IN the HIGH COURT at CALCUTTA the Hon'ble the Chief Justice

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

IN the HIGH COURT at CALCUTTA the Hon'ble the Chief Justice IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Original Side Present: The Hon’ble The Chief Justice Jyotirmay Bhattacharya And The Hon’ble Justice Shekhar B. Saraf APO 112 of 2017 ACO 48 of 2017 CA 563 of 2013 CC 43 of 2014 CP 611 of 1988 Prasanta Kumar Mitra & Ors. Versus India Steam Laundry (P) Ltd. & Ors. For the appellants : Mr. S. Pal, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Raj Ratan Sen, Advocate, Mr. Gautam Kumar Ray, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. S. B. Mookherjee, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Roopa Mitra, Advocate For Respondent no. 3 Mr. Jayanta Kumar Mitra, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Soumitra Dutta, Advocate For Respondent no. 4 Mr. Joydip Kar, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Sirsanya Bandopadhyay, Advocate For Respondent no. 16 & 17 Mr. Joy Saha, Advocate, Mr. Subhojit Saha, Advocate For Respondent No. 13, 14 and 15 Heard on : 26/10/2017, 27/11/2017, 06/12/2017, 08/12/2017, 03/01/2018, 10/01/2018, 11/01/2018, 17/01/2018, 19/01/2018, 25/01/2018, 02/02/2018, 17/05/2018, 21/06/2018, 22/06/2018, 28/06/2018, 05/07/2018 Judgment on: September 5, 2018 Shekhar B. Saraf, J. : 1. This is an application arising out of an appeal in connection with a judgment passed by the Learned Single Judge on March 22, 2017 in the matter of Prasanta Kumar Mitra and Ors. –v- India Steam Laundry (P) Limited and Ors. (in C.A. 563 of 2013 with C.P. 611 of 1988; C.C 43 of 2014). The company petition above relates to mismanagement and oppression under sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, 1956 (hereinafter referred to as “the 1956 Act”). By the said order, the Single Judge held that from 15th December, 2016, the High Court had lost jurisdiction to hear and dispose of the above proceedings in the High Court and the same stood transferred to the National Company Law Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as ‘NCLT’). Factual Background 2. The facts leading to this application and appeal are as follows: - a. The Companies Act, 1956 came into force on April 1st, 1956. b. The Companies (Amendment) Act, 1988 (hereinafter referred to as “Amendment Act, 1988”) came into force on May 31, 1991. From this day onwards, several matters including matters relating to mismanagement and oppression (Section 397 to 405 of the 1956 Act) were transferred to the Company Law Board. c. The Amendment Act, 1988 had a provision being Section 68 that retained matters and proceedings that were pending before the High Court prior to coming into force of the Amendment Act, 1988. The relevant section is set out below: “Section 68: (1) Any matter or proceeding which, immediately before the commencement of the Companies (Amendment) Act, 1988 was pending before any Court shall, notwithstanding that such matter or proceeding would be heard by the Company Law Board after such commencement, be continued and disposed of by that court after such commencement in accordance with the provisions of the Principal Act as they stood immediately before such commencement. (2) Any matter or proceeding which immediately before the commencement of the Companies (Amendment) Act, 1988, was pending before the Company Law Board by virtue of any notification issued by the Central Government shall, unless such matter or proceeding would be heard by the Company Law Board after such commencement, be heard and disposed of by the Central Government.” d. The Companies Bill, 2011 was introduced in Parliament on December 2, 2011. The Notes on Clauses to the said bill explained two provisions of the bill including that of clause 434, which dealt with transfer of proceedings from various forums to the proposed tribunal. The said clause is set out below: “Clause 434: This Clause corresponds to sections 10F and 647A of the Companies Act, 1956 and seeks to provide that on foundation of Tribunal, all matters pending before CLB shall stand transferred to the Tribunal. Similarly, all proceedings relating to compromise, arrangements and reconstruction and winding up of the companies pending before District Court and High Courts shall be transferred to the Tribunal except winding up proceedings pending before District Courts or High Courts.” e. On June 1, 2016 the NCLT was notified and came into existence. Further, sub-section 1(a) and 1(b) of Section 434 of the Companies Act, 2013 (hereinafter referred to as “the 2013 Act”) were also notified on the date mentioned above. f. On December 7, 2016, Clause (c) of sub-section (1) of Section 434 of the 2013 Act was notified with effect from December 16, 2016. Section 434 of the 2013 Act is provided below: “434. Transfer of certain pending proceedings.-(1) On such date as may be notified by the Central Government in this behalf,- (a) all matters, proceedings or cases pending before the Board of Company Law Administration (herein in this section referred to as the Company Law Board) constituted under sub-section (1) of section 10-E of the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), immediately before such date shall stand transferred to the Tribunal and the Tribunal shall dispose of such matters, proceedings or cases in accordance with the provisions of this Act; (b) any person aggrieved by any decision or order of the Company Law Board made before such date may file an appeal to the High Court within sixty days from the date of communication of the decision or order of the Company Law Board to him on any question of law arising out of such order: Provided that the High Court may if it is satisfied that the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from filing an appeal within the said period, allow it to be filed within a further period not exceeding sixty days; (c) all proceedings under the Companies Act, 1956 (1 of 1956), including proceedings relating to arbitration, compromise, arrangements and reconstruction and winding up of companies, pending immediately before such date before any District Court or High Court, shall stand transferred to the Tribunal and the Tribunal may proceed to deal with such proceedings from the stage before their transfer. (d) any appeal preferred to the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction or any reference made or inquiry pending to or before the Board of Industrial and Financial Reconstruction or any proceeding of whatever nature pending before the Appellate Authority for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction or the Board for Industrial and Financial Reconstruction under the Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 (1 of 1986) immediately before the commencement of this Act shall stand abated: Provided that a company in respect of which such appeal or reference or inquiry stands abated under this clause may make a reference to the Tribunal under this Act within one hundred and eighty days from the commencement of this Act in accordance with the provisions of this Act: Provided further that no fees shall be payable for making such reference under this Act by a company whose appeal or reference or inquiry stands abated under this clause. (2) The Central Government may make rules consistent with the provisions of this Act to ensure timely transfer of all matters, proceedings or cases pending before the Company Law Board or the Court, to the Tribunal under this section.” g. Further, on 7th December 2016 the Companies (Transfer of Pending Proceedings) Rules, 2016 and the Companies (Removal of Difficulties) Order, 2016 formulated under Section 470 of the 2013 Act were also notified. The said Order is provided below: “In the Companies Act, 2013, in Section 434, in sub-Section (1), in Clause (c), after the proviso, the following provisos shall be inserted, namely;- ‘Provided further that only such proceedings relating to cases other than winding up, for which orders for allowing or otherwise of the proceedings are not reserved by the High Courts shall be transferred to the Tribunal: Provided further that- (i) All proceedings under the Companies Act, 1956 other than the cases relating to winding up of companies that are reserved for orders for allowing or otherwise such proceedings; or (ii) The proceedings relating to winding up of companies which have not been transferred from the High Courts; Shall be dealt with in accordance with provisions of the Companies Act, 1956 and the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959’.” h. The Single Judge held that all the matters should be transferred to NCLT as per the 7th December, 2016 notification under the 2013 Act, holding that Section 434 of the 2013 Act had impliedly repealed the transitional provision brought in by the Amendment Act, 1988. The relevant portion of the order is delineated below: “25. Mr. Sen contended that the Court will be slow to hold that an earlier statute or a provision thereof has been impliedly repealed by a subsequent statute or a provision thereof. In this connection, learned Senior Counsel relied on the Apex Court decisions in Union of India-vs.- Venkateshan S. (supra) and Lal Shah Baba Dargah Trust-vs.- Magnum Developers (supra). As a proposition of law there cannot be any dispute with such contention. Where a subsequent statute does not expressly repeal a previous statute covering the same field, to the best extent possible, the courts will endeavour to give effect to both the statutes by resorting to the principle of harmonious construction. However, when the words of the later statute are crystal clear leaving no scope for confusion and if such words cannot under any circumstances be construed harmoniously with the words of the previous statute, the earlier statute must be held to have been impliedly repealed. Where the earlier and the later provisions of law cannot stand together, where the words of the two enactments are absolutely irreconcilable, where the two provisions of law are plainly repugnant to each other, the earlier law would stand abrogated by the later law.
