Judgments - Supreme Court of India
RASHTRIYA COLLIERY MAZDOOR SANGH DHANBAD Vs. EMP. IN RELATION TO MANG. OF KEND.C.&ORS
HARPAL SINGH @ CHHOTA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB
PRESI. SECY, J.K.SYNTS.MAZ.UN.,KOTA&ANR Vs. ARFAT PETROCHEMICALS PVT.LTD & ORS.
BAIJNATH AND ORS Vs. STATE OF M P
(38) A cumulative consideration of the overall evidence on the facet of dowry, leaves us unconvinced about the truthfulness of the charge qua the accused persons. The prosecution in our estimate, has failed to prove this indispensable component of the two offences beyond reasonable doubt. The factum of unnatural death in the matrimonial home and that too within seven years of marriage therefore is thus ipso facto not sufficient to Full Judgment
H.P. STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LTD Vs. MAHESH DAHIYA
“Hence it has to be held that when the enquiry officer is not the disciplinary authority, the delinquent employee has a right to receive a copy of the enquiry officer’s report before the disciplinary authority arrives at its conclusions with regard to the guilt or innocence of the employee with regard to the charges levelled against him. That Full Judgment
GHANSHYAM SARDA Vs. SASHIKANT JHA, DIRECTOR M/S JK JUTE MILLS CO. LTD. & ORS.
18. The document dated 04.04.2013 did not by itself create any interest nor did the title pass upon execution of such document on 04.04.2013 but it was only after the registration on 02.07.2014 that the title in Katihar property passed from the Company in favour of the transferee. The submission of the contemnors however, is that by virtue of Section Full Judgment
DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. SURESH KR. GOEL AND ANR.
THE UNITED COMMERCIAL BANK & ANR. Vs. GANGADHAR MOHANTY & ANR.
P.M.ABUBAKAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ORS.
E. SUBBULAKSHMI Vs. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT & ORS.
VINESHKUMAR MAVJIBHAI PARMAR Vs. DETHALI GOPALAK VIVIDH KARYAKARI SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD. AND ORS.
SAHEB REDDY Vs. SHARANAPPA & ORS.
SRIKANT ROY & ORS. Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND & ORS.
ANANTHESH BHAKTA REPTD. BY MOTER USHA A BHAKTA AND ORS Vs. NAYANA S. BHAKTA AND ORS
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND 2 ORS. Vs. DHIRENDRA PAL SINGH
Admittedly, no departmental enquiry was initiated in the present case against the respondent for the misconduct, if any, nor any proceedings drawn as provided in Article 351-A of UP Civil Service Regulations. Learned single Judge of the High Court has observed that the document which is the basis of enquiry and relied upon by the State authorities, copy Full Judgment