Created byFuzzy Cloud

Supreme Court of India

M M PUNCHHI

262 judgments delivered by benches including this judge — showing 201–262.

PREETAM SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS. AND ORS.versusASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND ORS.

1996 INSC 439 January 1996Remitted to Lower Court

The dispute involved Bhoomidari rights over 38.25 acres in a village undergoing consolidation under the U.P. Consolidation of Holdings Act, where the Gaon Sabha objected to the appellants' entries in revenue records. The Consolidation Officer ordered expunction of the appellants' names, and the Settlement Officer reman

K.M. SHARMAversusDEVI LAL & ORS.

1990 INSC 19 January 1990Dismissed

K.M. Sharma filed a writ petition challenging the appointment of Shri Devi Lal as Deputy Prime Minister, contending that the oath he took was not the one prescribed by Article 75(4) and Schedule III of the Constitution and that he was still serving as Chief Minister of Haryana when the oath was administered. The Union

KING PAL SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 13118 November 1996Dismissed

The appellants, former zamindars, challenged the vesting of their estates in the State of Uttar Pradesh under the U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, which they claimed left their rights to work mines intact. The Collector issued notices to stop mining and offered leases governed by the U.P. Minor Mine

PURI MUNICIPAL COUNSEL AND ORS.versusINDIAN TOBACCO CO. LTD.

1995 INSC 7008 November 1995Dismissed

The Puri Municipal Council imposed octroi tax on marine fish and prawns found in the possession of non‑fishermen within the municipal limits without payment of the entry tax. Indian Tobacco Co. Ltd. challenged the levy, and the Orissa High Court dismissed the municipality's claim. On appeal, the Supreme Court examined

HARKISHAN DASS AND ORS.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS.

1995 INSC 7028 November 1995Disposed off

A cooperative society discovered that its cashier‑cum‑member had misappropriated large sums of money after his death. The society initiated arbitration under Sections 55 and 56 of the Punjab Co‑operative Societies Act, 1961, and an award was made against the deceased's heirs and legal representatives for the principal,

DR. (MISS) ALETTA GRACE BELLversusDR. (MISS) S. TIRKEY AND ANR.

1995 INSC 7038 November 1995Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. (Miss) Alette Grace Bell, the Medical Superintendent of Duncan Hospital in Bihar, was served a notice by the Drug Controller requiring a licence to manufacture and distribute an IV solution for patients, invoking Section 18(c) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. The High Court held that the hospital needed such a

RAJ DEO SHARMAversusTHE STATE OF BIHAR

1998 INSC 3848 October 1998Appeal(s) allowed

R.D. Sharma was charged under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 for an offence alleged in an FIR dated 2 November 1982. After a charge‑sheet in 1985, the Special CBI Judge framed charges only in 1993 and, by June 1995, had examined merely three of the forty witnesses listed. Sharma filed a writ petition seeking qu

DR. MUKHTIAR CHAND AND ORS. ETC.versusTHE STATE OF PUNJAB AND ORS.

1998 INSC 3858 October 1998Disposed off

The Supreme Court examined whether Rule 2(ee)(iii) of the Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, which defines "registered medical practitioner", exceeded the legislative competence of the Central Government under the Indian Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, and whether state notifications declaring Vaids/Hakims as practitioner

VIMAL SINGHversusKHUMAN SINGH AND ANR.

1998 INSC 3888 October 1998Appeal(s) allowed

Vimal Singh was tried for murder under Section 302 IPC for allegedly stabbing Vijay Singh with a knife. The trial court acquitted him, finding the prosecution had not proved the charge beyond reasonable doubt. The complainant, Khuman Singh, filed a revision petition; the Madhya Pradesh High Court re‑appraised the evide

SUSHMA SURI ETC. ETC.versusGOVT. OF NATIONAL CAPITAL TERRITORY OF DELHI AND ANR.

1998 INSC 3868 October 1998Disposed off

Sushma Suri, an Additional Government Advocate with more than seven years of experience, applied for the Delhi Higher Judicial Service (DHJS) but was not called for interview. She challenged the decision, arguing that a Government Advocate remains an "advocate" under Article 233(2) of the Constitution and is therefore

C.N. RUDRAMURTHY ETC.versusK. BARKATULLA KHAN AND ORS. ETC.

1998 INSC 3878 October 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord (appellant) filed an eviction suit against the original tenant for non‑payment of rent and alleged sub‑letting. The trial court decreed eviction, but the Karnataka High Court set aside the decree, holding that Section 31 of the Karnataka Rent Control Act, 1961 was invalid per Padmanabha Rao and directing t

HARIBHAU DAGDU TANDALEversusINDUSTRIAL CO-OPERATIVE ASSOCIATION LTD. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 11648 October 1996Dismissed

The Registrar, invoking Section 102(1)(a) of the Maharashtra Co‑operative Societies Act, 1960, issued an interim winding‑up order against Industrial Co‑operative Association Ltd and appointed a special liquidator. The society appealed to the State Government under Section 104, but while the appeal was pending the liqui

STATE THROUGH CBIversusMOHD. ASHRAFT BHAT AND ANR.

1995 INSC 8537 December 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, Ashraf Bhat, was arrested under the Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 in connection with two FIRs. In FIR No. 56 of 1991 he was arrested on 17‑April‑1992, but the prosecution filed the police report (challan) on 23‑December‑1992, after the one‑year period prescribed under the Ac

SMT. OMWATI ETC.versusMAHENDRA SINGH AND ORS.

1997 INSC 7217 November 1997Dismissed

The accused Mahendra Singh and five others were convicted by the trial court for murder, attempted murder and rioting under Sections 148, 302/149 and 307/149 IPC based on the testimony of three eye‑witnesses. The Allahabad High Court set aside the convictions, holding that the prosecution had not proved the guilt of th

SURENDRA NARAIN @ MUNNA PANDEYversusTHE STATE OF U.P.

1997 INSC 7227 November 1997Dismissed

Sureendra Narain (Munna Pandey) was convicted of murder under IPC s.302 for shooting Shree Prakash in a rickshaw. The prosecution relied on three eye‑witnesses who named the accused in the FIR, and the accused surrendered later and sought a test identification parade, which was ordered by the Sessions Court but never c

V. L. PATILversusARJUN HALAPPA NAIKAWAD! AND ORS.

1996 INSC 8377 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the Karnataka High Court was justified in criticizing the appellant, V.L. Patil, for allegedly using his ministerial position to influence a land tribunal's decision. The High Court had linked Patil's role as a minister to the tribunal's order, despite finding no direct or circumstant

SMT. VIJAYALAKSHMIversusB. HIMANTHARAJA CHETTY AND ANR.

1996 INSC 6317 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Smt. VUAYALAKSHMI, was the foster child of Batchu Muniyappa Chetty, who along with his brother B. Himantharaja Chetty partitioned their joint family property under a registered deed that included a pre-emption clause. After the foster father and his widow died, the property was bequeathed to the appellan

PAWAN KUMARversusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 6327 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Pawan Kumar was appointed on an ad‑hoc basis as a Class IV field worker in Haryana. While in service he was convicted in a summary trial under Section 294 of the Indian Penal Code for an obscene act, pleading guilty and paying a fine of Rs 20. When his regularisation was considered, the authorities, relying on the conv

M/S. SPENCER AND CO. LTD. AND ANR.versusM/S. VISHWA DARSHAN DISTRIBUTORS PVT. LTD. AND ORS.

1994 INSC 5776 December 1994Directions issued

Special Leave Petitions were filed against interim orders of the Madras High Court. On 14 January 1994 the Supreme Court ordered the parties to approach the High Court for an early disposal of the matter and to inform the Supreme Court of the result, expressing confidence that the High Court would give due attention. T

SMT. AMBALIKA PADHI AND ANRversusRADHAKRISHNA PADHI AND ORS.

