Supreme Court of India Judgements

46448 Judgements hosted as on 05/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Month: August 2021

Consumer

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 24A – Insurance Act, 1938 – Section 64- UM(c) – Fire Insurance Claim – Surveyor report – HELD the reliance placed on the surveyor’s report by the NCDRC without giving credence to the investigation report in the facts and circumstances of the instant case cannot be faulted – Accordingly, the amount as ordered by the NCDRC shall be payable with interest at 9% per annum instead of 12% per annum – Appeal allowed in part.

Aug 28, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LTD. — Appellant Vs. M/S. HARESHWAR ENTERPRISES (P) LTD. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and A.S. Bopanna,…

Rent

Rented land – Use of land as club for a pavilion is in interest of section of public – Eviction petition – Maintainability – – Therefore, use of land as club for a pavilion is in interest of section of the public – Thus, land let out to a club which for the purpose of construction and use of pavilion falls within the scope of Section 2(f) of the Act and thus eviction petition is maintainable under the Act – Appeal allowed.

Aug 22, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJINDER KUMAR BANSAL AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. MUNICIPAL COMMITTEE AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. )…

Property Matters

Redemption of Mortgage – Decree of foreclosure passed in the suit filed by the mortgagee will not extinguish the right of the mortgagor to redeem land in view of the fact that he was not impleaded as a party in the suit though he has purchased part of the mortgaged property by virtue of registered sale deed.

Aug 22, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NARAYAN DEORAO JAVLE (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS — Appellant Vs. KRISHNA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. )…

Corporate

Tender – Supply of E-learning Kits to 22 Zilla Parishad Schools in Maharashtra – Upgradation of software and training could not be performed – Recovery proceedings – Challenged – Appellant shall undertake the upgrading of software as agreed under the contract and also impart training to the teachers

Aug 22, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MULTITASK SOLUTIONS — Appellant Vs. ZILLA PARISHAD WASHIM AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

SARFAESI

SARFAESI Act, it has to satisfy the conditions of Section 65A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – If a tenant claims that he is entitled to possession of a Secured Asset for a term of more than a year, it has to be supported by the execution of a registered instrument – HELD even if the tenancy has been claimed to be renewed in terms of Section 13(13) of the SARFAESI Act, the Borrower would be required to seek consent of the secured creditor for transfer of the Secured Asset by way of sale, lease or otherwise, after issuance of the notice under Section 13(2) of the SARFAESI Act and, admittedly, no such consent has been sought by the Borrower in the present case – Appeal dismissed.

Aug 22, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HEMRAJ RATNAKAR SALIAN — Appellant Vs. HDFC BANK LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer and Krishna Murari, JJ. )…

Service Matters
Service

Appointment of appellant can only be construed as irregular and not illegal – Appellant is held entitled to be regularized with all consequential benefits – Appeal allowed. Finding recorded by the Division Bench of the High Court in respect of nature of the appointment of the appellant being illegal is thus not liable to be sustained – Her rejection of the claim for regularization on the ground of her appointment being illegal by the impugned order is patently erroneous.

Aug 22, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NEELIMA SRIVASTAVA — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S.Abdul Nazeer and Krishna Murari, JJ. )…

Cr P C

Improper To Quash FIR U/s 482 CrPC When There Are Serious Triable Allegations – the contents of FIR and prima facie material, if any, requiring no proof. At such stage, the High Court cannot appreciate evidence nor can it draw its own inferences from contents of FIR and material relied on. HELD the High Court cannot act like the Investigating agency nor can exercise the powers like an Appellate Court.

Aug 16, 2021 sclaw

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 787 OF 2021 Kaptan Singh …Appellant Versus The State of Uttar Pradesh and others …Respondents J U…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 120-B read with Section 420 – Cheating – The case involves fraudulent transactions by accused in connivance with Indian Bank officials resulting in interest-free advances to the petitioners – The main issue is whether the petitioners were involved in cheating the bank and if they availed any undue benefit from the fraudulent transactions – The petitioners argued that they were not involved in the cheating, had not availed any undue benefit, and that the transactions were normal business dealings – The court dismissed the Special Leave Petitions, upholding the Trial Court’s conviction of the petitioners for cheating the bank through unauthorized transactions.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Condonation of Delay – Delay of 1663 days – The State of U.P. filed a SLP against an order dated 13.11.2009 by the Allahabad High Court, with a delay of 1,633 days – The main issue was the condonation of the significant delay in filing the SLP – The State argued that the delay was due to the time taken for obtaining legal opinion and permissions, and later, the realization that the appeal was not filed initially – The application for condonation of delay was dismissed, and consequently, the SLP was also dismissed – The court found the explanation for the delay unsatisfactory, especially since the State was aware of the High Court’s order when it was passed – The court did not find sufficient cause to condone the delay, leading to the dismissal of the SLP.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Property Matters

Partition Suit – The dispute involves partition of properties left by Late ‘R’ with the main contention over roof rights of a property in Kota and another in Jaipur – The primary issue is the valuation of roof rights for further construction and the equal distribution of property among co-sharers – The appellants argue that the valuation report failed to assess the value of roof rights, which would affect the overall property valuation and entitlement of co-sharers – The respondents maintain that the property valuation and shares were appropriately determined by the approved Valuer and upheld by both the Trial Court and High Court – The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in revaluating the property or altering the determined shares of the parties – The Court emphasized the importance of family ties over property disputes and suggested alternative dispute resolution methods for amicable settlements – The Court referenced the case of Afcons Infrastructure Limited vs. Cherian Varkey Construction Company Private Limited, advocating for ADR in family-related property disputes – The Supreme Court concluded that revisiting the valuation and partition would only prolong litigation and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Constitution Municipal Laws

West Bengal Municipal(Building) Rules, 2007 – Rule 50 – Open spaces for building in areas other than municipalities in hill areas – The appellants challenge the High Court of Calcutta’s order regarding a contempt petition related to their residential property construction and its compliance with Rule 50 of Rules, 2007 – The appellants argue that the writ petition was a private matter and should not have been entertained by the High Court – They also claim that municipal authorities are unfairly pressuring them due to the contempt proceedings – The respondent claims that the appellants violated the sanctioned building plan, justifying the High Court’s direction for an enquiry – The Supreme Court allowed the appellants to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, ensuring their objections would be considered objectively without prejudice from the contempt or writ proceedings – The court expressed reservations about the High Court’s exercise of writ jurisdiction in a private dispute and suggested the civil court as the appropriate forum for grievances – The appeal was disposed of with the appellants given the liberty to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, without cost order.

May 5, 2024 sclaw