Supreme Court of India Judgements

46468 Judgements hosted as on 12/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Election Laws

Election Laws

Representation of People Act, 1951 – Sections 81, 83 and 86 – Conduct of Election Rules, 1962 – Section 94A – Dismissal of election petition – Appeal against – Non-submission of Form 25 would not lead to the dismissal of election petition – This was a curable defect and the learned Judge trying the election petition ought to have granted an opportunity to the appellant to file an affidavit in support of the petition in Form 25 in addition to the already existing affidavit filed with the election petition – Non-submission of Form 25 would not lead to the dismissal of the election petition – Appeal allowed.

Dec 16, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH A. MANJU — Appellant Vs. PRAJWAL REVANNA @ PRAJWAL R AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ.…

Election Laws

Uttar Pradesh Kshettra Panchayat and Zila Panchayats Act, 1961 – Section 28 – Motion of no-confidence in Adhyaksha – Provisions of Section 28 which ensured that an elected representative can only stay in power so long as such person enjoys the support of the majority of the elected members of the Zila Panchayat – As soon as such a person loses the confidence of the majority, he becomes unwanted – In a democratic set up, the will of the majority has to prevail.

Sep 11, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SAU. SANGEETA W/O SUNIL SHINDE — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and B.R.…

Election Laws

Election Laws – Declaration of results – State Government through learned counsel as well as the State Election Commission, Uttar Pradesh that necessary measures have been put in place in terms of the guidelines issued from time to time, including the recent Notifications dated 29.04.2021 and 30.04.2021 issued by the State Election Commission – No interference.

May 2, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SACHIN YADAV — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. ) Special Leave…

Election Laws

Rules 4 and 5 of Rules, 1994 as well as Rule 2(b) of Rules, 2007 does in no manner disobey the mandate of Article 243S(4), both can be complied with without any conflict between the two different provisions – Provisions of Section 5(3)(iii) (a) as well as Rules 4 and 5 of Rules, 1994 and Rule 2(b) of Rules, 2007 are not inconsistent with provisions of Article 243S.

Feb 25, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH PARMAR SAMANTSINH UMEDSINH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan, R. Subhash Reddy and M.R. Shah,…

Election Laws

Representation of the People Act, 1951 – Section 8(3) – Disqualification- petitioner was disqualified from contesting the elections in terms of Section 8(3) of the Act. In such circumstances, she could not have maintained an election petition as “a candidate at such election” in terms of Section 81(1). Therefore, the High Court was right in not venturing into an exercise in futility, by taking up the election petition for trial, though the High Court was wrong in rejecting the election petition on the ground of existence of incurable of defects – Special Leave Petition is dismissed.

Dec 15, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SARITHA S. NAIR — Appellant Vs. HIBI EDEN — Respondent ( Before : S.A. Bobde, CJI., A.S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ. ) Special…

Election Laws

Averments do not disclose that the appellant has a cause of action which invest him with right to sue – It is settled that where a person has no interest at all, or no sufficient interest to support a legal claim or action he will have no locus standi to sue – Election Petition has been rightly nipped in the bud- Appeal dismissed.

Nov 25, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH  TEJ BAHADUR — Appellant Vs. SHRI NARENDRA MODI — Respondent ( Before : S. A. Bobde, C.JI., A. S. Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ.…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 376(2)(g) and 506(1) – Tamil Nadu Prevention of Women Harassment Act, 1998 – Section 4 – Gang Rape – The victim’s testimony, along with her mother and aunt’s statements, was consistent with the initial complaint and corroborated by medical evidence – The defense argued that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – Whether the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies were not significant and did not affect the overall credibility of the evidence – The court dismissed the appeal and upheld the conviction of the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The court rejected the defense’s argument that the long gap between the victim’s examination-in-chief and cross-examination led to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies – The court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant for gang rape and related charges – The Supreme Court found that the evidence presented was sufficient to convict the appellant and rejected the defence’s arguments regarding inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimonies.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Dismissal of Civil Suit – Condonation of delay – Standing to file an application – The court clarified that only parties to a suit or those who have accrued a right in the lis can file an application for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of the suit. A stranger to the proceedings cannot file such an application.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Haryana Public Moneys (Recovery of Dues) Act, 1979 – Section 3(1)(b) – State Financial Corporation Act, 1951 – Section 29 – The appeals arise from a High Court judgment regarding the recovery of time-barred debts under the Act, 1979, and the Act, 1951 – The main issue is whether a debt time-barred under the Limitation Act can be recovered using the aforementioned Acts – The appellants argued that time-barred debts cannot be recovered under the Recovery of Dues Act, citing the precedent set in V.R. Kalliyanikutty – The respondents argued that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act allow for time-barred debt recovery, as they only bar the remedy, not the right – The court examined whether the Recovery of Dues Act creates a new right for creditors and allows for time-barred debt recovery – The court discussed the distinction between a debt and the right of action for its recovery, noting that the statute of limitation bars the latter but not the former – The court concluded that the Recovery of Dues Act and the State Financial Corporations Act provide an alternative mechanism for recovering debts, even if they are time-barred – Matter needs to be placed before the Hon’ble Chief Justice of India to constitute an appropriate three-judge bench.

May 12, 2024 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Law – Policy Claim – The appellants, family of the deceased, filed a complaint after the LIC repudiated their claim on a policy following the policyholder’s accidental death – The main issue was whether there was a concluded contract between the deceased and LIC at the time of his death, which would obligate LIC to pay the insurance benefits – The appellants argued that LIC had accepted the first premium and issued a receipt, thereby assuming risk and concluding the contract before the policyholder’s death – LIC contended that the policy was not communicated to the deceased and was blocked due to his demise, implying no concluded contract existed – The Supreme Court set aside the NCDRC’s order, restored the District Forum’s order in favor of the appellants, and directed LIC to pay the insurance benefits as per the policy terms – The Court found clear presumption of acceptance of the policy by LIC, as the first premium receipt indicated the corporation was on risk from the receipt date – The Court relied on precedents that establish the principles of insurance contracts and the obligations of good faith expected from insurers – The Supreme Court concluded that LIC had indeed entered into a contract with the policyholder before his death, and thus, was liable to pay the insurance benefits to the appellants.

May 12, 2024 sclaw