Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Category: Property Matters

Property Matters Transfer Of Property Act

Considering the principles laid down in sub-section (4)(b) of Section 55 of the Transfer of Property Act Act, the seller will have a charge over the property subject matter of the sale for unpaid consideration and he can enforce the charge by filing a suit.

Aug 20, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before: Abhay S. Oka & Rajesh Bindal, JJ. Civil Appeal No.10412 of 2013 Decided on: 31.07.2023 Yogendra Prasad Singh (Dead) through LRs – Appellants Versus Ram…

Property Matters Transfer Of Property Act

Practice of ‘ta khubzul badlain’ in Bihar recognises that a duly executed sale deed will not operate as a transfer in praesenti but postpones the actual transfer of title, from the time of execution and registration of the deed, to the time of exchange of equivalents, that is, registration receipt and the sale consideration, if the intention of the parties was that title would pass only on payment of entire sale consideration

Aug 6, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH YOGENDRA PRASAD SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS — Appellant Vs. RAM BACHAN DEVI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh…

Property Matters Transfer Of Property Act

Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – Section 53A – the prospective purchaser having performed his part of the contract and lawfully in possession acquires possessory title which is liable to be protected in view of Section 53A of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882.

Jul 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GHANSHYAM — Appellant Vs. YOGENDRA RATHI — Respondent ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos.7527-7528 of 2012 Decided…

Municipal Laws Property Matters State Laws

Development Control Regulations for Greater Mumbai, 1991 – Regulation 34 – Claim for Additional TDR – Waiting to receive clearance of right over additional Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) in a pending acquisition proceeding does not amount to abandonment of the claim

May 11, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GODREJ AND BOYCE MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED THROUGH ITS CONSTITUTED ATTORNEY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF GREATER MUMBAI AND OTHERS —…

Evidence Act Property Matters Registration Act

Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – Section 54 – Registration Act, 1908 – Section 17 – Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 67 – Transfer of ownership – Where a deed of sale had been duly executed and registered, its delivery and payment of consideration have been endorsed thereon it would amount to a full transfer of ownership so as to entitle its purchaser to maintain a suit for possession of the property sold

May 9, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DAMODHAR NARAYAN SAWALE (D) THROUGH LRS. — Appellant Vs. SHRI TEJRAO BAJIRAO MHASKE AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and C.T.…

Housing Property Matters

Enhancement clause clause does not talk about demand of additional price on account of any other factor specially the one raised in the present appeals, namely, on account of enhancement of compensation on account of acquisition of land for carving of the plots Held the price as negotiated between the parties is clearly mentioned in the letter of allotment and the same has to be read as part of the lease-cum-sale agreement – Appeal dismissed

May 3, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE BELGAUM URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — Appellant Vs. DHRUVA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. )…

Property Matters

HELD (1) The entire property 5/1 Vasant Vihar, New Delhi, is deattached. The order dated 15.12.2017 is modified to such extent; (2) The application for impleadement filed by Mrs. Manju Awasty is disposed of; (3) The restriction imposed on Mrs. Monica Gogia, bona fide buyer and owner of C-1/2 Vasant Vihar, New Delhi from transferring the property as captioned, is vacated.

Apr 28, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RITIKA AWASTY — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Krishna Murari and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) I.A. Nos.…

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