Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Category: C P C

C P C

Res judicata—Second suit before expiry of period of limitation for filing an appeal in first suit—Entire fact circumstance in each case must be looked at before deciding whether to proceed with the second proceeding on the basis of res judicata or to adjourn and/or stay the second proceeding to await the outcome in the first proceeding.

Sep 9, 2018 sclaw

  2018(2) Law Herald (SC) 678 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1015   SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CANARA BANK — Appellant Vs. N.G. SUBBARAYA SETTY — Respondent ( Before : Adarsh Kumar…

C P C

Held, when the plaintiff could be shown the indulgence, the same equity should have been mated out to the appellant (defendant)-Since it was suit for recovery of money-The Court should have put the parties at least to terms and then disposed of the matter on merits-Ex parte Decree set side.                                                                           

Aug 26, 2018 sclaw

(2017) 100 ACrC 264 : (2017) 175 AIC 263 : (2017) 2 ICC 443 : (2017) 1 LAR 643 : (2017) 1 LawHerald(SC) 746 : (2017) 2 LJR 661 : (2017) 4 LW 283…

C P C

Civil Procedure Code, 1908, O.41 R.23 and O.26 R.9–Remand of Case-Suit for declaration—Claim for ownership and possession in booth sites allotted by society-Having regard to the rival contentions of the parties claiming to be in possession, case remanded to trial court to appoint a Commissioner to get a report as to the location of the disputed sites and their physical features and other relevant facts and decide afresh.       

Aug 15, 2018 sclaw

(2017) 174 AIC 62 : (2017) AIR(SCW) 1341 : (2017) AIR(SC) 1341 : (2017) 123 ALR 271 : (2017) 1 ARC 768 : (2017) 1 BBCJ 421 : (2017) 2…

C P C

Transfer of Case—Matrimonial Disputes— Where the parties have difficulty and there is no place which is convenient and where one or both the parties make a request for use of video conference, proceedings may be conducted through video conferencing, obviating the needs of the party to appear in person. Administration of Justice—Use of Technology—Every district court must have at least one e-mail ID and notified phone number—A designated officer/ manager to be appointed to respond to emails and phone queries—These steps would take care of the problems of litigants to some extent.

Aug 12, 2018 sclaw

(2017) 174 AIC 103 : (2017) AIR(SCW) 1345 : (2017) 2 AIRJharR 462 : (2017) AIR(SC) 1345 : (2017) AllSCR 900 : (2017) 122 ALR 905 : (2017) 5 ALT…

C P C

Civil Procedure  Code, 1860, S.100–Second Appeal-Substantial question of law-­House Tax-While disposing off the appeal the high court did not decided the questions whether the suit seeking a declaration that the demand of House Tax raised under the Act is maintainable, Matter remanded back to be decided afresh-Haryana Municipal Act, 1973.

Aug 11, 2018 sclaw

(2017) 174 AIC 95 : (2017) AIR(SCW) 1330 : (2017) 3 AIRJharR 321 : (2017) AIR(SC) 1330 : (2017) AllSCR 2127 : (2017) 123 ALR 284 : (2017) 3 AndhLD…

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