Supreme Court of India Judgements

46650 Judgements hosted as on 11/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: July 2019

Accident

Accident—Loss of Future Earning—Non earning victim—Legal principles laid down Accident—Speedy disposal of Claim Petitions—Directions issued for establishment of Motor Accidents Mediation Authority in every district Accident—Speedy disposal of Claim Petitions—Police to complete investigation and file FIR and provide all documents in form of evidence to MACT and Insurance Company—Insurance Company to decide within 30 days whether claim is payable otherwise MACT to decide petition within 30 days

Jul 6, 2019 sclaw

2019(2) Law Herald (SC) 1658 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 940: 2019) 1 ACC 730 : (2019) 1 ILR(Kerala) 883 : (2019) 2 JBCJ 35 : (2019) 2 KerLJ 253 : (2019)…

Consumer

Consumer—Revision petition against an order passed by State Commission in execution proceedings before National Commission is not maintainable Execution Petition—Execution proceedings even though they are proceedings in a suit, but cannot be considered to be a continuation of the original suit

Jul 6, 2019 sclaw

2019(2) Law Herald (SC) 1584 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 1016 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Honlrie Mr. Justice Uday Umesh Lalit Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Indu Malhotra Civil Appeal No.…

Service Matters
Service

Advocates—An advocate cannot work merely as mouth piece of his client while making presentation before the Court—He must tell the Court the correct position of law The College being affiliated to the University was bound by the provisions of the Act with its attendant consequences for noncompliance-Order of termination, passed without approval of Vice chancellor in violation of statutory rules, set aside.

Jul 6, 2019 sclaw

2019(2) Law Herald (SC) 1578 : 2019 LawHerald.Org 1015 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arun Mishra Hon’ble Mr. Justice Navin Sinha Civil Appeal No(s). 4794…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw
Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw