SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2012 Supreme(SC) 519

S.S.NIJJAR, H.L.GOKHALE
MUNNA LAL KAROSIA – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF M. P. – Respondent


ORDER

1. SLP(C) No.1673/2006: Leave granted. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant at length. A bare perusal of the impugned order passed by the High Court indicates that although stigmatic remarks have been made against respondent No.6, he was neither present nor heard. The impugned order would have serious adverse civil consequences on the appellant. Such an order could not have been passed without compliance with the rules of natural justice. On this short ground, in our opinion, the order passed by the High Court cannot be sustained. Accordingly, the impugned order passed by the High Court is hereby set aside and the appeal is allowed. Application for impleadment is dismissed.

2. Civil Appeal No. 4665/2006: The appellant herein was respondent No.1 in Contempt (Civil) Petition No.335/2006 before the High Court. It appears that the order dated 18.11.2005 passed by the High Court, was the subject matter of the SLP(C) No. 1673/2006. In the aforesaid special leave petition, this Court while issuing notice on 30.1.2006 directed status quo insofar as the posting of the petitioner in the above special leave petition was concerned.

3. Mr. Tankha, learned Additional Solicit


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top