Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.28 seconds)Section 11 in The Right to Information Act, 2005 [Entire Act]
The Cpio, Supreme Court Of India, Tilak ... vs Subhash Chandra Agarwal & Anr. on 2 September, 2009
As emphasized by the Supreme Court in the judgment of Central Public
Information Officer, Supreme Court of India vs. Subhash Chandra Agarwal
in its judgment dated 13.11.2019, right to privacy and right to information have
to be treated as co-equals and none can take precedence over the other, rather a
balance needs to be struck. The following observations may also be relied upon
in that regard:
Justice K.S.Puttaswamy(Retd) And Anr. vs Union Of India And Ors. on 24 August, 2017
Further in K.S. Puttaswamy and Anr. v. Union of India and Ors. [(2017) 10
SCC 1], the Supreme Court observed as under:
Naresh Trehan vs Rakesh Kumar Gupta on 24 November, 2014
12. Further, in Naresh Trehan vs Rakesh Kumar Gupta [W.P.(C)
85/2010 & CM Nos.156/2010 & 5560/2011], the Delhi High Court made the
following observations:
Centrlal Board Of Sec.Education & Anr vs Aditya Bandopadhyay & Ors on 9 August, 2011
11. The Commission while taking into consideration the contentions raised
by the parties have taken note of the fact that inspection report as sought in the
RTI application contain details of clients of the banks including their transaction
and financial history which have been entrusted by them to their respective
banks or financial institutions in a fiduciary capacity. Further, in Central Board
Of Sec. Education &Anr. vs Aditya Bandopadhyay&Ors [2011 (8) SCC
497] vide order dated 09.08.2011 examined and explained the expression
'fiduciary relationship', and have illustrated a few relationships where parties
were involved in an act of fiduciary capacity including 'customers' in the
following words:
Section 35A in The Banking Regulation Act, 1949 [Entire Act]
The Income Tax Act, 1961
The Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934
Girish Ramchandra Deshpande vs Cen.Information Commr.& Ors on 3 October, 2012
The Supreme Court while deciding upon issues relating to personal
information of an individual in terms of his income tax returns passed the
following observations in Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. Central
Information Commr. [(2013) 1 SCC 212] :