(1)
VISHNU AGARWAL … Vs.
STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER …RESPONDENT D.D
23/02/2011
Criminal Procedure – Section 362 CrPC – Recall vs. Review – The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court erred in recalling an order passed on 2.9.2003. The appellant contended that under Section 362 of the CrPC, once a judgment or final order is signed, the court cannot alter or review it except to correct clerical or arithmetical errors. However, the Court clarified that the applicati...
(2)
BRIJ PAL BHARGAVA AND OTHERS … Vs.
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS …RESPONDENT D.D
23/02/2011
Land Acquisition – Procedural Fairness – Hearing under Section 5A – The appellants contended that they were not given a proper hearing under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act. They argued that although they filed objections and requested a personal hearing, they were informed that no reply had been filed by the Land Acquisition Department and no further hearing date was provided. The Su...
(3)
HARYANA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION … Vs.
JAGAT RAM AND ANOTHER …RESPONDENT D.D
23/02/2011
Promotion Criteria – Seniority-cum-Merit vs. Merit-Cum-Seniority – The Supreme Court examined whether the promotion of Ram Kumar, a junior officer, over Jagat Ram, a senior officer, in the Haryana State Warehousing Corporation was justified under the seniority-cum-merit principle. The Court held that promotions based on seniority-cum-merit should prioritize seniority unless the senior candidat...
(4)
IVO AGNELO SANTIMANO FERNANDES AND OTHERS … Vs.
GOVERNMENT OF GOA AND ANOTHER …RESPONDENT D.D
23/02/2011
Land Acquisition – Interest on Compensation – Court Deposit Requirement – The Supreme Court examined whether the State’s liability to pay interest on compensation subsists until the amount is deposited in court as per Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court held that the State's liability to pay interest continues until the compensation is either paid to the cl...
(5)
AMERIKA RAI AND OTHERS … Vs.
STATE OF BIHAR …RESPONDENT D.D
23/02/2011
Criminal Law – Unlawful Assembly and Common Object – Section 149 IPC – The Supreme Court examined whether the accused, who formed an unlawful assembly, could be held liable for the murder of Shankar Rai and the attempted murder of Dineshwar Rai under Section 149 IPC. The Court upheld the convictions of the appellants, emphasizing their active participation and the shared common object of the...
(6)
VISHNU AGARWAL … Vs.
STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER …RESPONDENT D.D
23/02/2011
Criminal Procedure – Section 362 CrPC – Recall vs. Review – The Supreme Court examined whether the High Court erred in recalling an order passed on 2.9.2003. The appellant contended that under Section 362 of the CrPC, once a judgment or final order is signed, the court cannot alter or review it except to correct clerical or arithmetical errors. However, the Court clarified that the applicati...
(7)
BRIJ PAL BHARGAVA AND OTHERS … Vs.
STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS …RESPONDENT D.D
23/02/2011
Land Acquisition – Procedural Fairness – Hearing under Section 5A – The appellants contended that they were not given a proper hearing under Section 5A of the Land Acquisition Act. They argued that although they filed objections and requested a personal hearing, they were informed that no reply had been filed by the Land Acquisition Department and no further hearing date was provided. The Su...
(8)
HARYANA STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION … Vs.
JAGAT RAM AND ANOTHER …RESPONDENT D.D
23/02/2011
Promotion Criteria – Seniority-cum-Merit vs. Merit-Cum-Seniority – The Supreme Court examined whether the promotion of Ram Kumar, a junior officer, over Jagat Ram, a senior officer, in the Haryana State Warehousing Corporation was justified under the seniority-cum-merit principle. The Court held that promotions based on seniority-cum-merit should prioritize seniority unless the senior candidat...
(9)
IVO AGNELO SANTIMANO FERNANDES AND OTHERS … Vs.
GOVERNMENT OF GOA AND ANOTHER …RESPONDENT D.D
23/02/2011
Land Acquisition – Interest on Compensation – Court Deposit Requirement – The Supreme Court examined whether the State’s liability to pay interest on compensation subsists until the amount is deposited in court as per Sections 28 and 34 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. The Court held that the State's liability to pay interest continues until the compensation is either paid to the cl...