Recommended publications
  • Ilr - Cut- 1127 (S.C.)
    2016 (II) ILR - CUT- 1127 (S.C.) SUPREME COURT OF INDIA JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, J. & S.A. BOBDE, J. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 213 OF 2013 (WITH BATCH) STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. ……..Appellants .Vrs. JAGJIT SINGH & ORS. ……..Respondents (A) SERVICE LAW – Equal Pay for equal work – Whether temporarily engaged employees (daily wage employees, ad-hoc appointees, employees appointed on casual basis, contractual employees and the like), are entitled to minimum of the regular pay scale, alongwith dearness allowance (as revised from time to time) on account of their performing the same duties, which are discharged by those engaged on regular basis, against sanctioned posts ? The duties and responsibilities discharged by the temporary employees in the present bunch of appeals were the same as were being discharged by regular employees – It is not the case of the appellants that the respondent employees did not possess the prescribed qualifications for appointment on regular basis and they would not be entitled to pay parity – So the principle of “equal pay for equal work” would be applicable to all the concerned temporary employees, so as to vest in them the right to claim wages, at par with the minimum of the pay-scale of regularly engaged Govt. employees, holding the same post – Held, all the concerned temporary employees, in the present bunch of cases, would be entitled to draw wages at the minimum of the pay scale (at the lowest grade, in the regular pay scale), extended to regular employees, holding the same post. (Paras 57, 58) (B) SERVICE LAW – Principle of “equal pay for equal work” – Employees engaged on regular basis, claiming higher wages under such principle – “onus of Proof” – Person who claims it, has to proof parity in the duties and responsibilities of the subject post with the reference post alongwith other parameters described in paragraph 42 of the judgment which can be taken into consideration while dealing with the matter.
    [Show full text]
  • National Initiative Towards Strengthening Arbitration and Enforcement In
    NATIONAL INITIATIVE TOWARDS STRENGTHENING ARBITRATION AND ENFORCEMENT IN 21st - 23rd October, 2016 Vigyan Bhawan, New Delhi Supporting International Institutions Register here: http://arbitrationindia.in/registration/ NATIONAL INITIATIVE NATIONAL INITIATIVE TOWARDS STRENGTHENING TOWARDS STRENGTHENING ARBITRATION AND ARBITRATION AND ENFORCEMENT IN ENFORCEMENT IN ABOUT THE CONFERENCE SESSION HIGHLIGHTS ‘National Initiative towards Strengthening Arbitration and Enforcement in India’ is a landmark three-day Shri Pranab Mukherjee conference organised in New Delhi to promote India as a global hub for arbitration amongst international Hon’ble President of India, Chief Guest, Inaugural Session practitioners, corporate houses and the Indian legal fraternity. This is the first time the Government of India through NITI Aayog is organising an important global Shri Narendra Modi conference with active support from six international arbitration institutions (HKIAC, ICC, KLRCA, LCIA, Hon’ble Prime Minister of India, Chief Guest, Valedictory Session PCA and SIAC). The conference is also supported by major industry associations in India. Ministry of Law and Justice, Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, National Legal Services Authority, NILERD, Shri T.S. Thakur International Centre for Alternative Dispute Resolution and legal fraternity have also been involved in Hon’ble Chief Justice of India and Patron-in-Chief of the Conference organising the event. The conference will serve as a platform for discussing critical issues, sharing experience on best international Shri Arun Jaitley practices and creating a roadmap to strengthen arbitration and its enforcement in the country. This will, Hon’ble Union Minister for Finance and Corporate Affairs, Government of India ultimately, feed into policymaking for promoting international commercial arbitrations in India.
