Latest news with #KVViswanathan
Time of India
16 hours ago
- Business
- Time of India
Arunachal land for defence: SC stays Rs 410 cr recompense; Ref Court fixed compensation for land eight times of mkt rate
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Friday stayed an order of the Itanagar bench of Gauhati HC asking the Centre to deposit 50% of Rs 418 crore compensation, which the govt alleged was vitiated by forgery, for acquisition of 537 acres of land for defence projects in remote Indo-China border areas of Arunachal Pradesh. Appearing for the Union govt, additional solicitor general S D Sanjay told a bench led by Justice K V Viswanathan that one man forged and fabricated power of attorneys of 102 landowners and approached the Reference court for reassessment of the market value of the land, which the authorities had pegged at Rs 70 crore and paid the landowners. Sanjay said despite the govt pointing out the mischief played by one person, as against the rest of the landowners having recorded their satisfaction in cumulatively receiving Rs 70 crore as compensation, the Reference Court determined the market price of land in the remote areas to be eight times the rate arrived at by authorities. How did the land in the remote Indo-China border areas of Arunachal Pradesh rise from Rs 10-12 lakh per acre to nearly 80 lakh per acre, the ASG asked. The bench said it was the Union govt counsel which had agreed to deposit 10% of Rs 418 crore before the Itanagar bench and hence, it must do the same. The SC directed the Centre to deposit Rs 41.8 crore before the Itanagar Bench registry and ordered suspension of operation of the Reference Court's order. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like 2025 Top Trending Local Enterprise Accounting Software [Click Here] Accounting ERP Click Here Undo The Union govt has pointed out that the redetermination of compensation amount was vitiated by 'forgery, fabrication and fraud played by one Dagli Riba, who alone had moved the Reference Court based on forged and fabricated power of attorneys of 102 landowners.' The Centre said the landowners had received compensation at the rate determined earlier and signed the deed of acceptance in November 2023 and did not approach the reference court for enhancement of compensation. It accused Riba of taking advantage of the situation to play fraud with the intention of pocketing the arbitrarily enhanced compensation amount. The defence ministry had on Feb 16, 2023, approved a proposal to acquire 537 acres in the general area of Bame village under Basar Circle, Leparada district in Arunachal Pradesh (border area) for establishment of Corps Ammunition Point. It had fixed the market rate of Rs 12.9 lakh per acre as compensation, totalling Rs 70 crore.
NDTV
2 days ago
- Politics
- NDTV
UP Government Gives Rs 5 Lakh Aid To Accused Over Delay In Release From Jail
New Delhi: Following Supreme Court's reprimand, the UP government on Friday said a man, whose release from prison was delayed for about a month after getting bail, has been compensated with Rs 5 lakh. The man, booked under the provisions of the state's anti-conversion law, was granted bail by the top court on April 29 but released from Ghaziabad district jail only on June 24 -- indicating a delay of 28 days. On June 25, the top court while pulling up the state authorities over the delay, ordered a Rs 5 lakh compensation and asked UP government to report on compliance. On Friday, the state's counsel informed a bench of Justices K V Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh that the state had complied with the direction and paid the compensation. The man's counsel confirmed having received the amount. The top court granted bail to the accused on April 29 and subsequently on May 27, a trial court in Ghaziabad issued his release. On June 25, when the top court was informed about the man's release the previous day, it said liberty was a "very valuable and precious" right guaranteed under the Constitution. The man, the top court said, had lost his liberty for at least 28 days due to a "trivial non-issue". The bench also took strong exception over the delay on the ground that a sub-section of a provision of Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021 was not mentioned in the bail order. It had passed the order on a plea by the accused seeking a modification of the April 29 order to specifically include clause (1) of section 5 of the 2021 Act. The bench then ordered an enquiry into the matter by the principal district and sessions judge, Ghaziabad. The enquiry's focus was directed to be on the reason behind the delay. On June 25, the state's counsel said the trial court's May 27 order mentioned all details except Sub-Section (1) of Section 5 of the Act and, therefore, a plea for correction was filed by the jail authorities on May 28. Since the application was not disposed of earlier, she said, the petitioner was not released. The lawyer further informed the bench that the man was released post the order's correction. The man was booked under Section 366 (kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel her marriage etc) of the erstwhile IPC and Sections 3 and 5 (Prohibition of conversion from one religion to another religion by misrepresentation, force, fraud, undue influence, coercion, allurement) of the 2021 Act. On Friday, the bench posted the examination of the inquiry report on August 25.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Business