1991 INSC 3266 December 1991Appeal(s) allowed

Urmila Padhi filed a suit for declaration of title based on a 1968 partition and later died during the proceedings. Her brother’s son and sister were brought in as legal representatives under a deed of settlement and a will executed by her. The trial court upheld the suit, finding the settlement and will valid and gran

NARAYAN BHIMJI VADANGALE AND ANR.versusHUKUMCHAND CHUNILAL THOLE AND ANR

1991 INSC 3276 December 1991Appeal(s) allowed

The decree-holder firm obtained a money decree against a judgment debtor and, during execution, the debtor's agricultural land was attached and auctioned, with the firm emerging as the successful bidder. The heirs of the debtor filed an objection under Section 47 of the CPC, alleging that the sale violated Section 63 o

SMT. GULAB DEVIversusTHE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF CONSOLIDATION AND ORS.

1996 INSC 12956 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, Gulab Devi, succeeded to her father's tenancy under Section 35 of the Uttar Pradesh Tenancy Act, 1939, along with her sister Ram Kumari. After the Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 came into force, Ram Kumari died unmarried while Gulab Devi was already married. The Deputy Direc

SURJIT SINGH AND ORS ETC. ETC.versusHARBANS SINGH AND ORS ETC. ETC.

1995 INSC 5396 September 1995Appeal(s) allowed

The case involved a family settlement deed that prohibited alienation of the ancestral property during the lifetime of the patriarch, Janak Singh. After his death, a suit for partition was filed and the trial court passed a preliminary decree and subsequently an order restraining all parties from alienating any part of

LIPTON INDIA LTD. ETC.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ANR.

1996 INSC 8286 August 1996Disposed off

Lipton India Ltd. and Brook Bond India Ltd., tea companies, maintained godowns in 1968 where a single salesman opened and closed the premises, loading tea onto a manually‑operated push‑cart for door‑to‑door sales. They sought clarification on whether such premises required registration under Section 7 of the Bombay Sho

LAXMAPPA AND ORS.versusSMT. BALAWA KOM TIRKAPPA CHAVDI

1996 INSC 8296 August 1996Dismissed

The widow, a destitute and widowed daughter, adopted her brother as her son with her father's consent. The father and the adopted son jointly gifted her agricultural land in 1950, stipulating that the land would revert to them (or their heirs) upon her death. After the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 came into force, the wi

SHRI KANWAR PAL AND ORS.versusGAON SABHA KIRARI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 8306 August 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The Gaon Sabha of Kirari Suleman Nagar complained that a co‑sharer, Narender Singh, had converted agricultural land to non‑agricultural use, violating Section 81 of the Delhi Land Reforms Act, 1954. A notice was served on Singh to restore the land to agricultural use within three months or face ejectment and vesting of

SRI RAM NIWAS TOD! AND ANR.versusBIBI JABRUNNISSA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 8316 August 1996Dismissed

The appellants challenged the validity of a gift of a house and its appurtenant land made by the father‑in‑law to the respondent, who was already in possession of the property. The gift was evidenced by an oral declaration and a written deed that had not been registered. The trial court and the High Court held that the

GANPATRAO GULABRAO PAWAR AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1992 INSC 1046 April 1992Case Partly allowed

The petitioners, agricultural landholders, filed returns under the Maharashtra Agricultural Lands (Ceiling and Holdings) Act, 1961. The Collector held that the first petitioner’s holding was 124 acres 23 guntas, below the ceiling, and therefore not a surplus holder. The petitioner appealed this finding before the Mahar

P. ASHOKANversusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1998 INSC 736 February 1998Dismissed

The petitioner filed a writ petition under Article 32 of the Constitution challenging the correctness of a decision that had become final on its merits. The petition sought reconsideration of that final decision. The Court examined whether Article 32 can be invoked to obtain a fresh look at a final order. Relying on th

MOHD. ABDUL KHADER MOHD KASTIM AND ANR.versusPAREETHIJ KUNJU SAYED AHAMMED AND ORS.

1996 INSC 12895 November 1996Dismissed

The appellant, a mortgagor of a property under a usufructuary mortgage, filed a redemption suit seeking to pay the mortgage amount of Rs.18,000. The trial court passed a preliminary decree on 22 November 1960 directing redemption on deposit of the mortgage money, payment of mesne profits, and a provision for claiming i

DR. S.K. KHANNA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF HARYANA AND ORS. ETC. ETC.

1993 INSC 3665 November 1993

The plaintiffs, originally appointed as Lecturers in a private college that was later taken over by the Haryana Government, claimed they had been promoted to Senior Lecturers under the UGC scheme and that the Government’s regularisation of them as Lecturers amounted to a demotion. The Court examined the statutory order

PANNI LALversusRAJINDER SINGH AND ANR.

1993 INSC 1845 May 1993Dismissed

The mother of two minor respondents sold their land to the appellant without obtaining court permission, though the deed was attested by the father. After attaining majority, the respondents sued for possession, claiming the sale was void. The appellant argued that the father's attestation made the sale a valid act of

MRS. RENA DREGOversusLALCHAND SONI, ETC.

1998 INSC 1325 March 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The landlady, Ms. Rena Drego, sought eviction of her tenant under Section 13(1)(g) of the Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, claiming a bona‑fide and reasonable need for additional accommodation for her large family. The trial court dismissed her suit, but the appellate Small Causes Court granted

SWARAN SINGHversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1998 INSC 1335 March 1998Appeal(s) allowed

Shri Doodh Nath, an MLA, was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. He filed a remission petition before the Governor of Uttar Pradesh, which was granted despite the Governor not being informed of material facts such as five other serious criminal cases pending against him, the earlier dismissal of his

U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATIONversusM/S SUMAC INTERNATIONAL LTD.

1996 INSC 14334 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The U.P. State Sugar Corporation entered into a contract with M/s Sumac International Ltd. for the supply and installation of a sugar plant, requiring the seller to furnish several irrevocable bank guarantees payable on demand. The contract was not completed within the stipulated or extended time, leading the appellant

JOSEPH KURIEN PHILIP JOSEversusSTATE OF KERALA

1994 INSC 4344 October 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The case arose from the 1981 Punalur liquor tragedy in Kerala where arrack adulterated with methyl alcohol caused several deaths. Joseph Kurian (A‑4) managed the Punalur depot and Philip Jose (A‑1) controlled it; both were convicted by the trial court under IPC sections 272 (adulteration) and 328 (causing hurt by poiso

K.A. MOHAMMED ALIversusC.N. PRASANNAN

1994 INSC 4384 October 1994Disposed off

Advocate K.A. Mohammed Ali was convicted by the Kerala High Court under Section 12 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 for raising his voice, using derogatory language against a magistrate, publishing posters and staging a demonstration. The High Court imposed a fine of Rs. 2,000 and ordered the advocate to pay Rs. 5,0

KALICHARAN MAHAPATRAversusSTATE OF ORISSA

1998 INSC 2824 August 1998Dismissed

Kalicharan Mahapatra, a retired IPS officer, was charged under Sections 13(2) and 13(1)(e) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for possession of cash and jewellery discovered during a raid. He argued that, having retired before the charge‑sheet was filed, he could not be prosecuted because the Act required a prio

POLYCHEM LTD. AND ANOTHERversusSTATE OF MAHRASHTRA AND OTHER

1998 INSC 2844 August 1998Appeal(s) allowed

Polychem Ltd., a manufacturer of alcoholic beverages, paid supervision charges in advance each quarter as required by Section 58-A of the Bombay Prohibition Act, 1949. After the government raised the wages and dearness allowance of its supervising staff retrospectively, it demanded a differential amount of supervision

SHAMSHUL KANWARversusSTATE OF U.P.

