May 2023 - Page 7 of 13 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

November 23, 2024 2:24 am

IMPORTANT – Allotment of Plot – Demand of additional price – Non-construction of plot within a period – Additional amount sought not be recovered at the stage of issuance of notice. HELD Even that amount also needs to be calculated and recovered from the guilty officers who, despite there being judgment of this Court, dealing with the same issue opined the case to be fit for filing appeals. burden the Appellants with cost of Rs. 1,00,000/- to be deposited with the Supreme Court Mediation Centre.

May 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HARYANA URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. JAGDEEP SINGH — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal,JJ. ) Civil…

C P C Election Laws

Representation of the People’s Act, 1951 – Ss 13(1)(a) and 100(1)(d)(iv) – (CPC) – Order 7 Rule 11(a) -In absence of material facts constituting cause of action for filing Election petition under Section 100(1)(d)(iv) of the said Act, the Election petition is required to be dismissed under Order VII Rule 11(a) CPC read with Section 13(1)(a) of the RP Act – Election petition dismissed.

May 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KANIMOZHI KARUNANIDHI — Appellant Vs. A. SANTHANA KUMAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Bela M. Trivedi, JJ. ) Civil…

Constitution

Case transferred from regular court – State Government is interested in taking action against land grabbers, it can bring an appropriate legislation with a clear definition of “land grabber” and “land grabbing” or better legislations with a clear definition of “land grabbing”, “land grabber”, and “land grabbing cases” – The present order shall not prevent the State Government from enacting such legislation – Appeal dismissed

May 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GOVERNMENT OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. R. THAMARAISELVAM ETC. ETC. — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ.…

Direct Taxation Income Tax Act

Income Tax Act, 1961 – Sections 50C and 143(3) – ITAT has without examining any of the relevant factors confirmed that the transaction was transfer of stock in trade – Matter is required to be remanded to the ITAT to consider the appeal afresh in light of the observations to take into consideration the relevant factors while considering the transaction as stock in trade or as sale of capital assets or business transaction.

May 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 8 MUMBAI — Appellant Vs. GLOWSHINE BUILDERS AND DEVELOPERS PVT. LTD. — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V.…

I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Sections 30(2), 52 and 53 – In terms of Section 52 of the Code, a secured creditor in liquidation proceedings has the right to relinquish its security interest to the liquidation estate and receive proceeds from the sale of assets by the liquidator in the manner specified under Section 53 of the Code.

May 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S VISTRA ITCL (INDIA) LTD AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. MR. DINKAR VENKATASUBRAMANIAN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M. R. Shah and…

Cr P C

Magistrate, on remand, has passed an order under Section 156(3) directing registration of the FIR – He is required to examine, apply his judicious mind and then exercise discretion whether or not to issue directions under Section 156(3) or whether he should take cognizance and follow the procedure under Section 202 – Order directing registration of the FIR is set aside – Appeal allowed.

May 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KAILASH VIJAYVARGIYA — Appellant Vs. RAJLAKSHMI CHAUDHURI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Sanjiv Khanna, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…

Land Acquisition

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 – Section 24(2) – Lapse of acquisition proceedings – Subsequent purchaser has no locus to challenge the acquisition and/or pray for deemed lapse of acquisition.

May 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — Appellant Vs. NARENDRA KUMAR JAIN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. ) Civil…

Bail Declined

(IPC) – Sections 302, 307, 201, 120B – Murder – Despite and without taking into consideration any of the material forming part of the charge sheet and without even considering the seriousness of the offences alleged; material collected during the investigation, the High Court has by a nonspeaking order has directed to release the accused on bail – Order HC quashed

May 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAHUL GUPTA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER ETC. — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. ) Criminal…

Evidence Act Property Matters Registration Act

Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – Section 54 – Registration Act, 1908 – Section 17 – Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 67 – Transfer of ownership – Where a deed of sale had been duly executed and registered, its delivery and payment of consideration have been endorsed thereon it would amount to a full transfer of ownership so as to entitle its purchaser to maintain a suit for possession of the property sold

May 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DAMODHAR NARAYAN SAWALE (D) THROUGH LRS. — Appellant Vs. SHRI TEJRAO BAJIRAO MHASKE AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T.…

Customs & Excise

Customs Act, 1962 – Sections 125 and 127B – Whether a settlement remedy under Section 127B of the Customs Act, 1962, would be available for the seized goods, which are specified under Section 123 of the Act? – Divergent view regarding the issue – Matter to be placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India.

