Supreme Court of India Judgements

46448 Judgements hosted as on 05/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Contempt

Contempt

Sentence Order :: “Three Contemnors have no iota of Remorse & want to virtually hold Judiciary to Ransom”: SC sentences 3 lawyers to 3 Months Simple Imprisonment. Held “Keeping in view the COVID-19 pandemic and the lockdown conditions we direct that this sentence shall come into force after 16 weeks from today when the contemnors should surrender before the Secretary General of this Court to undergo the imprisonment.Otherwise, warrants for their arrest shall be issued,”

May 6, 2020 sclaw

“Three Contemnors have no iota of Remorse & want to virtually hold Judiciary to Ransom”: SC sentences 3 lawyers to 3 Months Imprisonment The Court has sentenced Vijay Kurle, Rashid…

Contempt

No ill-founded sympathy for Advocates who try to browbeat or threaten Judges: Supreme Court holds three Advocates guilty of Contempt of Court . HELD “both the complaints are ex facie contemptuous. Highly scurrilous and scandalous allegations have been levelled against the two judges of this Court. In our view, the entire contents of the complaints amount to contempt.”

Apr 27, 2020 sclaw

No ill-founded sympathy for Lawyers who try to browbeat or threaten Judges: Supreme Court holds three lawyers guilty of Contempt of Court The Supreme Court has also observed in its…

Contempt

Initiation of contempt proceedings – Notifications providing for consequential seniority in promotion to the Members of the SC/ST communities – In the absence of any quantifiable data relating to the issue of backwardness and inadequacy of representation of the concerned classes in public employment, no benefit of consequential seniority could be extended

Jan 25, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH BAJRANG LAL SHARMA — Appellant Vs. C.K. MATHEW AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, Indira Banerjee and M.R. Shah, JJ.…

Contempt

Contempt Petition (Civil) -We do not see anything wrong in the process undertaken by the State Government in pursuance of various interim orders passed by this Court and also in pursuance of the Judgment and final order dated 25.07.20171. The fact that out of 12,091 candidates only few could be selected and the reasons for non-selection of rest of the candidates, were part of the record since October 2016.

Dec 15, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANJAI KUMAR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. DR. PRABHAT KUMAR — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and M. R. Shah, JJ. )…

Contempt

Enforcement of the foreign award in Delhi High Court – Contempt petition – Disobeying the orders – Malvinder Mohan Singh (Contemnor Nos.9 and 12) and Shivinder Mohan Singh, (Contemnor Nos.10 and 13) have knowingly and wilfully violated the orders of this Court dated 11.08.2017, 31.08.2017 and 15.02.2018 as continued on 23.02.2018 – Therefore, this Court hold both of them guilty of committing Contempt of this Court

Nov 17, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH VINAY PRAKASH SINGH — Appellant Vs. SAMEER GEHLAUT AND OTHER RESPONDENT ( Before : Ranjan Gogoi, CJI, Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna, JJ. )…

Contempt

Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, S. 12–Criminal contempt-Posting of derogatory remarks against Judge of High Court on social media/ facebook-Appellant was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one month—Held; it was not a case where the contempt action should have been taken against the appellant who is an Advocate—Impugned order of High Court set aside.    

Jan 23, 2019 sclaw

2018(4) Law Herald (SC) 3116 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1849 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. Subhash Reddy CriminaZ Appeal No.…

Contempt

Contempt–When the court either suo motu or on a motion or a reference, decides to take action and initiate proceedings for contempt, it assumes jurisdiction to punish for contempt–The exercise of jurisdiction to punish for contempt commences with the initiation of a proceeding for contempt and if the order is passed not discharging the rule issued in contempt proceedings, it would be an order or decision in exercise of its jurisdiction to punish for contempt–Against such order, appeal would be maintainable.

Jan 12, 2019 sclaw

2009(1) LAW HERALD (SC) 197 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Cyriac Joseph Civil Appeal No. 7317 of 2008…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 120-B read with Section 420 – Cheating – The case involves fraudulent transactions by accused in connivance with Indian Bank officials resulting in interest-free advances to the petitioners – The main issue is whether the petitioners were involved in cheating the bank and if they availed any undue benefit from the fraudulent transactions – The petitioners argued that they were not involved in the cheating, had not availed any undue benefit, and that the transactions were normal business dealings – The court dismissed the Special Leave Petitions, upholding the Trial Court’s conviction of the petitioners for cheating the bank through unauthorized transactions.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Condonation of Delay – Delay of 1663 days – The State of U.P. filed a SLP against an order dated 13.11.2009 by the Allahabad High Court, with a delay of 1,633 days – The main issue was the condonation of the significant delay in filing the SLP – The State argued that the delay was due to the time taken for obtaining legal opinion and permissions, and later, the realization that the appeal was not filed initially – The application for condonation of delay was dismissed, and consequently, the SLP was also dismissed – The court found the explanation for the delay unsatisfactory, especially since the State was aware of the High Court’s order when it was passed – The court did not find sufficient cause to condone the delay, leading to the dismissal of the SLP.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Property Matters

Partition Suit – The dispute involves partition of properties left by Late ‘R’ with the main contention over roof rights of a property in Kota and another in Jaipur – The primary issue is the valuation of roof rights for further construction and the equal distribution of property among co-sharers – The appellants argue that the valuation report failed to assess the value of roof rights, which would affect the overall property valuation and entitlement of co-sharers – The respondents maintain that the property valuation and shares were appropriately determined by the approved Valuer and upheld by both the Trial Court and High Court – The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in revaluating the property or altering the determined shares of the parties – The Court emphasized the importance of family ties over property disputes and suggested alternative dispute resolution methods for amicable settlements – The Court referenced the case of Afcons Infrastructure Limited vs. Cherian Varkey Construction Company Private Limited, advocating for ADR in family-related property disputes – The Supreme Court concluded that revisiting the valuation and partition would only prolong litigation and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Constitution Municipal Laws

West Bengal Municipal(Building) Rules, 2007 – Rule 50 – Open spaces for building in areas other than municipalities in hill areas – The appellants challenge the High Court of Calcutta’s order regarding a contempt petition related to their residential property construction and its compliance with Rule 50 of Rules, 2007 – The appellants argue that the writ petition was a private matter and should not have been entertained by the High Court – They also claim that municipal authorities are unfairly pressuring them due to the contempt proceedings – The respondent claims that the appellants violated the sanctioned building plan, justifying the High Court’s direction for an enquiry – The Supreme Court allowed the appellants to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, ensuring their objections would be considered objectively without prejudice from the contempt or writ proceedings – The court expressed reservations about the High Court’s exercise of writ jurisdiction in a private dispute and suggested the civil court as the appropriate forum for grievances – The appeal was disposed of with the appellants given the liberty to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, without cost order.

May 5, 2024 sclaw