Specific Performance Of Re-Conveyance Deed Can’t Be Sought When Plaintiff Denies Defendant’s Title In Property
To provide a brief background that led to the instant appeal, it may be mentioned that the plaintiffs (Madhavan and Kaladevi) are father and daughter. The defendant (Kanakavally) was a…
Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes(Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Sections 3(2)(v) and 14A(1) – – Acquittal -There must be an allegation that the accused not being a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe committed an offence under the IPC punishable for a term of 10 years or more against a member of the Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe knowing that such person belongs to such ‘community’
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHASHIKANT SHARMA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Sandeep Mehta,…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 306 – Abetment of Suicide – Acquittal – The said incident allegedly happened more than two weeks before the date of suicide. There is no allegation that any act was done by the appellants in the close proximity to the date of suicide – By no stretch of the imagination, the alleged acts of the appellants can amount to instigation to commit suicide
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MOHIT SINGHAL AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal,…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 302 and 34 – Murder – Applicability of Section 34 of the IPC – For applying Section 34 IPC there should be a common intention of all the co-accused persons which means community of purpose and common design – Common intention does not mean that the co-accused persons should have engaged in any discussion or agreement so as to prepare a plan or hatch a conspiracy for committing the offence
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAM NARESH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…
Kannur University Act, 1996 – Section 10(9) and Section 10(10) – Re-appointment of Vice-Chancellor – It is the Chancellor who has been conferred with the competence under the Act 1996 to appoint or reappoint a Vice-Chancellor – No other person even the Pro-Chancellor or any superior authority can interfere with the functioning of the statutory authority and if any decision is taken by a statutory authority
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH DR. PREMACHANDRAN KEEZHOTH AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE CHANCELLOR KANNUR UNIVERSITY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI.,…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 120B – Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 – Section 3 – Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) not be applicable to criminal conspiracy under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) unless the conspiracy is specifically related to money laundering – PMLA to be invoked, the conspiracy must have a direct connection to money laundering activities
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PAVANA DIBBUR — Appellant Vs. THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Stamp Act 1899 – Section 35 – Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 65 – Unstamped document – Secondary evidence – If a document that is required to be stamped is not sufficiently stamped, then the position of law is well settled that a copy of such document as secondary evidence cannot be adduced
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VIJAY — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
(CrPC) – Sections 482, 378 and 407 – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 448, 454 and 380 – Theft – Discharge application – When coupled with the fact that the police did not find any offences having been made out against the appellants under Sections 454 and 380, IPC, the case against the appellants under Section 448, IPC finds itself on shaky ground – There is no suspicion, much less strong or grave suspicion that the appellants are guilty of the offence alleged
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VISHNU KUMAR SHUKLA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin…
Promotion by selection through LDCE vis-à-vis competitive examination is a facility or a chance given for out of their promotion without waiting for the normal course of promotion – It in effect is selection through competitive examination within the limited category of candidates and cannot be equated with normal promotion – This being the position, the argument that regular promotion criteria had to be applied with regard to medical fitness even in the matter of selection through LDCE is not acceptable
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PAVNESH KUMAR — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Civil…
Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education Act, 2009 – Section 23(1) – Appointment of teachers for Class I to VIII – Government cannot amend or supersede statutory rules by administrative instructions, but if the rules are silent on any particular point, it can fill up the gaps and supplement the rules and issue instructions not inconsistent with the rules already framed – An authority cannot issue orders/office memorandum/executive instructions in contravention of the statutory rules
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JAIVEER SINGH AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTARAKHAND AND OTHERS RESPONDENT ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ.…