May 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH YAMAL MANOJBHAI — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Krishna Murari and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Writ Petition…

You missed

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 376 and 313 — Rape — False promise of marriage — Physical relationship with the complainant under the false promise of marriage, leading to her pregnancy and subsequent abortions — Whether the FIR should be quashed based on the allegations and the delay in filing the complaint — The petitioner argued that the relationship was consensual and the delay in filing the FIR undermines the credibility of the allegations — The respondent claimed that the petitioner deceived her with a false promise of marriage, leading to non-consensual physical relations — The Supreme Court quashed the FIR, noting the long-term consensual relationship and the lack of prima facie evidence for rape under Section 376 IPC —The Court emphasized the delay in filing the FIR and the nature of the relationship, which appeared consensual —The Court referred to previous judgments, highlighting the importance of prima facie evidence and the misuse of legal provisions —The FIR and all proceedings based on it were quashed, preventing abuse of the legal process.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw

Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B —Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 — Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) — Financial misconduct and conspiracy — Whether the High Court was correct in discharging the respondent from the charges of conspiracy and financial misconduct — The CBI argued that the High Court conducted a mini-trial at the charge-framing stage and that there was sufficient suspicion to frame charges against the respondent — The respondent’s counsel argued that the material in the charge sheet did not make out a case against the respondent and that the High Court rightly discharged him —The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to discharge the respondent, stating that mere suspicion was not enough to frame charges – The Court found that the respondent’s role was limited to signing the memorandum prepared by senior officers and participating in the Management Committee meeting, which approved the proposal — The Court emphasized that the proposal had passed through various committees and that the respondent’s actions did not amount to criminal misconduct — The appeal was dismissed, and the respondent was discharged from the charges — The trial against other accused persons will continue.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw

Municipal Laws

Patna Municipal Corporation Act, 1951 — Sections 146, 423 and 488(1) — The Patna Municipal Corporation imposed a royalty on advertisements, which was later increased — The respondents challenged this imposition, arguing it was a tax without legislative backing — Whether the royalty imposed by the Corporation was a tax and if it was legally enforceable without legislative sanction — The Corporation argued that the royalty was agreed upon by the parties and was not a tax — They contended that the enhancement of the rate was within their rights — The respondents argued that the imposition was a tax, which required legislative sanction, and the Corporation had no authority to levy it — The Division Bench quashed the enhancement, ruling that the Corporation had no power to impose the tax without legislative backing — The Court found that the royalty was not a tax but a fee agreed upon by the parties — It held that the Corporation’s actions were within the scope of the agreement — The Court distinguished between royalty and tax, emphasizing that royalty is based on an agreement, not statutory provision — The Court upheld the imposition of royalty as per the agreement but noted that the enhancement in rates was not challenged effectively — The judgment of the Division Bench was set aside.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw

Constitution

Citizenship Act, 1955 — Section 6A — Special provisions as to citizenship of persons covered by the Assam Accord — The case involves the constitutional validity of Section 6A of the Citizenship Act 1955, which grants citizenship to certain migrants from Bangladesh to Assam —The main issues include whether Parliament had the legislative competence to enact Section 6A, and if Section 6A violates Articles 6, 7, 14, 29, and 355 of the Constitution — Petitioners argue that Section 6A is unconstitutional as it conflicts with Articles 6 and 7, adopts unreasonable cut-off dates, and violates Articles 14, 29, and 355 — Respondents contend that Section 6A is within Parliament’s legislative competence under Article 11 and does not violate the Constitution — The judgment addresses the legislative competence of Parliament, the reasonableness of cut-off dates, and the impact on Assamese cultural identity — The court examines the historical context of citizenship provisions, the legislative intent behind Section 6A, and the scope of judicial review under Article 14 — The court analyzes the constitutional provisions on citizenship, the legislative objective of Section 6A, and the balance between legislative intent and constitutional mandates —The court concludes that Section 6A of the Citizenship Act is constitutional and does not violate the cited Articles of the Constitution.

Oct 21, 2024 sclaw

Month: May 2023

You missed