Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Month: October 2021

Municipal Laws

Rights of the Council are to administer the properties as a delegate of the Government of India and not as an owner as there were no transfer of rights in the markets in favour of the Council. Markets transferred by the Government of India to the Council have to be dealt independently and separately than the properties owned by the Council as the Council has no title over such markets as it has been asked only to manage them on behalf of the Government of India – Order of eviction upheld.

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NEW DELHI MUNICIPAL COUNCIL — Appellant Vs. GANGA DEVI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ. ) Civil…

Cr P C

Summoning of accused – In the order issuing summons, the learned Magistrate has to record his satisfaction about a prima facie case against the accused -Merely because respondent Nos. 2 to 5 and 7 & 8 are the Chairman/Managing Director/Executive Director/Deputy General Manager/Planner & Executor, automatically they cannot be held vicariously liable, unless, as observed hereinabove, there are specific allegations and averments against them with respect to their individual role

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAVINDRANATHA BAJPE — Appellant Vs. MANGALORE SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LIMITED AND OTHERS ETC. — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ.…

Bail Declined

(IPC) – S 302 and 120B – (CrPC) – Section 439 – Cancellation of Bail – Conspiracy – Murder – Tampering with evidence – Deceased was employed with the Intelligence Bureau – Mobile phone of the wife of the deceased was seized and it showed that she had been in constant touch with the First respondent-accused after the death of her husband – First respondent himself being an employee of the Anti-Corruption Bureau, the likelihood of the evidence being tampered with and of the witnesses being suborned cannot be discounted – surmise that the police had “developed a case” that Ketamine was administered, after four months of the incident – Conclusion that the High Court was in error in allowing the application for bail – Appeal allowed.

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHRI MAHADEV MEENA — Appellant Vs. PRAVEEN RATHORE AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and BV Nagarathna, JJ. )…

Service Matters
Service

Service matter – High Court was not justified and had fallen into error. This is for the reason that the information furnished under the RTI Act showing the name of the respondent at Serial No.301, having obtained 114.80 marks was the select list which was prepared for the first time, which was the subject matter of litigation; had been set aside and was therefore not reckonable. In the re-select list, the name of the respondent is shown at Serial No. 474 having obtained 109.86 marks.

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF ODISHA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. ARATI MOHAPATRA — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

Corporate

Copyright Rules, 2013 – Rule 29(4) – An exercise of judicial re-drafting of Rule 29(4) was unwarranted, particularly at the interlocutory stage – High Court was also of the view that the second proviso may be resorted to as a matter of routine, instead of as an exception and that the ex post facto reporting should be enlarged to a period of fifteen days (instead of a period of twenty four hours). Such an exercise was impermissible since it would substitute a statutory rule made in exercise of the power of delegated legislation with a new regime and provision which the High Court considers more practicable

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SAREGAMA INDIA LIMITED — Appellant Vs. NEXT RADIO LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and BV Nagarathna, JJ.…

Service Matters
Service

Reinstatement – Misconduct – Assaulting senior official – Aims and object of the appellant and the serious nature of misconduct proved against the respondent, instead of granting reinstatement, by balancing the conflicting interests, appropriate compensation needs to be awarded – Moreover, considering the nature of the misconduct proved against the respondent, the grant of reinstatement will not be in the interest of justice – Long gap of 17 years will be also one of the considerations for not granting reinstatement

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NATIONAL GANDHI MUSEUM — Appellant Vs. SUDHIR SHARMA — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos.…

Constitution

Bihar Electricity Duty Act, 1948 – Section 3(1), 6B(1) and 5A Held, While a High Court would normally not exercise its writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution if an effective and efficacious alternate remedy is available, the existence of an alternate remedy does not by itself bar the High Court from exercising its jurisdiction in certain contingencies – Issues raised by the appellant are questions of law which require, upon a comprehensive reading of the Bihar Electricity Act, a determination of whether tax can be levied on the supply of electricity by a power generator (which also manufactures sugar)

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH M/S MAGADH SUGAR AND ENERGY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud,…

SARFAESI

(SARFAESI) – Sections 13(1), 13(2), 13(3), 13(4), 14 and 35 – Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 – Rules 8 and 9 – HELD Since the sale scheduled on 27.2.2012, as per the First Sale Notice dated 21.1.2012, could not be held due to the reasons attributable solely to the guarantors, there was no necessity of again following the same procedure of providing a 30 days’ clear notice.

Oct 3, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH S. KARTHIK AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. N. SUBHASH CHAND JAIN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and…

Land Acquisition

Land Acquisition – As per the settled preposition of law, the compensation determined for the lands acquired subsequently cannot be said to be comparable at all. Even otherwise in the facts and circumstances, the same cannot be said to be comparable because of the fact that it has come on record that in the year 1976 when the lands in question were acquired, there was no development at all, however, subsequently, after 1980 the development had taken place – Appeal are partly allowed.

Oct 2, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AJAI PAL SINGH AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna,…

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