1.   
    2. Legal Notices and Court Petitions   
    3. Supreme Court Petitions   
    4. SPECIAL LEAVE PETITIONS (CIVIL)

    SPECIAL LEAVE PETITIONS (CIVIL)

    Courtkutchehry.com offers Legal Notices and Court Petitions that touch upon a range of Legal requirements. Click on any document to purchase and download.

    10 results
    SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CIVIL) TO BE FILED BEFORE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ASSAILING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT DISMISSING A PETITION IN LIMNIE BY PASSING A NON REASONED ORDER AND BY ONLY MENTIONING “NO ORDER”
    special leave petition (civil) to be filed before hon’ble supreme court of india assailing the impugned order passed by the hon’ble high court dismissing a petition in limnie by passing a non reasoned order and by only mentioning “no order”
    WRIT PETITION (PIL) IN PUBLIC INTEREST UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA TO BE FILED BEFORE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SEEKING ISSUANCE OF APPROPRIATE WRIT OR DIRECTIONS FROM THE HON’BLE COURT ON THE ASPECT OF UTILIZATION / MISUSE / MISAPPROPRIATION OF “SECRET SERVICE FUNDS” OF THE POLICE WITH DIRECTION THAT A THOROUGH AND DETAILED INQUIRY BE ORDERED TO BE CONDUCTED BY THE CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (CBI), INTO THE UTILIZATION / MISUSE / MISAPPROPRIATION OF SUCH FUNDS WHICH ARE APPROXIMATELY TO THE TUNE OF SEVERAL HUNDRED CRORES WITH FURTHER DIRECTION THEREBY CALLING ALL THE STATES TO FILE STATUS REPORT OF “SECRET SERVICE FUNDS” MAINTAINED BY THEM INCLUDING THE DETAILS OFF ALL THE CORRUPTION RELATED INQUIRES WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN CARRIED OUT AND THERE OUTCOMES, IF ANY, SO FAR AND ALSO DIRECTIONS TO CALL FOR THE RECORDS FROM THE OFFICE OF COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA (CAG), PERTAINING TO ALL THE STATES FOR LAST 10 YEARS.
    writ petition (pil) in public interest under article 32 of the constitution of india to be filed before hon’ble supreme court of india seeking issuance of appropriate writ or directions from the hon’ble court on the aspect of utilization / misuse / misappropriation of “secret service funds” of the police with direction that a thorough and detailed inquiry be ordered to be conducted by the central bureau of investigation (cbi), into the utilization / misuse / misappropriation of such funds which are approximately to the tune of several hundred crores with further direction thereby calling all the states to file status report of “secret service funds” maintained by them including the details off all the corruption related inquires which may have been carried out and there outcomes, if any, so far and also directions to call for the records from the office of comptroller and auditor general of india (cag), pertaining to all the states for last 10 years.
    SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION UNDER ORDER XVI RULE 4(1) (A) READ WITH ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA TO BE FILED BEFORE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ASSAILING THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT IN W.P. (PIL) WHEREBY THE HON’BLE DIVISION BENCH HAS DISMISSED THE PETITION OF THE PETITIONER ON THE GROUND THAT THIS HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA HAVE VIDE ORDER PASSED IN WP(C) NO.292 OF 2011 DECLINED TO REFER THE INVESTIGATION OF “SECRET SERVICE FUND” TO THE CBI FOR LAST TEN YEARS ON THE GROUND THAT THERE IS NO STATUARY PROVISION FOR THE SAME BUT THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT ERRED IN APPRECIATING THAT THE SAID ORDER OF THIS HON’BLE SUPREME COURT IS IN THE NATURE OF A GENERAL ORDER AND THE SAME DOES NOT COME IN WAY OF THE RELIEFS PRAYED IN THE PRESENT W.P. (PIL) AS THE NATURE OF ALLEGATIONS MADE IN THIS PETITION IS OF PARTICULAR NATURE AND THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT, NOT WITHSTANDING THE ORDER OF THE APEX COURT IN W.P. (C) CAN DEFINITELY INTERFERE UNDER ITS INHERENT JURISDICTION AND / OR EVEN THE STATE GOVERNMENT CAN INTERFERE AND ORDER FOR THE INVESTIGATION INTO THE “SECRET SERVICE FUND” EITHER BY THE CBI AND / OR BY ANY OTHER APPROPRIATE AGENCY BY INVOKING PROVISION OF DELHI SPECIAL POLICE ESTABLISHMENT ACT 1946
    special leave petition under order xvi rule 4(1) (a) read with article 32 of the constitution of india to be filed before hon’ble supreme court of india assailing the impugned judgment and order passed by the hon’ble high court in w.p. (pil) whereby the hon’ble division bench has dismissed the petition of the petitioner on the ground that this hon’ble supreme court of india have vide order passed in wp(c) no.292 of 2011 declined to refer the investigation of “secret service fund” to the cbi for last ten years on the ground that there is no statuary provision for the same but the hon’ble high court erred in appreciating that the said order of this hon’ble supreme court is in the nature of a general order and the same does not come in way of the reliefs prayed in the present w.p. (pil) as the nature of allegations made in this petition is of particular nature and the hon’ble high court, not withstanding the order of the apex court in w.p. (c) can definitely interfere under its inherent jurisdiction and / or even the state government can interfere and order for the investigation into the “secret service fund” either by the cbi and / or by any other appropriate agency by invoking provision of delhi special police establishment act 1946
    APPEAL UNDER SECTION 55 OF THE MONOPOLIES & RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICES ACT, 1969 READ WITH ORDER XX-A OF THE SUPREME COURT RULES, 1966 TO BE FILED BEFORE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AGAINST THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND FINAL ORDER PASSED BY THE MONOPOLIES & RESTRICTIVE TRADE PRACTICES COMMISSION IN A UTPE WHEREBY THE HON’BLE COMMISSION HAS PASSED A “CEASE AND DESIST” ORDER AGAINST THE APPELLANT AND HAS DIRECTED THE APPELLANT NOT TO CLAIM ESCALATION CHARGES FOR INCREASE IN THE COST OF MATERIAL AND LABOUR CHARGES AND ALSO DIRECTED THE APPELLANT TO REFUND THE SAME, IF ALREADY REALIZED AND ALSO TO REFUND THE HOLDING CHARGES AS THE APPELLANT HAS INDULGED IN UNFAIR TRADE PRACTICES
    appeal under section 55 of the monopolies & restrictive trade practices act, 1969 read with order xx-a of the supreme court rules, 1966 to be filed before hon’ble supreme court of india against the impugned judgment and final order passed by the monopolies & restrictive trade practices commission in a utpe whereby the hon’ble commission has passed a “cease and desist” order against the appellant and has directed the appellant not to claim escalation charges for increase in the cost of material and labour charges and also directed the appellant to refund the same, if already realized and also to refund the holding charges as the appellant has indulged in unfair trade practices
    SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA TO BE FILED BEFORE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AGAINST THE IMPUGNED FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT IN A FAO (OS) WHEREBY THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE RESPONDENTS BY TOTALLY IGNORING THE FACTS THAT WHILE THE APPLICATION LABELED AS ONE UNDER ORDER 23 RULE 3 CPC WAS SIGNED BY THE PETITIONER ALONGWITH THE RESPONDENT BUT THE SAID APPLICATION DID NOT SEEK RECORDING OF COMPROMISE AND INSTEAD SOUGHT WITHDRAWAL OF THE CIVIL SUIT AND THE SAID APPLICATION WAS UNILATERALLY FILED BY THE RESPONDENT WITHOUT THE PETITIONER BEING PERSONALLY PRESENT IN THE COURT TO RECORD HIS STATEMENT FOR COMPROMISE AS STIPULATED UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF ORDER 23 RULE 3 CPC
    special leave petition under article 32 of the constitution of india to be filed before hon’ble supreme court of india against the impugned final judgment and order passed by the hon’ble high court in a fao (os) whereby the hon’ble high court allowed the appeal of the respondents by totally ignoring the facts that while the application labeled as one under order 23 rule 3 cpc was signed by the petitioner alongwith the respondent but the said application did not seek recording of compromise and instead sought withdrawal of the civil suit and the said application was unilaterally filed by the respondent without the petitioner being personally present in the court to record his statement for compromise as stipulated under the provisions of order 23 rule 3 cpc
    SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA TO BE FILED BEFORE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SEEKING LEAVE TO APPEAL AGAINST THE IMPUGNED JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. SINGLE JUDGE OF HON’BLE HIGH COURT IN C.C.P.O (CONTEMPT PETITION) FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN C.S.(OS) WHEREBY THE LD. SINGLE JUDGE HAS WHILE DISMISSING A CONTEMPT PETITION, HAD OBSERVED THAT “I AM NOT INCLINED TO DEAL WITH THE ALLEGATIONS MADE IN THE APPLICATION. HENCE DISMISSED BUT THE LD. SINGLE JUDGE DID NOT APPRECIATE THAT THE SAID OBSERVATION PRIMA FACIE PROVE THAT HAD NOT GONE INTO THE MERITS OF THE CASE AND THE DISMISSAL OF THE CONTEMPT PETITION WAS ACTUALLY REFUSAL ON THE PART OF THE LD. SINGLE JUDGE TO EXERCISE HIS JURISDICTION
    special leave petition under article 32 of the constitution of india to be filed before hon’ble supreme court of india seeking leave to appeal against the impugned judgment and order passed by the ld. single judge of hon’ble high court in c.c.p.o (contempt petition) filed by the petitioner in c.s.(os) whereby the ld. single judge has while dismissing a contempt petition, had observed that “i am not inclined to deal with the allegations made in the application. hence dismissed but the ld. single judge did not appreciate that the said observation prima facie prove that had not gone into the merits of the case and the dismissal of the contempt petition was actually refusal on the part of the ld. single judge to exercise his jurisdiction
    SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 32 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA TO BE FILED BEFORE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER/ JUDGMENT PASSED BY THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT IN A C.W.P. VIDE WHICH THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT HAD DISMISSED THE SAID WRIT PETITION IN LIMINIE AND RESULTANTLY THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT HAS ERRED IN LAW IN NOT APPRECIATING THAT THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER OF THE CASE HAD IN A MALAFIDE MANNER AND IN AN UNCANNY HASTE ARRIVED AT FINDING/CONCLUSION THAT THE CASES ARE OF CIVIL IN NATURE THEREBY FRUSTRATING THE LEGAL RIGHTS OF THE PETITIONERS WHICH IS APPARENT FROM THE FACT THAT THE CONSISTENT STAND OF THE INVESTIGATING OFFICER BEFORE THE DIFFERENT COURTS WAS THAT THE ACCUSED HAD IN A PRE-PLANNED CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY CHEATED THE INNOCENT CUSTOMERS OF SEVERAL CORES OF RUPEES AND IN FACT THE I.O. HAD STATED IN HIS REPLY FILED IN HIGH COURT THAT CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION OF THE ACCUSED WAS REQUIRED TO ASCERTAIN THE TRUTH.
    special leave petition under article 32 of the constitution of india to be filed before hon’ble supreme court of india against the impugned order/ judgment passed by the hon’ble high court in a c.w.p. vide which the hon’ble high court had dismissed the said writ petition in liminie and resultantly the hon’ble high court has erred in law in not appreciating that the investigating officer of the case had in a malafide manner and in an uncanny haste arrived at finding/conclusion that the cases are of civil in nature thereby frustrating the legal rights of the petitioners which is apparent from the fact that the consistent stand of the investigating officer before the different courts was that the accused had in a pre-planned criminal conspiracy cheated the innocent customers of several cores of rupees and in fact the i.o. had stated in his reply filed in high court that custodial investigation of the accused was required to ascertain the truth.
    SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL UNDER ARTICLES 136 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA TO BE FILED BEFORE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AGAINST THE FINAL JUDGMENT AND ORDER PASSED BY HON’BLE HIGH COURT IN C.O.C.P. WHEREBY THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT HAS DISMISSED THE PETITION OF THE PETITIONERS IN LIMNIE AND RESULTANTLY THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE LITIGANTS TO MAKE SOLEMN ASSURANCES & STATEMENTS AND GIVE UNDERTAKINGS BEFORE THE COURTS BASED UPON WHICH ORDERS ARE PASSED BY THE HON’BLE COURTS AND LATER ON THE HIGH COURT PERMITTED THE LITIGANTS TO FLOUT THOSE UNDERTAKINGS AND ORDERS AND INSTEAD OF ENTERTAINING THE CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS AGAINST SUCH LITIGANTS, THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT REQUIRED THE PETITIONER TO FILE EXECUTION OF THE ORDER OF THE COURT BEFORE WHOM SUCH UNDERTAKING WAS GIVEN BY THE DEFAULTING PARTY
    special leave to appeal under articles 136 of the constitution of india to be filed before hon’ble supreme court of india against the final judgment and order passed by hon’ble high court in c.o.c.p. whereby the hon’ble high court has dismissed the petition of the petitioners in limnie and resultantly the hon’ble high court has erred in allowing the litigants to make solemn assurances & statements and give undertakings before the courts based upon which orders are passed by the hon’ble courts and later on the high court permitted the litigants to flout those undertakings and orders and instead of entertaining the contempt proceedings against such litigants, the hon’ble high court required the petitioner to file execution of the order of the court before whom such undertaking was given by the defaulting party
    SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION UNDER ARTICLES 136 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA TO BE FILED BEFORE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AGAINST THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT IN CIVIL REVISION (O&M), WHEREBY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE HAS IN-LIMINE DISMISSED THE CIVIL REVISION PETITION PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER SEEKING SETTING ASIDE OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LD. ADDL. DISTRICT JUDGE AND THE LD. SINGLE JUDGE PASSED THE IMPUGNED ORDER WITHOUT DECIDING THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER UNDER ORDER 1 RULE 10 READ WITH ORDER 23 RULE 1A OF THE CPC SEEKING LEAVE TO BE TRANSPOSED AS A PETITIONER IN THE CIVIL REVISION PETITION
    special leave petition under articles 136 of the constitution of india to be filed before hon’ble supreme court of india against the impugned order passed by the learned single judge of the high court in civil revision (o&m), whereby the learned single judge has in-limine dismissed the civil revision petition preferred by the petitioner seeking setting aside of the order passed by the ld. addl. district judge and the ld. single judge passed the impugned order without deciding the application filed by the petitioner under order 1 rule 10 read with order 23 rule 1a of the cpc seeking leave to be transposed as a petitioner in the civil revision petition
    SPECIAL LEAVE TO APPEAL UNDER ARTICLES 136 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA TO BE FILED BEFORE HON’BLE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ASSAILING THE IMPUGNED ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE OF THE HIGH COURT IN NOTICE OF MOTION FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN THE ALREADY DISPOSED OFF BATCH OF BUNCH SUITS WHEREBY THE LEARNED SINGLE JUDGE HAS BY PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER VIRTUALLY STAYED ITS OWN CONSENT ORDER AS MODIFIED SUBSEQUENTLY BY CONSENT ORDER IN A BATCH OF BUNCH SUITS WHICH WERE FINALLY DISPOSED OFF VIA COMPROMISE VIDE CONSENT MINUTES OF THE ORDER / AMENDED CONSENT MINUTES OF THE ORDER
    special leave to appeal under articles 136 of the constitution of india to be filed before hon’ble supreme court of india assailing the impugned order passed by the learned single judge of the high court in notice of motion filed by the respondent in the already disposed off batch of bunch suits whereby the learned single judge has by passing the impugned order virtually stayed its own consent order as modified subsequently by consent order in a batch of bunch suits which were finally disposed off via compromise vide consent minutes of the order / amended consent minutes of the order