1995 INSC 3374 May 1995Dismissed

In Village Sakhni, Uttar Pradesh, a factional clash erupted during a funeral procession, resulting in the death of ten members of the prosecution party. The accused, led by Shamshul Kanwar, were found to have entered the scene armed and fired indiscriminately, constituting an unlawful assembly under Sections 302 and 14

J.K. COTTON SPPINNING AND WEAVING MILLS CO. LTD.versusCOLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE

1998 INSC 1264 March 1998Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a textile mill, was served with two show‑cause notices under Section 11‑A of the Central Excises and Salt Act for alleged excise duty on yarn removed within the factory for the period November 1980 to December 1981. The Delhi High Court had stayed the effect of a circular dated 24‑September‑1980, and the

MITHILESH RANI AND ORS.versusREGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, DEHRADUN AND ORS.

1994 INSC 1044 March 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants applied to the Regional Transport Authority, Dehradun for stage carriage permits on the Muzaffarnagar‑Yamuna Bridge route. While the applications were pending, the Supreme Court stayed the issuance of fresh permits on routes covered by certain writ petitions, but clarified that the stay did not prohibit

RAMBILAS AND ORS.versusSTATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

1997 INSC 6843 October 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants were convicted under IPC sections 302 and 201 for the murder of Deosharan, a notorious villager, based primarily on the testimony of four eye‑witnesses who claimed to have heard a disturbance and seen the assault. During cross‑examination the witnesses admitted they did not actually see the assault, and

STATE OF U.P.versusSIKANDER ALI AND ORS.

1998 INSC 1713 April 1998Disposed off

The State of U.P. appealed the acquittal of Sikandar Ali and others, who had been convicted by a trial court for the murder of two brothers‑in‑law, Shamsher Singh and Ramji Tripathi, based on the testimony of two eye‑witnesses (PW‑1 and PW‑2) recorded in the FIR within an hour of the incident. The High Court set aside

NANDU MAL GIRDHARI LAL ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.

1992 INSC 1023 April 1992Dismissed

The appellants, commission agents operating in the Muzaffarnagar market area, were required to pay a market fee under the Uttar Pradesh Krishi Utpadan Mandi Adhiniyam Act, 1964, as amended retrospectively to apply from 12 June 1973. They challenged the demand for fees covering the period 11 October 1973 to 12 August 19

SACHIDA NAND SINGH AND ANR.versusSTATE OF BIHAR AND ANR.

1998 INSC 523 February 1998Dismissed

The appellants forged a certified copy of a Jamabandi (Rent Roll) and introduced it in a court of Executive Magistrate during proceedings under Section 145 of the CrPC. A complaint alleging forgery offences (IPC §§ 468, 469, 471) was filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, who forwarded it to police, leading to an

MOHMOODKHAN MAHBOOBKHAN PATHANversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1997 INSC 873 February 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Sub‑Registrar, was convicted under Section 161 IPC and Section 5(2) read with 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 for allegedly receiving Rs 60 as illegal gratification for issuing certified copies of sale deeds. The prosecution set up a trap and caught him taking the money, but the appel

STATE OF TAMIL NADUversusP. MUNIAPPAN

1997 INSC 7782 December 1997Appeal(s) allowed

P. Muniappan, an assistant professor, was charged with murdering his wife Nagammal after she was found hanging in their kitchen with burn injuries and signs of struggle. The prosecution relied on extensive circumstantial evidence—Muniappan's motive to obtain a divorce and a second marriage, his exclusive presence in th

M/S. DLF UNIVERSAL LTD.versusPROF. A. LAKSHMI SAGAR AND ORS. ETC.

1998 INSC 3382 September 1998Disposed off

M/s DLF Universal Ltd. proposed a garden colony of 270 country‑type villas on agricultural land along the Arkavathi River. The Karnataka State Government approved the scheme on 29 June 1991, imposing conditions prescribed by the State Pollution Control Board to prevent water pollution and ensuring water supply from bor

KIRAN BALAversusSURINDER KUMAR

1996 INSC 6132 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Kiran Bala sold her residential house to relatives to pay debts, but the sale was declared null and void as a fraudulent transfer under the Transfer of Property Act. The decree-holder sought to attach and sell the house in execution of a money decree, while the appellant claimed exemption under Section 60(1)(ccc) of th

SMT. SANTOSH YADAVversusSTATE OF,HARYANA AND ORS.

