February 2022 - Page 10 of 11 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

October 18, 2024 7:23 am

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Sections 4 and 18 – Land acquisition – Compensation – Determination of market value – High Court has erred in law in holding that since the land of the sale exemplars is of irrigated agricultural land whereas the land acquired is unirrigated, is not the reasonable yardstick to determine market value of the land as the land in question is close to already developed area – Appeal allowed.

Feb 6, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MADHUKAR S/O GOVINDRAO KAMBLE AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. VIDARBHA IRRIGATION DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and V.…

Constitution

Contract with respect to Mega projects HELD Considering the special peculiarities of such foreign sovereign funded development contracts, which can be envisaged and exist only due to the availability of the investment and willingness of the foreign sovereign country to finance such infrastructure project, the said contracts assume the different characteristics. Therefore, there shall be different considerations so far as the judicial interference is concerned between the foreign funded contracts and the ordinary public works contracts funded from public exchequer.

Feb 5, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NATIONAL HIGH SPEED RAIL CORPORATION LIMITED — Appellant Vs. MONTECARLO LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ.…

Constitution

Maharashtra Legislative Assembly Rules – Rules 8, 53 and 106 – Quashing of Maharashtra Assembly’s Resolution to Suspend – One year suspension is worse than “expulsion”, “disqualification” or “resignation” — insofar as the right of the constituency to be represented before the House/Assembly is concerned – In that, long suspension is bound to affect the rights harsher than expulsion wherein

Feb 5, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ASHISH SHELAR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE MAHARASHTRA LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari and C.T.…

Service

Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 – Clause 8.1, Section 1, Part A of the First Schedule – Grade pay – High Court has no jurisdiction to interfere with the Government policies in the form of Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme which was after accepting the Sixth Central Pay Commission

Feb 5, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. K. SUDHEESH KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Sanjiv…

Acquittal

Maharashtra Police Act, 1951 – Section 56(1)(a)(b) – Order of externment – Impugned Judgment and order of the High Court shows that unfortunately, the Division Bench did not notice that an order of externment is not an ordinary measure and it must be resorted to sparingly and in extraordinary circumstances – Order of externment set aside.

Feb 5, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEEPAK S/O LAXMAN DONGRE — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka,…

Rent

Haryana (Control of Rent & Eviction) Act, 1973 – Sections 5(1), 7(2), 7(3) and 11 – Suit for possession – Expiry of lease term – Statutory tenant – Jurisdiction of Civil Court – Section 11 of the Act has an overriding effect to the provisions of other laws. That being so, the jurisdiction indeed of a civil Court is impliedly barred from the field covered specifically by the provisions of the Act 1973 and that being the complete code determining the rights of a tenant/landlord to the exclusion of the other laws –

Feb 5, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUBHASH CHANDER AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M/S BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED. (BPCL) AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay…

C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Sections 2(4) and 44A – Execution of foreign decree – Held the District Court or the High Court in its ordinary original civil jurisdiction is competent to exercise power for execution of decree, including money decree of the foreign Court of reciprocating jurisdiction, provided other conditions are complied with as contemplated under Section 44A of the Code.

Feb 5, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MESSER GRIESHEIM GMBH (NOW CALLED AIR LIQUIDE DEUTSCHLAND GMBH) — Appellant Vs. GOYAL MG GASES PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi…

Constitution

Constitution of India, 1950 – Articles 16(4) and 16(4-A) – Reservation in Promotions – Unit for Collecting Quantifiable Data – Before providing for reservation in promotions to a cadre, the State is obligated to collect quantifiable data regarding inadequacy of representation of SCs and STs -Collection of information regarding inadequacy of representation of SCs and STs cannot be with reference to the entire service or ‘class’/’group’ but it should be relatable to the grade/category of posts to which promotion is sought

Feb 5, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH JARNAIL SINGH AND OTHER — Appellant Vs. LACHHMI NARAIN GUPTA AND OTHER — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, Sanjiv Khanna and B.R.…

Property Matters

Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act, 1951 – Sections 14 and 36 – Madhya Pradesh Trust Rules, 1962 – Rule 9 – Sanction for disposal of trust property – Aim of public control is to ensure that the trust is administered efficiently and smoothly – State interest is that far, and no more; it cannot mean that the state can dictate what decisions can or cannot be taken

