Supreme Court of India Judgements

46448 Judgements hosted as on 05/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: March 2019

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950, Art. 19 (2)–Ban on Book HELD the creativity and the author’s perception of the uni­ verse are to be borne in mind. What is true to poetry is applicable to novels or any creative writing. It has to be kept uppermost in mind that the imagination of a writer has to enjoy freedom. It cannot be asked to succumb to specifics. That will tantamount to imposition. A writer should have free play with words, like a painter has it with colours. The passion of imagination cannot be directed.

Mar 3, 2019 sclaw

2019(1) Law Herald (SC) 396 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 2130 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Chief Justice Dipak Mishra Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.M. Khanwilkar Hon’ble Mr. Justice…

C P C

Auction Sale—Recalling of Order—Execution of Decree—During the pendency of execution second appeal before High Court decreetal amount had been deposited with District Court—Such fact was not brought on record before Supreme Court which had earlier dismissed the objections in conducting auction sale-Impugned order recalled by Supreme Court-Order of auction sale set aside.      

Mar 1, 2019 sclaw

2019(1) Law Herald (SC) 348 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 546 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri Hon’ble Mr. Justice S. Abdul Nazeer Hon’ble Mr. Justice…

Acquittal

Identification of Prisons Act, 1920, S.4–Sample of Fingerprints-­ Police officer is competent to take finger print from crime scene without the orders from Magistrate–To dispel doubts as to its bona fides and to rule out the fabrication of evidence, it is eminently desirable that they were taken before or under the order of a Magistrate-Evidence Act, 1872, S.27.

Mar 1, 2019 sclaw

2019(1) Law Herald (SC) 333 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 524 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar Criminal Appeal No.…

Cheque Dishonour

Dishonour of Cheque—Blank Cheque—Subsequent filing in of an unfilled signed cheque is not an alteration. Dishonour of Cheque—Presumption of debt—The existence of a fiduciary relationship between the payee of a cheque and its drawer, would not disentitle the payee to the benefit of the presumption under Section 139.

Mar 1, 2019 sclaw

2019(1) Law Herald (SC) 321 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 525 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mrs. Justice R. Banumathi Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Indira Banerjee Criminal Appeal Nos. 230-231…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 120-B read with Section 420 – Cheating – The case involves fraudulent transactions by accused in connivance with Indian Bank officials resulting in interest-free advances to the petitioners – The main issue is whether the petitioners were involved in cheating the bank and if they availed any undue benefit from the fraudulent transactions – The petitioners argued that they were not involved in the cheating, had not availed any undue benefit, and that the transactions were normal business dealings – The court dismissed the Special Leave Petitions, upholding the Trial Court’s conviction of the petitioners for cheating the bank through unauthorized transactions.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Condonation of Delay – Delay of 1663 days – The State of U.P. filed a SLP against an order dated 13.11.2009 by the Allahabad High Court, with a delay of 1,633 days – The main issue was the condonation of the significant delay in filing the SLP – The State argued that the delay was due to the time taken for obtaining legal opinion and permissions, and later, the realization that the appeal was not filed initially – The application for condonation of delay was dismissed, and consequently, the SLP was also dismissed – The court found the explanation for the delay unsatisfactory, especially since the State was aware of the High Court’s order when it was passed – The court did not find sufficient cause to condone the delay, leading to the dismissal of the SLP.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Property Matters

Partition Suit – The dispute involves partition of properties left by Late ‘R’ with the main contention over roof rights of a property in Kota and another in Jaipur – The primary issue is the valuation of roof rights for further construction and the equal distribution of property among co-sharers – The appellants argue that the valuation report failed to assess the value of roof rights, which would affect the overall property valuation and entitlement of co-sharers – The respondents maintain that the property valuation and shares were appropriately determined by the approved Valuer and upheld by both the Trial Court and High Court – The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in revaluating the property or altering the determined shares of the parties – The Court emphasized the importance of family ties over property disputes and suggested alternative dispute resolution methods for amicable settlements – The Court referenced the case of Afcons Infrastructure Limited vs. Cherian Varkey Construction Company Private Limited, advocating for ADR in family-related property disputes – The Supreme Court concluded that revisiting the valuation and partition would only prolong litigation and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Constitution Municipal Laws

West Bengal Municipal(Building) Rules, 2007 – Rule 50 – Open spaces for building in areas other than municipalities in hill areas – The appellants challenge the High Court of Calcutta’s order regarding a contempt petition related to their residential property construction and its compliance with Rule 50 of Rules, 2007 – The appellants argue that the writ petition was a private matter and should not have been entertained by the High Court – They also claim that municipal authorities are unfairly pressuring them due to the contempt proceedings – The respondent claims that the appellants violated the sanctioned building plan, justifying the High Court’s direction for an enquiry – The Supreme Court allowed the appellants to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, ensuring their objections would be considered objectively without prejudice from the contempt or writ proceedings – The court expressed reservations about the High Court’s exercise of writ jurisdiction in a private dispute and suggested the civil court as the appropriate forum for grievances – The appeal was disposed of with the appellants given the liberty to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, without cost order.

May 5, 2024 sclaw