1996 INSC 6142 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a Hindi teacher, was appointed on a six‑monthly contract in 1980 and regularised in 1984. In 1990 the Education Department ordered her removal, claiming her teacher‑training certificate from Uttar Pradesh was not recognised by Haryana. The Department relied on a 7 July 1981 circular that barred recruitme

INDORE TEXTILES LTD. AND ANR.versusUNION OF INDIA AND ANR.

1998 INSC 1182 March 1998Dismissed

Indore Textiles Ltd., a closed public limited company, had its management taken over by the Central Government under Section 18AA of the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1951. Shortly before the expiry of that takeover, the Madhya Pradesh Governor promulgated an ordinance, later replaced by the Indore Texti

C. KRISHNA GOWDA AND ORS.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS

1998 INSC 492 February 1998Dismissed

The petitioners, direct recruits to the Karnataka Administrative Service (Junior Scale), challenged a Karnataka Government order dated 3 March 1976 that listed 133 temporary posts alongside 152 permanent posts, arguing that the temporary posts should be counted in the cadre strength of 285 for applying the quota betwee

STATE OF M.P.versusUDAI SINGH

1997 INSC 7721 December 1997Appeal(s) allowed

The State of Madhya Pradesh appealed against the Madhya Pradesh High Court's acquittal of Udai Singh, who had been convicted by the trial court for the murder of three women and the attempted murder of a fourth under IPC sections 302 and 307. The Supreme Court examined whether the eyewitness testimonies—despite minor i

ANOKHE LALversusRADHAMOHAN BANSAL AND OTHERS.

1996 INSC 12651 November 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The landlord filed an eviction suit against a partnership firm. The son of a deceased partner sought to be impleaded as an additional defendant, first under Order I Rule 10(2) CPC and later under Order 30 Rule 4 CPC, both applications being dismissed by the trial court and the district court. While the suit was pending

AMRUTLAL SOMESHWAR JOSHIversusSTATE OF MAHARASHTRA

1994 INSC 3461 September 1994Dismissed

Amrutlal Someshwar Joshi was convicted of murdering three persons, including a three‑year‑old child, during a robbery and was sentenced to death under IPC 302. He appealed, arguing that he was only 17 years old at the time of the offence and that age should be a mitigating factor, citing Hamam and Raisul as precedents.

SMT. SWARNALATA SARKARversusSTATE OF WEST BENGAL AND ORS.

1996 INSC 5991 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Smt. Swarnalata Sarkar filed a criminal complaint alleging bigamy under S. 494 r/w S. 109 IPC against her husband, who had married another woman with the collusion of several respondents. The trial magistrate issued process based on preliminary evidence under S. 200 CrPC. The accused filed a frivolous application under

RAJ KJSHORE PRASADversusSTATE OF BIHAR

1996 INSC 6001 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant Raj Kishore Prasad was alleged by two witnesses to have urged his brother, the accused Avadh Kishore, to kill the victim, but the police filed a report only against Avadh Kishore. The Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) dismissed the informant's application to summon the appellant, but the Sessions Court, on

MAHABIR CHOUDHARY ETC.versusSTATE OF B!HAR

1996 INSC 6021 May 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Thirteen residents of Kusi village were prosecuted after three men from the neighbouring Malpura village cut open a bund, diverting water during a drought. The Kusi villagers attempted to restore the bund, were resisted, and four of them shot the three intruders, causing their deaths. The trial court convicted the four

RADHEY SHYAM JAISWAL (DEAD) AND ORS.versusSMT. RAM DULARI DEVI AND ORS.

1996 INSC 6041 May 1996Dismissed

The decree-holder obtained a decree in 1949 and later sold the attached house to an auction purchaser. After a compromise failed, a fresh execution application was filed on 16 November 1961, more than twelve years after the decree, leading to the sale of the property. The widow and daughters of the original judgment de

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search