Supreme Court of India Judgements

46468 Judgements hosted as on 12/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: February 2020

Cr P C

Cheating – Quashing of proceedings – There are no such specific allegations against the appellants being Managing Director or the Director of the company respectively – It is required to be noted that though the FIR was filed in the year 2000 and the charge-sheet was submitted/filed as far back as on 28.5.2004, the appellants were served with the summons only in the year 2017, i.e., after a period of approximately 13 years from the date of filing the charge-sheet. QUASHED

Feb 1, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUSHIL SETHI AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and M. R.…

Cr P C

Magistrate While Holding Inquiry U/s 202 CrPC Required To Take A Broad View And a Prima Facie Case: SC HELD criminal proceedings initiated are an abuse of process of law or the Court or not and/or whether the dispute is purely of civil nature or not and/or whether the civil dispute is tried to be given a colour of criminal dispute or not.

Feb 1, 2020 sclaw

  Magistrate While Holding Inquiry U/s 202 CrPC Required To Take A Broad View And a Prima Facie Case: SC [Read Judgment] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 31 Jan 2020 9:28 PM…

Municipal Laws

Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 – Section 351 – Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 – Section 3Z(2)(i) – Transferable Development Rights – legal heirs of the original owner of the land were the petitioners in one writ petition and eleven persons claiming to be the tenants, were the petitioners in the other writ petitions – Insofar as persons claiming to be the owners of the land are concerned, the Municipal Corporation itself had conceded before the High Court that they were willing to offer TDR.

Feb 1, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH MUNICIPAL COMMISSIONER, MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. PANNA MAHESH CHANDRA DAVE AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : N.V.…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 376(2)(g) and 506(1) – Tamil Nadu Prevention of Women Harassment Act, 1998 – Section 4 – Gang Rape – The victim’s testimony, along with her mother and aunt’s statements, was consistent with the initial complaint and corroborated by medical evidence – The defense argued that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – Whether the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies were not significant and did not affect the overall credibility of the evidence – The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The court rejected the defense’s argument that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The Supreme Court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant and rejected the defence’s arguments regarding inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Dismissal of Civil Suit – Condonation of delay – Standing to file an application – The court clarified that only parties to a suit or those who have accrued a right in the lis can file an application for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of the suit. A stranger to the proceedings cannot file such an application.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Haryana Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1979 – Section 3(1)(b) – State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 – Section 29 – The appeals arise from a High Court judgment regarding the recovery of time-barred debts under the Act, 1979, and the Act, 1951 – The main issue is whether a debt time-barred under the Limitation Act can be recovered using the aforementioned Acts – The appellants argued that time-barred debts cannot be recovered under the Recovery of Dues Act, citing the precedent set in V.R. Kalliyanikutty – The respondents argued that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act allow for time-barred debt recovery, as they only bar the remedy, not the right – The court examined whether the Recovery of Dues Act creates a new right for creditors and allows for time-barred debt recovery – The court discussed the distinction between a debt and the right of action for its recovery, noting that the statute of limitation bars the latter but not the former – The court concluded that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act provide an alternative mechanism for recovering debts, even if they are time-barred – Matter needs to be placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India to constitute an appropriate three-judge bench.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Law – Policy Claim – The appellants, family of the deceased, filed a complaint after the LIC repudiated their claim on a policy following the policyholder’s accidental death – The main issue was whether there was a concluded contract between the deceased and LIC at the time of his death, which would obligate LIC to pay the insurance benefits – The appellants argued that LIC had accepted the first premium and issued a receipt, thereby assuming risk and concluding the contract before the policyholder’s death – LIC contended that the policy was not communicated to the deceased and was blocked due to his demise, implying no concluded contract existed – The Supreme Court set aside the NCDRC’s order, restored the District Forum’s order in favor of the appellants, and directed LIC to pay the insurance benefits as per the policy terms – The Court found clear presumption of acceptance of the policy by LIC, as the first premium receipt indicated the corporation was on risk from the receipt date – The Court relied on precedents that establish the principles of insurance contracts and the obligations of good faith expected from insurers – The Supreme Court concluded that LIC had indeed entered into a contract with the policyholder before his death, and thus, was liable to pay the insurance benefits to the appellants.

May 12, 2024 sclaw