Feb 5, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH PARSI ZOROASTRIAN ANJUMAN, MHOW — Appellant Vs. THE SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER/THE REGISTRAR OF PUBLIC TRUSTS AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh…

Registration Act

Registration Act, 1908 – Section 32(c) read with Section 33 and 34(2)(c) – Production of original power of attorney -there is really no need for the production of the original power of attorney, when the document is presented for registration by the person standing in the shoes of the second defendant in this case as he would be covered by the provisions of Section 32(a) as he has executed the document though on the strength of the power of attorney –

Feb 5, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AMAR NATH — Appellant Vs. GIAN CHAND AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : K.M Joseph and Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

You missed

Cr P C I P C

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 482 — Quashing of Criminal Proceedings under Section 482 in Cases with Predominantly Civil Character — The court reiterated the principle that criminal cases with overwhelmingly and predominantly civil character, particularly those arising out of commercial transactions, matrimonial relationships, or family disputes, should be quashed when the parties have resolved their entire disputes among themselves — This principle is applied in the present case, where the dispute involved a loan transaction between the accused persons and the bank, and the parties had settled the matter through the One Time Settlement (OTS).

Oct 9, 2024 sclaw

Service

The main issue is whether the eligibility criteria requiring AICTE approval for diplomas is valid, given the Supreme Court’s previous ruling that universities do not need AICTE approval for technical courses —The petitioners argued that the eligibility criteria were inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s ruling and that they were unfairly excluded from the recruitment process —The respondents contended that the recruitment process was conducted according to the existing rules and that the petitioners were bound by the doctrine of acquiescence —The Supreme Court directed the Bihar Technical Service Commission to prepare a fresh select list of meritorious candidates, considering the previous High Court order and the AICTE’s stance —The Court found that changing the eligibility criteria after the selection process was completed was impermissible and that the petitioners had a legitimate right to be considered — The appeals were disposed of with directions to prepare a revised select list within three months, ensuring that eligible candidates are considered fairly.

Oct 9, 2024 sclaw

Direct Taxation Income Tax

Income Tax Act, 1961 — Section 139(5) — Revised Income Tax Return — The appellant filed multiple revised returns for the assessment year 1989-90, which were not considered due to being barred by limitation —Whether the assessing officer can consider claims made in a revised return filed after the time limit prescribed by Section 139(5) of the Act — The appellant argued that the assessing officer should consider the claim for deduction of deferred revenue expenditure, even if the revised return was filed late —The respondent contended that the assessing officer has no jurisdiction to consider claims made in a time-barred revised return —The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court’s decision that the assessing officer cannot consider claims in a time-barred revised return —The Court emphasized that the assessing officer’s jurisdiction is limited by the time constraints set in Section 139(5) —The Court referred to previous judgments, including Wipro Finance Ltd. and Goetze (India) Ltd., to support its decision —The appeal was dismissed, affirming that claims in a time-barred revised return cannot be considered by the assessing officer.

Oct 9, 2024 sclaw

Tenders & Contracts

Coal Mining Bid — Rejection of — Eligibility criteria — Appellants challenged the rejection of its technical bid by Respondent-BCCL for a coal mining project, while the bid of Respondent No. 8 was accepted despite non-compliance with mandatory requirements —Whether BCCL was justified in rejecting the appellant’s bid and accepting the bid of Respondent No. 8, which did not meet the eligibility criteria — Appellant argues that the rejection was arbitrary and discriminatory — The appellant complied with all requirements, while Respondent No. 8 was allowed to submit missing documents later — BCCL argues that the appellant’s bid was non-compliant due to issues with the Power of Attorney — The Tender Committee could seek shortfall documents but not replace them —The Supreme Court found BCCL’s actions arbitrary and illegal, setting aside the rejection of the appellant’s bid and the acceptance of Respondent No. 8’s bid — The appellant’s Power of Attorney was valid and notarized before submission — BCCL’s acceptance of Respondent No. 8’s bid despite non-compliance was unjustified —Government bodies must act fairly and transparently in awarding contracts — The decision-making process must be free from arbitrariness and bias —The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside BCCL’s decision and any subsequent agreements, and directed BCCL to initiate a fresh tender process.

Oct 9, 2024 sclaw

Month: February 2022

You missed