devahari Devasingh Pawar & others
18/1/2008.
Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973 - section 197
- proceedings pending before ACJM quashed by the High Court as no
sanction as required - was there employees of the blood bank were
prosecuted under IPC and Drugs Act - HIV contaminated blood was supplied
to the Government Medical College and Hospital, Nagpur by its blood bank
and as a result, some patients who were given blood transfusion had
tested HIV positive - Leave granted |
S.Raju v C.
Sathammai
17/1/2008.
Code of Civil
Procedure - order 39
- leave to defend the suit - denial by the city Civil Court and the High
Court - appeal - the trial court and High Court have taken a rather
technical view of the matter - in the overall facts and circumstances of
the case, the petitioner ought to have at least been allowed to defend
the suit, subject to the condition of depositing a part of the
plaintiff's claim.-
Leave granted |
Kunju @
Balachandran v State of Tamil Nadu 16/1/2008
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 302 -
conviction under - appeal - it is not the number, the quantity, but the
quality that is material. The time-honoured principle is that evidence
has to be weighed and not counted. On this principle stands the edifice
of Section 134 of the Evidence Act. The test is whether the evidence has
a ring of truth, is cogent, credible and trustworthy, or otherwise - Leave granted |
Gaudiya
Mission v Shobha Bose & another 15/1/2008.
Testamentary case - great many questions
were involved in the
Testamentary Suit instituted by the respondent No. 1. Several issues
were framed by the trial Court and the suit was decided by a detailed
judgment entering into merits of the matter - the learned counsel
for the appellants is right in submitting that the Division Bench of the
High Court ought to have admitted the appeal. - Leave granted |
Brijendra
Singh v State of M.P. & another 11/1/2008.
Adoption - Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - section 100 - challenge in this
appeal is to the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Jabalpur
in a Second Appeal under Section 100 of the Code - the present appeal
involves a very simple issue but when the background facts are
considered it projects some highly emotional and sensitive aspects of
human life |
Puran Singh
v State of Uttaranchal 10/1/2008.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 302 - conviction order and sentence
recorded by High Court - acquittal by Session Court - appeal - as per
Ballistic Expert's opinion, cartridge E.C.1 was not fired from the
single barrel 12 bore No. 1319 said to have been used by the accused -
therefore, the appellant accused is entitled to benefit of doubt |
State of
M.P. & others v Madhukar Rao 9/1/2008.
Wild Life Protection Act, 1972 - section 50(1)(c) - Criminal Procedure
Code, 1973 - section 451 - whether a vehicle or vessel etc. seized
under Section 50(1)(c) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 is put
beyond the power of the Magistrate to direct its release during the pendency of trial in exercise of powers under Section 451 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973 |
Suryalakshmi Cotton Mills Ltd. v Rajvir Industries Ltd. & others
9/1/2008.
Investigation - interference - by statutory authority - Blank cheques -
handed over for business purposes during 2000-2004 - fraudulently used -
dispute arose in 2005 - a bare perusal of Section 415 read with Section
420 of the Indian Penal Code would clearly lead to the conclusion that
fraudulent or dishonest inducement on the part of the accused must be at
the inception and not at a subsequent stage - Leave granted |
M/s. Sify
Ltd. v M/s. First Flight Couriers Ltd. 8/1/2008.
Civil Procedure Code - order 37 rules 2 and 3 - the appellant
company is engaged in the business of providing service in setting up of
Networks and other value added services in the field of information and
technology. The respondent company is engaged in the business of
providing Courier services. - Leave granted |
Bhadrappa
(D) By Lrs. v Tolacha Naik 8/1/2008.
Karnataka High Court Act - section 4 - writ appeal filed under -
dismissal - challenged - proceedings were initiated on the basis of an
application that the alienation was hit by Section 4 of Karnataka
Scheduled Castes and Schedules Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of
Certain Lands) Act, 1978 |
Ramesh
Krishna Madhusudan Nayar v The State of Maharashtra 7/1/2008.
Indian Penal Code, 1860 - section 302 - applicability of - appellant
sentenced to life imprisonment - appeal - for the application of
Exception 4, it is not sufficient to show that there was a sudden
quarrel and there was no premeditation. It must further be shown that
the offender has not taken undue advantage or acted in cruel or unusual
manner. The expression undue advantage as used in the provision means
'unfair advantage' - Leave granted |
Bhagwan
Dass & another v Punjab State Electricity Board 4/1/2008
Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and
Full Participation) Act, 1995 - section 47 - protection under -
the appellant protested against the action of the Board in relieving him
from service - Leave granted |
Kaliyamma & others v Deputy Commnr. Chitradurga
Distt. & others 3/1/2008.
Karnataka High Court Act 1979 - section 4 -
writ appeal filed under - dismissal - challenged - the stand taken before
the High Court essentially was that the land was granted under the
non-depressed class category and, therefore, the period is 12 years to
substantiate the plea about adverse possession |
|
|
 |
Lawyers
Directory:
Delhi
-
Delhi-2 -
Kolkata -
Mumbai -
Mumbai-2 -
Chennai -
Bangalore -
Hyderabad -
Allahabad -
Pune -
Ahmedabad -
Nagpur -
Cochin -
Gurgaon -
Jaipur -
Ludhiana -
Thane -
Noida -
Indore -
Lucknow -
Ghaziabad
Chandigarh -
Jodhpur
-
Pondicherry -
New York -
Milan -
Switzerland -
Barbados -
London -
Cameroon -
Dubai -
Paris -
Johannesburg -
Lawyers In America
-
Lawyers Home |
