Month: February 2021

Relief has been sought is (i) cancellation of all the agreements; (ii) refund of moneys to purchasers; and in the alternative (iii) ensuring that the construction is carried out and that the premises are handed over within a reasonable period of time -Entertaining a petition of this nature will involve the Court in virtually carrying out a day to day supervision of a building project

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UPENDRA CHOUDHURY — Appellant Vs. BULANDSHAHAR DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and M. R. Shah, JJ.…

Kerala Private Forest (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 – Section 8 – Kerala Forest (Vesting and Management of Ecologically Fragile Lands) Act, 2003 -It is just and proper that even if the respondents are not compensated for the value of the land, they need to be compensated for the benefits arisen out of the lands for the period they were kept out of possession by action of the respondents, treating it to be vested land under Act, 1971

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE CONSERVATOR AND CUSTODIAN OF FOREST AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SOBHA JOHN KOSHY AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan, R.…

Service Matters

Heart ailment – Section 2(i) of the Act takes into account visual disability, locomotor disability, mental illness, mental retardation, hearing impairment and leprosy – A heart ailment is not covered within the definition of disability in the Act – When the 1995 Act was replaced by the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016,

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH NAWAL KISHORE SHARMA — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Dinesh Maheshwari and Hrishikesh Roy,…

Societies Registration Act, 1860 – Sections 10 and 24 – Held, the appellants who are otherwise eligible to be enrolled as members of the Society in their own rights need not be denied of the same – They have a right to be considered for being admitted as members of the Society by the newly elected Managing Committee.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SWATI ULHAS KERKAR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SANJAY WALAVALKAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and S. Ravindra Bhat, JJ.…

Securities and Exchange Board of India (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996 – Regulations 18(15)(c) and 39(2)(a) – Winding up of mutual fund schemes – Consent of the unit holders would mean consent by majority of the unit holders who have participated in the poll, and not consent of majority of all the unit holders of the scheme.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH FRANKLIN TEMPLETON TRUSTEE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. AMRUTA GARG AND OTHERS ETC — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer…

Injuries were inflicted without premeditation in a sudden fight in the heat of passion upon a sudden quarrel and without the offender having taken advantage or acted cruelly or unusually – Appellant has served more than 18years of his jail sentence – This Court convict the appellant for an offence under Section 304 Part I IPC and sentence him to the sentence already undergone

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PARDESHIRAM — Appellant Vs. STATE OF M.P. (NOW CHHATTISGARH) — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and S. Ravindra Bhat, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…

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.