Supreme Court of India Judgements

46660 Judgements hosted as on 19/11/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Corporate

Corporate

National Housing Bank Act, 1987 – Section 36 and 36 (A) – Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 – Section 45(q)(a) – Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Section 227 and 239(2)(zk) – Insolvency and Bankruptcy (Insolvency and Liquidation Proceedings of Financial Service Providers and Application to Adjudicatory Authority), Rules, 2019 Rule 5 and 6 – Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 – Regulation 6 – Administrator made a public announcement under Regulation 6 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 – On 04.12.2019, public depositors were included as a class of creditors under Section 21 (6A) (b) of the IBC HELD It open to the Appellants to raise all points and contentions before the Committee of Creditors, the Administrator and if necessary, the NCLT

Feb 1, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VINAY KUMAR MITTAL AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. DEWAN HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION LTD. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and…

Corporate

Insurance Act, 1938 – Section 64(VB)(3) – No risk can be assumed by the insurer unless the premium payable is received in advance – HELD Proposal does not conclude the contract – A contract postulates an agreement between the parties – In the present case, the insurer while issuing the new policy at a fresh location specifically excluded STFI perils and refunded the premium – To hold to the contrary would be rewriting the agreement between the parties and creating a fresh contract

Jan 28, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHREE AMBICA MEDICAL STORES AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE SURAT PEOPLE’S CO-OPERATIVE BANK LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya…

Corporate

Debts Recovery Tribunal has no power to condone the delay in filing application for review under the Recovery of Debts and Bankruptcy Act 1993(RDB Act) HELD provisions of Limitation Act, including the provision to condone delay under Section 5 of it, apply only to original applications filed under Section 19 of the RDB Act and not to review applications.

Jan 27, 2020 sclaw

DRT Has No Power To Condone Delay In Filing Review Application Under RDB Act : SC [Read Judgment] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 27 Jan 2020 12:59 PM The Supreme Court has…

Corporate

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Sections 7, 9, 10 and 12-A – Initiation of corporate insolvency resolution process by financial creditor – Case of MSL in their appeal is that they want to run the company and infuse more funds – MSL has raised the funds upon mortgaging the assets of the corporate debtor only. In such circumstances, This Court are not engaging in the judicial exercise of determining the question as to whether after having been successful in a CIRP, an applicant altogether forfeits their right to withdraw from such process or not HELD Court direct the Resolution Professional to take physical possession of the assets of the corporate debtor and hand it over to the MSL

Jan 23, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH MAHARASTHRA SEAMLESS LIMITED — Appellant Vs. PADMANABHAN VENKATESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman, Aniruddha Bose and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ.…

Corporate

Deferred Spectrum charges – Dismissal of Appeal for Refund – Centre’s Appeal against TDSAT order to refund of Rs 104 Crores to Reliance Communications – Order of the TDSAT does not call for any interference – The Union nowhere disputes that the respondent licensees’ liability toward payment of deferred spectrum charges, in May, 2018, was to the tune of Rs. 774.25 crores – The total amount realized upon encashment of the bank guarantees furnished by the respondents, however, was to the extent of Rs. 908.91 crores

Jan 7, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. RELIANCE COMMUNICATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : R. F. Nariman and S. Ravindra Bhat, JJ.…

Corporate

Invocation or encashment of bank guarantee – HELD The settled position in law that emerges from the precedents of this Court is that the bank guarantee is an independent contract between bank and the beneficiary and the bank is always obliged to honour its guarantee as long as it is an unconditional and irrevocable one

Dec 23, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STANDARD CHARTERED BANK — Appellant Vs. HEAVY ENGINEERING CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and Ajay Rastogi, JJ.…

Corporate

NCLT and NCLAT would have jurisdiction to enquire into questions of fraud, they would not have jurisdiction to adjudicate upon disputes such as those arising under MMDR Act, 1957 and the rules issued thereunder, especially when the disputes revolve around decisions of statutory or quasi-judicial authorities, which can be corrected only by way of judicial review of administrative action.

Dec 3, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH M/S EMBASSY PROPERTY DEVELOPMENTS PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman, Aniruddha Bose…

Corporate

Electricity Act, 2003 – Sections 62, 65 and 108 – Levy of wheeling charges and grid support charges – Plea of promissory estoppel is not attracted, and there was no unequivocal promise – There was no material change in the facts and circumstances of the case to attract the plea of promissory estoppel based on Government orders

Dec 1, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH TRANSMISSION CORPORATION OF ANDHRA PRADESH LIMITED — Appellant Vs. M/S RAIN CALCINING LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra, M.R. Shah…

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