Supreme Court of India Judgements

46420 Judgements hosted as on 27/04/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Corporate

Corporate

Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1996 – HELD There is no legal infirmity in the finding of the High Court that UPPTCL acted in excess of power by its acts impugned, when there was admittedly no assessment or levy of cess under the Cess Act

May 16, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UTTAR PRADESH POWER TRANSMISSION CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. CG POWER AND INDUSTRIAL SOLUTIONS LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before :…

Corporate

Tender Call Notice-A reading of Section 4 would show that the registration of an establishment under the Orissa Act is to categorise the establishment as a shop, commercial establishment, hotel, etc. and not for the purpose of issuing a labour licence which, in the context of the present Tender Call Notice, can only be a labour licence under the Contract Labour Act

Apr 11, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S UTKAL SUPPLIERS — Appellant Vs. M/S MAA KANAK DURGA ENTERPRISES AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman and B.R. Gavai,…

Corporate

I B C, 2016 – S 14 – For the period of moratorium, since no Section 138/141 (NIA) proceeding can continue or be initiated against the corporate debtor because of a statutory bar, such proceedings can be initiated or continued against the persons mentioned in Section 141(1) and (2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act

Mar 7, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH P. MOHANRAJ AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M/S. SHAH BROTHERS ISPAT PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman, Navin Sinha and…

Corporate

It is settled law that a secured creditor stands outside the winding up and can realise its security dehors winding up proceedings.-Winding up proceedings – A petition either under Section 7 or Section 9 of the IBC is an independent proceeding which is unaffected by winding up proceedings that may be filed qua the same company

Mar 7, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH A. NAVINCHANDRA STEELS PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. SREI EQUIPMENT FINANCE LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman and B.R.…

Corporate

DRAT – Waiver of pre deposit – In all cases fifty per cent of the decretal amount i.e. the debt due is to be deposited before the DRAT as a mandatory requirement, but in appropriate cases for reasons to be recorded the deposit of at least twenty five per cent of the debt due would be permissible, but not entire waiver.

Feb 23, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. AMBUJ A. KASLIWAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. A. Bobde, CJI, A. S.…

Corporate

Trade Marks Act, 1999 – S 85 and 87 – In the absence of any member, the chairperson may, if the occasion so arises, act as technical or judicial member – Section 87 enables a vice-chairperson, or as the case may be the senior-most member of the board to act as chairperson in the event of a vacancy to that position

Feb 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION FOR PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY (INDIA GROUP) — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao,…

Corporate

Societies Registration Act, 1860 – Sections 10 and 24 – Held, the appellants who are otherwise eligible to be enrolled as members of the Society in their own rights need not be denied of the same – They have a right to be considered for being admitted as members of the Society by the newly elected Managing Committee.

Feb 16, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SWATI ULHAS KERKAR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SANJAY WALAVALKAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and S. Ravindra Bhat, JJ.…

Corporate

Securities and Exchange Board of India (Mutual Funds) Regulations, 1996 – Regulations 18(15)(c) and 39(2)(a) – Winding up of mutual fund schemes – Consent of the unit holders would mean consent by majority of the unit holders who have participated in the poll, and not consent of majority of all the unit holders of the scheme.

Feb 14, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH FRANKLIN TEMPLETON TRUSTEE SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. AMRUTA GARG AND OTHERS ETC — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer…

You missed

State Laws

Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 – The case involves the acceptance of Change Reports for the Vahiwatdar (Administrator) and Trustees of Shri Mallikarjun Devasthan, a Public Trust – The High Court invalidated the acceptance and remanded the matters for reconsideration – The main issue was the delay in filing the Change Report for the new Vahiwatdar of the Trust, which was submitted 17 years after the previous Vahiwatdar’s death – The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment, confirming the acceptance of Change Report Nos. 899 of 2015 and 1177 of 2017, allowing the civil appeals – The Court found that the delay in filing the Change Report was a curable defect and did not impact the legitimacy of the new Vahiwatdar’s assumption of office – The Court emphasized a liberal approach to condonation of delay, citing precedents.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw
Service

Maharashtra Employees of Private Schools (Conditions of Service) Regulation Act, 1977 – Sections 7, 8 and 9 – Procedure for resignation by employees of private schools – The appellant challenged his termination from, which was set aside by the Tribunal but reinstated by the High Court – The main issues were whether the appellant’s resignation was lawfully withdrawn and if the documents related to his resignation were fabricated – The appellant argued that his resignation withdrawal was not considered and that the school committee’s resolutions were fabricated – The respondents contended that the resignation was accepted by the management committee and the school committee, and the appellant was informed accordingly – The Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision, dismissing the appeal and affirming that the appellant’s resignation was voluntary and lawfully accepted – The Court found no evidence of fabricated documents and determined that the management committee’s acceptance of the resignation was valid – The Court referenced the MEPS Act and Rules, concluding that non-communication of resignation acceptance does not invalidate the termination – The Supreme Court concluded that the appellant’s resignation was accepted before his attempted withdrawal, and thus the termination was lawful.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw
I B C

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 – Section 5(7) – “financial creditor” – The appeals challenge judgments related to the status of certain creditors of M/s. Mount Shivalik Industries Limited under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) – The primary issue is whether the respondents are financial creditors or operational creditors within the meaning of the IBC – The appellants argue that the respondents are operational creditors, as the agreements indicate services rendered to promote the corporate debtor’s products – The respondents contend that the agreements were a means to raise finance, making them financial creditors due to the interest-bearing security deposits – The Court upheld the NCLAT’s decision, recognizing the respondents as financial creditors based on the commercial effect of the transactions – The Court examined the true nature of the transactions and found that the arrangements had the commercial effect of borrowing, satisfying the criteria for financial debt under the IBC – The Court applied the definition of financial debt and operational debt from the IBC, emphasizing the disbursal against the consideration for the time value of money – The appeals were dismissed, confirming the respondents’ status as financial creditors and allowing the resolution process to continue accordingly – The Court’s detailed analysis affirmed the NCLAT’s interpretation of the IBC provisions.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw
Family Court I P C

“Husband Has No Right On Wife’s Stridhan” Matrimonial Law – The appeal concerns a matrimonial dispute involving misappropriation of gold jewellery and monetary gifts – The appellant, a widow, married the first respondent, a divorcee, and alleged misappropriation of her jewelry and money by the respondents – The core issue is whether the appellant established the misappropriation of her gold jewellery by the respondents and if the High Court erred in its judgment – The appellant claimed that her jewellery was taken under the pretext of safekeeping on her wedding night and misappropriated by the respondents to settle their financial liabilities – The respondents denied the allegations, stating no dowry was demanded and that the appellant had custody of her jewellery, which she took to her paternal home six days after the marriage – The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment, upheld the Family Court’s decree, and awarded the appellant Rs. 25,00,000 as compensation for her misappropriated stridhan – The Court found the High Court’s approach legally unsustainable, criticizing it for demanding a criminal standard of proof and basing findings on assumptions not supported by evidence – The Court emphasized the civil standard of proof as the balance of probabilities and noted that the appellant’s claim for return of stridhan does not require proof of acquisition – The Supreme Court concluded that the appellant had established a more probable case and directed the first respondent to pay the compensation within six months, with a 6% interest per annum in case of default.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw