Judgments - Interpretation
AXIS BANK Vs. SBS ORGANICS PVT. LTD & ANR.
Hindu Personal Law Board Through Asok Pande V/s Union of India through Cabinet Secretary, Government of India & Ors
MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA Vs. V.N. PUBLIC HEALTH AND EDUCATIONAL TRUST & ORS
The application for grant of approval was filed with the Essentiality Certificate which was a conditional one and, therefore, a defective one. It was not an Essentiality Certificate in law. In such a situation, the High Court could not have directed for consideration of the application for the purpose of the inspection. Such a direction, we are disposed to think, runs counter to the law Full Judgment
MEDICAL COUNCIL OF INDIA Vs. CHRISTIAN MEDICAL COLLEGE VELLORE & ORS
COMMON CAUSE Vs. UNION OF INDIA & ORS.
Based on the interpretation placed by us on Section 4A(4) of the MMDR Act, and Rule 28 of the Mineral Concession Rules, we can draw the following conclusions. Firstly, unless an order is passed by the State Government declaring, that a mining lease has lapsed, the mining lease would be deemed to be subsisting, up to the date of expiry of the Full Judgment
LILAWATI AGARWAL (DEAD) BY LRS. & ORS. Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND
STATE OF U.P.& ANR. Vs. M/S AL FAHEEM MEETEX P.LTD. & ANR.
N.VENKATESHAPPA Vs. MUNEMMA & ORS.
MUKUND DEWANGAN Vs. ORIENTAL INS.CO.LTD.
RE-INHUMAN CONDITIONS IN 1382 PRISONS VS Vs.
SURESH NARAYAN KADAM & ORS. Vs. CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA & ORS.
POOJA PAL Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
This Court in Babubhai (supra) while examining the scope of Section 173(8) of the Code, did recall its observations in Manu Sharma vs. State (NCT of Delhi), (2010) 6 SCC 1, that it is not only the responsibility of the investigating agency but as well as of the courts to ensure, that investigation is fair and does not in any way hamper the Full Judgment
Ramprasad and Another Versus Central Valuation Board & Others
SRI AUROBINDO ASHRAM TRUST AND ORS Vs. R RAMANATHAN AND ORS
KULDEEP KUMAR PATHAK Vs. STATE OF UP AND ORS
M/S. S.K.L. CO. Vs. CHIEF COMMERCIAL OFFICER & ORS.
RAJBALA & ORS. Vs. STATE OF HARYANA & ORS.
It is a settled principle of law that curtailment of any right whether such a right emanates from common law, customary law or the Constitution can only be done by law made by an appropriate Legislative Body. Under the scheme of our Constitution, the appropriateness of the Legislative Body is determined on the basis of Full Judgment
POONA EMPLOYEES UNION Vs. FORCE MOTORS LIMITED & ANR.
D.N. JEEVARAJ Vs. CHIEF SEC., GOVT. OF KARNATAKA & ORS.
This Court has repeatedly held that where discretion is required to be exercised by a statutory authority, it must be permitted to do so. It is not for the courts to take over the discretion available to a statutory authority and render a decision. In the present case, the High Court has virtually taken over the function of the BDA by requiring it to take action against Sadananda Gowda and Full Judgment
STATE OF H.P.& ORS. Vs. ASHWANI KUMAR & ORS.
We make it clear that to maintain certainty in the judicial decision, we have to restrain from interfering with the decision of the High Court which has stood for a long period on the principle of stare decisis. However, the said principle will be applicable where the meaning of the Statute is ambiguous and capable of more interpretation than one. In Full Judgment