Supreme Court of India Judgements

46660 Judgements hosted as on 19/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: February 2020

Consumer

CLAIM REPUDIATED on grounds ‘farmers’ were not ‘consumers’ within the meaning of C P Act, 1986 – HELD “consumer” under the Act is very wide and it not only includes the person who hires or avails of the services for consideration but also includes the beneficiary of such services who may be a person other than the person who hires or avails of services – CLAIM ALLOWED

Feb 6, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CANARA BANK @ APPELLANT @ HASH M/S UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LIMITED AND OTHERS @ RESPONDENT ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer and Deepak…

Service Matters
Service

STA Rules – Rule 5 – Seniority and pensionary benefits – Appellants are not entitled to have seniority determined in respect of vacancies of Inspector which arose prior to 07.12.2002 – Appellants are eligible to be considered for promotion from 20.01.2003 and they are entitled to add their service as Data Entry Operator Grade ‘B’ for the purpose of the 2002 Inspector Rules HELD This Court direct that the promotions shall be notional where promotions have already been effected, however, entitling the parties to seniority and pensionary benefits

Feb 6, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH D. RAGHU AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. R. BASAVESWARUDU AND OTHERS ETC. — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and K.M. Joseph, JJ.…

Limitation

Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 – Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 14 – Acquisition – Term of lease – After issuance of the notification dated 06.03.1976 and inclusion of the subject land therein, there was no occasion for the appellant acquiring any further right in the land after expiry of the term of lease on 30.06.1977 and hence, the alleged second lease for a period of 25 years was of no effect;

Feb 6, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. NATESAN AGENCIES (PLANTATIONS) — Appellant Vs. STATE REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT. ENVIRONMENT AND FOREST DEPARTMENT — Respondent ( Before : Uday…

Accident

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 168 – Compensation – Suffered serious injuries resulting in damage to brain -Normally interest should be granted from the date of filing of the petition and if in appeal enhancement is made the interest should again be from the date of filing of the petition.

Feb 5, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KAJAL — Appellant Vs. JAGDISH CHAND AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and Deepak Gupta, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…

Property Matters

Compromise Decree Which Does Not Take In Property That Is Not Subject Matter Of Suit Need No Registration: SC HELD “A compromise decree passed by a Court would ordinarily be covered by Section 17(1)(b) but subsection(2) of Section 17 provides for an exception for any decree or order of a Court except a decree or order expressed to be made on a compromise and comprising immovable property other than that which is the subject-matter of the suit or proceeding.

Feb 5, 2020 sclaw

Compromise Decree Which Does Not Take In Property That Is Not Subject Matter Of Suit Need No Registration: SC [Read Judgment] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 5 Feb 2020 6:41 PM The…

Cr P C

DEFAULT BAIL – HELD The provisions of the Code do not empower anyone to extend the period within which the investigation must be completed nor does it admit of any such eventuality. On the expiry of the said period of 90 days or 60 days, as the case may be, an indefeasible right accrues in favour of the accused for being released on bail on account of default by the investigating agency

Feb 4, 2020 sclaw

  1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1218 OF 2018 @ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.6453 OF 2018 Achpal @ Ramswaroop &…

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