- Time of India
JAL promoters file petition in SC over land cancellation in Noida
Noida: Jai Prakash Associates Ltd 's (JAL) promoters have filed a special leave petition (SLP) in Supreme Court, challenging the Allahabad high court's decision that upheld the cancellation of the group's Sports City land along the Yamuna Expressway by the Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority (YEIDA). However, the court refused to grant any interim stay or relief on the plea filed on June 7. Instead, it issued notice and directed the current SLP be tagged with the already pending related case. The petitioners had requested the court to maintain the status quo on the land. YEIDA had argued there was no justification for granting relief to the promoters at this stage citing two other SLPs where "no stay or status quo was granted". You Can Also Check: Noida AQI | Weather in Noida | Bank Holidays in Noida | Public Holidays in Noida This development marks yet another legal twist in the protracted battle over the 1,000-hectare Sports City land, originally allotted to JAL for developing a mixed-use project with sports infrastructure, including the Buddh International Circuit. The land was cancelled by YEIDA in Feb 2020, citing non-payment of dues and violation of lease conditions. This led to multiple rounds of litigation. The next hearing in the case is scheduled for July 29. by Taboola by Taboola Sponsored Links Sponsored Links Promoted Links Promoted Links You May Like Giao dịch CFD với công nghệ và tốc độ tốt hơn IC Markets Đăng ký Undo The SLP — filed by Sunil Kumar Sharma and another suspended promoter in their personal capacity as guarantors to JAL's debt — came up for hearing on Monday before a bench comprising Justices KV Viswanathan and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh. The counsel, appearing for the petitioners, argued that the resumption of the land by the Yamuna Authority following the cancellation order substantially increased their liabilities as guarantors under the insolvency process. They argued the 1,000-hectare land parcel in question — part of the Sports City project — is a key asset for JAL's financial recovery and revival under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC). However, the legal team representing YEIDA objected to any interim relief. It submitted that two other SLPs — one filed by JAL through its insolvency resolution professional (IRP) and another by the committee of creditors (CoC) — were already heard by the court and no stay or status quo was granted. In March, Allahabad high court upheld YEIDA's cancellation order and directed the Authority to take over the land and complete the incomplete group housing projects. launched by JAL over a decade ago.
Time of India
2 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
SC to hear plea against Maratha quota in July
New Delhi: The Supreme Court will take up a plea seeking stay on the Maratha quota law in July. A plea has been filed in the top Court challenging the Bombay High Court 's interim order, which refused to stay the Maratha quota law and allowed the community to provisionally avail the 10% reservation , subject to the result of the petitions challenging it. A division bench comprising Justices KV Viswanathan and NK Singh Thursday allowed the listing of the plea on the week commencing July 14 (when the Supreme Court reopens after summer break). The plea was mentioned by a lawyer seeking urgent listing of the matter. The counsel argued that the Bombay High Court refused to stay the Maratha reservation and allowed its operation on a provisional basis. A three-judge bench of the High Court passed the order on June 11 allowing the Maratha community to avail 10% reservation in education and employment, subject to the final outcome of the petitions challenging the 2024 Maratha quota law. The High Court also proposed to hold special Saturday sittings to hear the challenge, pursuant to a Supreme Court direction to decide the matter expeditiously. Economic Times WhatsApp channel )
Hindustan Times
3 days ago
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
Supreme Court flags misunderstanding around mediation in matrimonial cases
Jun 26, 2025 06:40 PM IST The Supreme Court on Thursday said there was a "misunderstanding" about the concept of mediation in matrimonial case and it was often thought mediation means parties have to be together. The apex court referred to the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 which talks about pre-institution mediation and settlement. (Pic used for representation) (Pexels) Justices K V Viswanathan and N Kotiswar Singh made the observation in a transfer petition. "In matrimonial matters, we find there is a misunderstanding on the concept of mediation," Justice Viswanathan said. He continued, "The moment we say mediation, they think we are asking them to be together. We are not interested whether they are together or separate. We just want a solution to the matter. We will prefer if they are together..." The apex court referred to the Commercial Courts Act, 2015 which talks about pre-institution mediation and settlement. "In Commercial Courts Act also, you have to go through this process," the bench observed.