    [Show full text]
  • In the Supreme Court of India Civil Original Jurisdiction
    REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) NO 494 OF 2012 JUSTICE K S PUTTASWAMY (RETD.), AND ANR. ..Petitioners VERSUS UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..Respondents WITH T.C. (CIVIL) NO 151 OF 2013 T.C. (CIVIL) NO 152 OF 2013 W.P.(CIVIL) NO 833 OF 2013 W.P.(CIVIL) NO 829 OF 2013 W.P.(CIVIL) NO 932 OF 2013 CONMT. PET. (CIVIL) NO 144 OF 2014 IN W.P.(C) NO. 494/2012 T.P.(CIVIL) NO 313 OF 2014 T.P.(CIVIL) NO 312 OF 2014 S.L.P(CRL.) NO.2524/2014 W.P.(CIVIL) NO.37/2015 W.P.(CIVIL) NO.220/2015 1 CONMT. PET. (C)NO.674/2015 IN W.P.(C) NO.829/2013 T.P.(CIVIL)NO.921/2015 CONMT.PET.(C)NO.470/2015 IN W.P.(C) NO.494/2012 CONMT.PET.(C)NO.444/2016 IN W.P.(C) NO.494/2012 CONMT.PET.(C)NO.608/2016 IN W.P.(C) NO.494/2012 W.P.(CIVIL) NO.797/2016 CONMT.PET.(C)NO.844/2017 IN W.P.(C) NO.494/2012 W.P. (C) NO. 342/ 2017 AND WITH W.P.(C) NO.000372/2017 J U D G M E N T Dr D Y CHANDRACHUD, J This judgment has been divided into sections to facilitate analysis. They are : A The reference B Decision in M P Sharma C Decision in Kharak Singh D Gopalan doctrine: fundamental rights as isolated silos E Cooper and Maneka: Interrelationship between rights F Origins of privacy G Natural and inalienable rights H Evolution of the privacy doctrine in India I The Indian Constitution • Preamble • Jurisprudence on dignity 2 • Fundamental Rights cases • No waiver of Fundamental Rights • Privacy as intrinsic to freedom and liberty • Discordant Notes : (i) ADM Jabalpur (ii) Suresh Koushal J India’s commitments under International law K Comparative
    [Show full text]
  • News Letter Vol. I, No. 2, July-September 2012
    Vol. I, No. 2, July-September 2012 INSIDE EDITORIAL When this Newsletter is going to press, the nation mourns the horrific NEW CJI death of a young student, after she was brutally gang-raped and ACTIVITIES AT THE LAW SCHOOL assaulted in a moving bus in south Delhi recently. This tragic and eye- FORTHCOMING EVENTS opening incident calls for reflection – reflection about laws which have FACULTY UPDATES so far failed to check the frequent incidents of sexual assault on women LEGISLATIVE TRENDS not just in the national capital but also in other parts of the country and reflection about INTERNATIONAL LEGAL NEWS AND EVENTS the society in which we live in. An outraged and shocked nation demands stringent RECENT JUDICIAL DECISIONS punishments for rapists including death penalty in rarest of rare cases at least. But MY EXPERIENCE WITH LEGAL administration of capital punishment is not without problems. Delays in sentencing and AID PROGRAMME OF LAW executions, growing number of death row convicts and inconsistencies in the Supreme SCHOOL Court's own jurisprudence on death penalty call for an informed debate over the necessity of retaining death penalty in the statute books. Furthermore, death penalty shifts the focus away from the real issue to the controversies surrounding the penalty itself. Editorial Committee Social outrage leads to reform; and in the wake of Delhi gang-rape case, one can hope Editor in Chief that some far reaching criminal law reforms await us. But not just the criminal law Professor B.C.Nirmal reform-substantive and procedural but also police and judicial reforms are the need of Head and Dean Managing Editor the hour.
    [Show full text]
  • Chief Justice of India
    CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA The Chief Justice of India (CJI) is the head of the judiciary of India and the Supreme Court of India. The CJI also heads their administrative functions. In accordance with Article 145 of the Constitution of India and the Supreme Court Rules of Procedure of 1966, the Chief Justice allocates all work to the other judges who are bound to refer the matter back to him or her (for re-allocation) in any case where they require it to be looked into by a larger bench of more judges. The present CJI is Justice Dipak Misra and is the 45th CJI since January 1950, the year the Constitution came into effect and the Supreme Court came into being. He succeeded Justice Jagdish Singh Khehar on 28 August 2017 and will remain in office till 2 October 2018, the day he retires on turning 65 years in age. S.No Name Period 1 H. J. Kania 1950-1951 2 M. Patanjali Sastri 1951-1954 3 Mehr Chand Mahajan 1954 4 Bijan Kumar Mukherjea 1954-1956 5 Sudhi Ranjan Das 1956-1959 6 Bhuvaneshwar Prasad Sinha 1959-1964 7 P. B. Gajendragadkar 1964-1966 8 Amal Kumar Sarkar 1966 9 Koka Subba Rao 1966-1967 10 Kailas Nath Wanchoo 1967-1968 11 Mohammad Hidayatullah[10] 1968-1970 12 Jayantilal Chhotalal Shah 1970-1971 13 Sarv Mittra Sikri 1971-1973 14 Ajit Nath Ray 1973-1977 15 Mirza Hameedullah Beg 1977-1978 16 Yeshwant Vishnu Chandrachud 1978-1985 17 Prafullachandra Natwarlal Bhagwati 1985-1986 18 Raghunandan Swarup Pathak 1986-1989 19 Engalaguppe Seetharamiah Venkataramiah 1989 20 Sabyasachi Mukharji 1989-1990 21 Ranganath Misra 1990-1991 22 Kamal Narain Singh 1991 23 Madhukar Hiralal Kania 1991-1992 24 Lalit Mohan Sharma 1992-1993 25 Manepalli Narayana Rao Venkatachaliah 1993-1994 26 Aziz Mushabber Ahmadi 1994-1997 27 Jagdish Sharan Verma 1997-1998 Page 1 CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA 28 Madan Mohan Punchhi 1998 29 Adarsh Sein Anand 1998-2001 30 Sam Piroj Bharucha 2001-2002 31 Bhupinder Nath Kirpal 2002 32 Gopal Ballav Pattanaik 2002 33 V.
    [Show full text]
  • High Court of Jharkhand NEWSLETTER Volume : 2 Issue II*
    High Court of Jharkhand NEWSLETTER Volume : 2 Issue II* Oath Cermony of Hon'ble The Chief Justice, High Court of Jharkhand Judicial News and Events Development of Law E-Court Project Status Progress in modernization and computerzation of Justice DeliverySystem UBUNTU Master Trainer Certification Human Resources in District and Subordinate Judicary Judicial Work and Statistics of High Court and District and Sub-Ordinate Court ofJharhand 20 Old Cases Mission Mode Program Status Report of Stay Matter Cases in the High Court and District & Subordinate Judiciary Also available at www.jharkhandhighcourt.nic.in * This issue comprises two quarters (Jul.-Sep., 2013 & Oct.-Dec., 2013) " The Law...is perfection of reason." SIR EDWARD COKE, Institutes: Commentary upon Littleton AFFIRMATION The precepts of the law are these : to live honestly, to injure no one, and to give everyone else his due. Cicero Members of Judicial Fraternity Hon’ble tHE CHIEF JUSTICE OF INDIA AND HON’BLE JUDGES OF SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.M. Lodha Chief Justice of India Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice H.L. Dattu Justice T.S. Thakur Anil R. Dave Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya Judge, Supreme Court of India Judge, Supreme Court of India Judge, Supreme Court of India Judge, Supreme Court of India & Executive Chairman, NALSA & Chairman, SCLSC Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjana Prakash Desai Jagdish Singh Khehar Dipak Misra Jasti Chelameswar Judge, Supreme Court of India Judge, Supreme Court of India Judge, Supreme Court of India Judge, Supreme Court of India i Hon’ble Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. XII Issue No. 3 July - September, 2017 LIST of SUPREME COURT JUDGES (As on 30-09-2017)
    Vol. XII Issue No. 3 July - September, 2017 LIST OF SUPREME COURT JUDGES (As on 30-09-2017) S.No. Name of the Hon'ble Judge Date of Date of Appointment Retirement 01. Hon'ble Shri Dipak Misra, 10-10-2011 03-10-2018 Chief Justice of India As CJI: 28-08-2017 02. Hon'ble Mr. Justice J. Chelameswar 10-10-2011 23-06-2018 03. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ranjan Gogoi 23-04-2012 18-11-2019 04. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Madan B. Lokur 04-06-2012 31-12-2018 05. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph 08-03-2013 30-11-2018 06. Hon'ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri 12-04-2013 07-03-2019 07. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sharad Arvind Bobde 12-04-2013 24-04-2021 08. Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.K. Agrawal 17-02-2014 05-05-2018 09. Hon'ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana 17-02-2014 27-08-2022 10. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra 07-07-2014 03-09-2020 11. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Adarsh Kumar Goel 07-07-2014 07-07-2018 12. Hon'ble Mr. Justice R.F. Nariman 07-07-2014 13-08-2021 13. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre 13-08-2014 28-08-2019 14. Hon'ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi 13-08-2014 20-07-2020 15. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Uday U. Lalit 13-08-2014 09-11-2022 16. Hon'ble Mr. Justice Amitava Roy 27-02-2015 01-03-2018 17. Hon'ble Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Constitutional Posts - Cms Governors and CJI Free Static GK E-Book
    List of Constitutional Posts - CMs Governors and CJI Free static GK e-book List of Constitutional Posts - CMs Governors and Chief Justice of India are an integral part of the general awareness section in most of the Government exams. Questions related to Constitutional Posts Like CM’s, Governor’s and Chief Justice of India are common in the general awareness section of Government exams like SSC CGL, SSC CPO, UPSC and more. Here are some Sample Questions: Q: Who was the First Chief Justice of India? a) M. Patanjali Sastri b) Ajit Nath Ray c) Sabyasachi Mukharji d) H J Kania Solution: Option d. H J Kania Q: Who is the Governor of Karnataka? a) Shri Vajubhai Vala b) Shri Ram Naik c) Shri Banwarilal Purohit d) Shri Justice (Retd.) Palaniswamy Sathasivam Solution: Option a. Shri Vajubhai Vala In competitive exams, as little as 1 mark can make a lot of difference. For your assistance, we bring to you a Free eBook on Lists of Names of Important Constitutional Posts – CM, Governor and Chief Justice of India List of Constitutional Posts - CMs Governors and CJI Free static GK e-book Governors of Indian States – May 2018 State Governer Name Andhra Pradesh Shri E.S Lakshmi Narasimhan Arunachal Pradesh Shri B.D. Mishra Assam Shri Jagdish Mukhi Bihar Shri Satyapal Malik Chhattisgarh Shri Balramji Dass Tandon Delhi (NCT) Anil Baijal (Lt. Governor) Goa Smt. Mridula Sinha Gujarat Shri Om Prakash Kohli Haryana Prof. Kaptan Singh Solanki Himachal Pradesh Shri Acharya Dev Vrat Jammu and Kashmir Shri N. N. Vohra Jharkhand Shrimati Droupadi Murmu Karnataka Shri Vajubhai Vala Shri Justice (Retd.) Palaniswamy Kerala Sathasivam Madhya Pradesh Smt Anandiben Patel Maharashtra Shri Chennamaneni Vidyasagar Rao Manipur Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • List of Chief Justices of India There Have Been 47 Chief Justices in India Till Date
