Supreme Court of India Judgements

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

Category: Specific Performance

Specific Performance

Suit for specific performance filed within limitation cannot be dismissed on the sole ground of delay or laches. HELD discretion of the Court whether some additional amount ought or ought not to be paid by the plaintiff once a decree of specific performance is passed in its favour, even at the appellate stage.

Oct 18, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH FERRODOUS ESTATES (PVT.) LIMITED — Appellant Vs. P. GOPIRATHNAM (DEAD) AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : R.F. Nariman and Navin Sinha, JJ. )…

Specific Performance

Clever ploys cannot always pay dividends. HELD a short-cut was found by the petitioner/plaintiff to retain the plaint as such, but to seek permission to pay deficit court fee, as though what was filed in the first instance was actually a suit for specific performance. Such a dubious approach should not be allowed .

Feb 10, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ATMA RAM — Appellant Vs. CHARANJIT SINGH — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ. ) Special Leave Petition (C) No.27598…

Specific Performance

Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Section 115 – Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section 20 – Decree of possession by way of specific performance of the Agreement of Sale – Where the defendant No.2 (the appellant herein) had contested the suit and had put forth the contention that he was a bonafide purchaser without notice HELD the Courts below have on the contrary concluded that the defendants No.1 and 2 being of the same village, the defendant No.2 would have knowledge of the agreement entered into by the defendant No.1 in favour of the plaintiff – Such conclusion is only an assumption

Jan 28, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUKHWINDER SINGH — Appellant Vs. JAGROOP SINGH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…

Specific Performance

Hindu Succession Act, 1956 – Section 15 – Suit for specific performance of an agreement of sale – When a person concerned knew the right position relating to the title in property in his possession, he could not plead that he was induced to hold an erroneous belief because of the conduct of real owner of that property

Oct 27, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SIRDAR K.B. RAMACHANDRA RAJ URS. (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. — Appellant Vs. SARAH C. URS AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra and…

Specific Performance

Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section 16(1)(c) – Suit for specific performance of agreement – Readiness and willingness – The application for extension of time made after expiry of the time prescribed is sufficient evidence for the incapacity of the plaintiff to perform his obligations demonstrating readiness and willingness

Oct 4, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  RAVI SETIA — Appellant Vs. MADAN LAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Navin Sinha and Indira Banerjee, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No(s).…

Specific Performance

Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section 20(2)(c) – Suit for specific performance – Agreement to sell – To take benefit of clause (c) of sub­section (2) of Section 20 of the Specific Relief Act, the defendant in a suit for specific performance must show that he entered into the contract under the circumstances which though rendering the contract voidable, make it inequitable

Sep 29, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH LEELADHAR (D) THR. LRS. — Appellant Vs. VIJAY KUMAR (D) THR. LRS. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose,…

You missed

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
Consumer

”Eggshell Skull Rule Applied: Supreme Court Holds Hospital Liable for Post-Surgery Complications” Consumer Law – Medical Negligence – Appellant-Jyoti Devi underwent an appendectomy at Suket Hospital, but suffered continuous pain post-surgery – A needle was later found in her abdomen, leading to another surgery for its removal – The case revolves around medical negligence, deficient post-operative care by the hospital, and the determination of just compensation for the claimant-appellant – The claimant-appellant sought enhancement of compensation for the pain, suffering, and financial expenses incurred due to medical negligence – The respondents argued against the presence of the needle being related to the initial surgery and contested the amount of compensation – The Supreme Court restored the District Forum’s award of Rs.5 lakhs compensation, with 9% interest, and Rs.50,000 for litigation costs – The Court applied the ‘eggshell skull’ rule, holding the hospital liable for all consequences of their negligent act, regardless of the claimant’s pre-existing conditions – The Court emphasized the benevolent nature of the Consumer Protection Act and the need for just compensation that is adequate, fair, and equitable – The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the lower commissions’ awards and reinstating the District Forum’s decision for just compensation.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw
Corruption

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Section 7(a) – Taking undue advantage to influence public servant by corrupt or illegal means or by exercise of personal influence – The appeal challenges the High Court of Karnataka’s decision to quash an FIR against respondent for alleged bribery, based on a complaint by the appellant – The main issue is whether the High Court was correct in quashing the FIR, which was based on allegations of bribery and corruption against the respondent – The Supreme Court found the High Court’s decision legally unsustainable, noting that it failed to consider direct evidence, such as a pendrive, indicating the respondent’s complicity – The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, quashed the High Court’s judgment, and restored the FIR for further legal proceedings.

Apr 28, 2024 sclaw