Category: Environment

Prior environmental clearance – It is not necessary for the Central Government or for that matter, NHAI, to apply for prior environmental/forest clearances or permissions, as the case may be, at the stage of planning or taking an in principle decision to formalize the Project of constructing a new national highway manifested in notification under Section 2(2), including until the stage of issuing notification under Section 3A of the 1956 Act.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION UNIT — Appellant Vs. P.V. KRISHNAMOORTHY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar, B.R. Gavai and Krishna…

Minerals (Other than Atomic and Hydro Carbons Energy Minerals) Concession Rules, 2016-Lessees are granted time up to end of January, 2021 for the removal of the minerals excavated/mined on or before 15.03.2018 subject to payment of royalties and other charges. HELD If within the time stipulated above, the lessees could not remove the mineral, the Government shall invoke the power under Rule 12(1)(hh) – Application disposed of.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH CHOWGULE AND COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. GOA FOUNDATION AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. A. Bobde, CJI., A. S. Bopanna…

HELD The Registration Certificate of vehicles which do not possess a valid PUC Certificate shall be forthwith suspended and/or cancelled, and penal measures initiated against the owner and/or the person(s) in possession and/or control of the offending vehicle, in accordance with law.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Appellant Vs. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra…

Non-Supply of fuel to vehicles without PUC Certificate – Appeal against – Tribunal had no power and/or authority and/or jurisdiction to pass orders directing the Appellant State Government to issue orders, instructions or directions on dealers, outlets and petrol pumps not to supply fuel to vehicles without PUC Certificate – Appeal allowed.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Appellant Vs. CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra…

IN RE: REGISTRATION OF BS IV VEHICLES HELD we allow registration of vehicles only, not registered during lockdown in March, 2020 and for no other reason” “in the Delhi & NCR, NO registration of the vehicles of BS-IV is to be made after 31.03.2020. This is for the rest of the country and only due to lockdown, not to be used for any other purpose/reason and for registration of other vehicles of which registration was not done for any other reason.

IN RE: REGISTRATION OF BS IV VEHICLES HELD we allow registration of vehicles only, not registered during lockdown in March, 2020 and for no other reason” “in the Delhi &…

SCOI considered whether the NHAI, which owns and controls the highway, led to a duty of care to the users of the highway. HELD NHAI, which indisputably owns and controls the highway, and on whose behalf it was constructed, and for which the maintenance and operation agreement was entered into, led to a duty of care, to the users (of the highway)” The failure of the NHAI to ensure remedial action, and likewise the failure by Rathod (mining contractor) to take measures to prevent the accident, prima facie, disclose their liability. “

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE DIRECTOR GENERAL (ROAD DEVELOPMENT) NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. AAM AADMI LOKMANCH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before :…

Environment Law – Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 – Section 154 – Degradation of environment hill cutting at Katraj Ghat. Penalty HELD The directions were not based on any scientific evidence or report of any technical expert of state – Even the impugned notification does not specify what constitutes “hills”, and how they can be applied in towns and communities set in undulating areas and hilly terrain – Appeal partly allowed.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE DIRECTOR GENERAL (ROAD DEVELOPMENT) NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. AAM AADMI LOKMANCH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before :…

You missed

“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.