    List of Chief Justices of India There have been 47 Chief justices in India till date. H J Kania served as the First Chief Justice Of Supreme Court of India. The list of Chief Justice of India is given below: Chief Justice of India – List Tenure H.J Kania 26 January 1950 – 6 November 1951 M. Patanjali Sastri 7 November 1951 – 3 January 1954 Mehr Chand Mahajan 4 January 1954 – 22 December 1954 Bijan Kumar Mukherjea 23 December 1954 – 31 January 1956 Sudhi Ranjan Das 1 February 1956 – 30 September 1959 Bhuvaneshwar Prasad Sinha 1 October 1959 – 31 January 1964 P. B. Gajendragadkar 1 February 1964 – 15 March 1966 Amal Kumar Sarkar 16 March 1966 – 29 June 1966 Koka Subba Rao 30 June 1966 – 11 April 1967 Kailas Nath Wanchoo 12 April 1967 – 24 February 1968 Mohammad Hidayatullah 25 February 1968 – 16 December 1970 Jayantilal Chhotalal Shah 17 December 1970 – 21 January 1971 Sarv Mittra Sikri 22 January 1971 – 25 April 1973 A. N. Ray 26 April 1973 – 27 January 1977 Mirza Hameedullah Beg 29 January 1977 – 21 February 1978 Y. V. Chandrachud 22 February 1978 – 11 July 1985 P. N. Bhagwati 12 July 1985 – 20 December 1986 Raghunandan Swarup Pathak 21 December 1986 – 18 June 1989 Engalaguppe Seetharamaiah Venkataramiah 19 June 1989 – 17 December 1989 Sabyasachi Mukharji 18 December 1989 – 25 September 1990 Ranganath Misra 26 September 1990 – 24 November 1991 Kamal Narain Singh 25 November 1991 – 12 December 1991 Madhukar Hiralal Kania 13 December 1991 – 17 November 1992 Lalit Mohan Sharma 18 November 1992 – 11 February 1993 M.
    [Show full text]
  • Judges of the Supreme Court of India and the High Courts
    AS ON 01/06/2013 JUDGES OF THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND THE HIGH COURTS AS ON ST 01 JUNE, 2013 AS ON 01/06/2013 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Sanctioned Judge Strength: 31 (List of Judges arranged according to date of appointment) Sl. Name of the Judge Date of Date of REMARKS No. S/Shri Justice appointment Retirement [Parent High Court] 1 ALTAMAS KABIR 09/09/2005 19/07/2013 CJI W.E.F. 29.09.2012 CALCUTTA 2 P.SATHASIVAM 21/08/2007 27/04/2014 MADRAS 3 GANPAT SINGH SINGHVI 12/11/2007 12/12/2013 RAJASTHAN 4 R.M. LODHA 17/12/2008 28/09/2014 RAJASTHAN 5 H.L. DATTU 17/12/2008 03/12/2015 KARNATAKA 6 DR. BALBIR SINGH CHAUHAN 11/05/2009 02/07/2014 ALLAHABAD 7 ANANGA KUMAR PATNAIK 17/11/2009 03/06/2014 ORISSA 8 TIRATH SINGH THAKUR 17/11/2009 04/01/2017 JAMMU & KASHMIR 9 K.S.P. RADHAKRISHNAN 17/11/2009 15/05/2014 KERALA 10 SURINDER SINGH NIJJAR 17/11/2009 07/06/2014 PUNJAB & HARYANA 11 CHANDRAMAULI KUMAR PRASAD 08/02/2010 15/07/2014 PATNA 12 HEMANT LAXMAN GOKHALE 30/04/2010 10/03/2014 BOMBAY 13 SMT. GYAN SUDHA MISRA 30/04/2010 28/04/2014 PATNA 14 ANIL RAMESH DAVE 30/04/2010 19/11/2016 GUJARAT 15 S. J. MUKHOPADHAYA 13/09/2011 15/03/2015 JHARKHAND 16 SMT. R.P. DESAI 13/09/2011 30/10/2014 BOMBAY 17 JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR 13/09/2011 28/08/2017 PUNJAB & HARYANA 18 DIPAK MISRA 10/10/2011 03/10/2018 ORISSA 19 JASTI CHELAMESWAR 10/10/2011 23/06/2018 ANDHRA PRADESH 20 F.M.I.
    [Show full text]
  • [2013] 8 SCR 1 Performance of the Deed and for P
    [2013] 8 S.C.R. 1 2 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2013] 8 S.C.R. SARABJIT SINGH A A performance of the deed and for possession. In the suit v. he was not successful in getting any interim order in his STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS. favour. The appellant lodged FIR u/ss.420, 379, 427, 506, (Criminal Appeal No. 815 of 2013) 148 and 149 IPC, alleging that the vendor received Rs.3,00,000/- from him as consideration for agreement to JULY 1, 2013 B B sell. The vendor and the vendees (i.e. respondent No.4 [P. SATHASIVAM AND JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR, JJ.] and his brother) filed application seeking anticipatory bail. High Court granted bail. The vendees also filed a Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - s.482 - Quashing of complaint alleging harassment by Police in furtherance FIR - FIR u/ss. 420, 379, 427, 506, 148 and 149 IPC - Alleging of FIR lodged by the appellant. In the enquiry report in that one of the accused had taken Rs.3,00,000/- from him as C C the case of complaint by the vendees, it was concluded consideration pursuant to an agreement to sell a piece of land by the Superintendent of Police that the FIR by appellant - In addition, he also implicated the person to whom the was only to pressurize the vendees and the vendor. accused (vendor) had sold the land - During pendency of the The vendees approached the High Court, because investigation in FIR, complaint by the vendees of the land they were repeatedly summoned by the police authorities alleging harassment by police in pursuance of the FIR - After D D despite the favourable report.
    [Show full text]
  • Foreign Delegations in Supreme Court 25
    CONTENTS Appointments and Retirements in the Supreme Court of India. 2 Appointments in the High Courts . 3 - 4 Vacancies in the Courts 5 - 6 Institution, Disposal and Pendency of Cases in the Supreme Court. 7 Institution, Disposal and Pendency of Cases in the High Courts .. 8 Institution, Disposal and Pendency of Cases in the District and Subordinate Courts .. 9 Some Supreme Court Judgments / Orders of Public Importance.... 10 - 19 Major activities of National Judicial Academy. 20 - 21 Major activities of National Legal Services Authority. 22 - 24 Some Major events................................................................................ 25 Foreign delegations in Supreme Court 25 Some Important Visits and Conferences 26 - 28 This newsletter is intended to provide public access to information on the activities and achievements of the Indian Judiciary in general. While every care has been taken to ensure accuracy and to avoid errors/omissions, information given in the newsletter is merely for reference and must not be taken as having the authority of, or being binding in any way on, the Editorial Board of the newsletter and the officials involved in compilation thereof, who do not owe any responsibility whatsoever for any loss, damage, or distress to any person, whether or not a user of this publication, on account of any action taken or not taken on the basis of the information given in this newsletter. 2 COURT NEWS, APRIL - JUNE, 2017 APPOINTMENTS AND RETIREMENTS IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (FROM 01-04-2017 TO 30-06-2017) RETIREMENT Name of the Hon’ble Judge Date of Retirement Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pinaki Chandra Ghose 28-05-2017 COURT NEWS, APRIL - JUNE, 2017 3 APPOINTMENTS IN THE HIGH COURTS (FROM 01-04-2017 TO 30-06-2017) S.No.
    [Show full text]