Month: June 2020

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Sections 10 and 25 – Succession Act, 1925 – Section 270 – Suit for partition – Transfer of – A petition u/s 25 of the Code, however, is not decided on consideration on the “First past the post” . Bombay High Court, which is hearing the Testamentary petition (Probate), will decide the partition suit as well.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SINGLE BENCH SHAMITA SINGHA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. RASHMI AHLUWALIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose, J. ) Transfer Petition (Civil)…

Motor Vehicle – Just and Proper compensation – Enhancement of compensation – Horse cart was hit by a bus resulting into deaths – Deduction on account of contributory negligence held to be unsustainable – Therefore total compensation payable to the appellants in the first appeal at Rs.11,96,000/. Child death cosiderations determination shall not depend upon financial position of the victim or the claimant but rather on the capacity and ability of the deceased to provide happiness in life to the claimants had she remained alive.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS @APPELLAN Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Navin Sinha and B.R. Gavai, JJ.…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Sections 156(3) and 173 – Protest petition – When a complaint sent to police under/S 156(3) for investigation and then a protest petition is filed, the Magistrate after accepting the final report of the police under Section 173 and discharging the accused persons has the power to deal with the protest petition.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUBHASH SAHEBRAO DESHMUKH — Appellant Vs. SATISH ATMARAM TALEKAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Navin Sinha and Indira Banerjee, JJ. )…

Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 – Section 3 – Muslim divorce – Maintenance – Whether the family court has jurisdiction to try application filed by Muslim divorced woman for maintenance under Section 3 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 – Matter be placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for referring the matter to the Larger Bench.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RANA NAHID @ RESHMA @ SANA AND ANOTHERS — Appellant Vs. SAHIDUL HAQ CHISTI — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and Indira…

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – Section 2(30) – Definition of the expression ‘owner’ in Section 2(30) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, it is the person in whose name the motor vehicle stands registered, who, for the purposes of the said Act, would be treated as the owner of the vehicle.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SURENDRA KUMAR BHILAWE — Appellant Vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and Indira Banerjee, JJ.…

Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 – Sections 12, 16, 16(1)(b) and 18 – Appeal against order of allotment or release – Sub-letting the property to some other persons who were not the family members of the tenant – A perusal of the inspection report clearly established, that the original tenant was residing in the tenanted premises along with his son, brother’s son and their families. Appeal allowed.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MOHD. INAM — Appellant Vs. SANJAY KUMAR SINGHAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Navin Sinha and B.R. Gavai, JJ. ) Civil…

Government has no right to walk into the Court as and when they want “We have categorized such cases as “certificate cases” where the only purpose is to approach this court to get a certificate of dismissal of the appeal/petition and such endeavours must be discouraged.”

Filing Of ‘Certificate Cases’ Must Be Discouraged, Says SC [Read Order] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 21 Jun 2020 11:27 AM “We have categorized such cases as “certificate cases” where the only…

Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 136 – Rajasthan Transparency in Public Procurement Rules, 2013 – Rule 70(8) – Grant of contract – Once the bidding process is complete, the appellant is entitled to take work from the successful bidders rather than taking work from the short-term tenderers who were granted contract in exigency of the situation.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJASTHAN STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION — Appellant Vs. STAR AGRIWAREHOUSING AND COLLATERAL MANAGEMENT LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and…

IMP ::: Jagannath Rath Yatra – This Court Suggested to the parties that the procession of chariots, i.e., the Rath Yatra itself, could be allowed to proceed, however, without the general congregation which participates in this Yatra and informed that it would be well nigh impossible to ensure that there is no congregation

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ODISHA VIKASH PARISHAD — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Mr. S.A. Bobde, CJ., Mr. Dinesh Maheshwari…

You missed

Temple Bye Laws — Oachira Parabrahma Temple — Ancient structure without a building or deity, governed by Bye-laws with three-tier elected committees — Appellants, elected Secretary and President, challenged two High Court orders (2020 and 2023) that removed their committee and appointed an unelected one under an Administrative Head, citing violations of the temple’s Bye-laws and customs —Legality of appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one contrary to the temple’s Bye-laws — Petitioner argues that the High Court overstepped its jurisdiction and violated the temple’s governance structure by appointing an unelected committee and removing the elected one without proper legal basis — The High Court’s actions were necessary for the efficient administration of the temple until a scheme could be framed and new elections held — The Supreme Court modified the High Court orders, appointing a new retired Judge as Administrative Head to conduct fair elections within four months, while directing all parties to cooperate — The Court emphasized the need to preserve temple properties and governance as per established customs and laws — The Supreme Court struck down the High Court’s order appointing an unelected committee, appointed a new Administrative Head to conduct elections, and directed all parties to cooperate, emphasizing the importance of adhering to the temple’s established governance structure and Bye-laws.