Supreme Court of India Judgements

46448 Judgements hosted as on 05/05/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: State Laws

State Laws

U.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1997 – HELD held that a financier of a motor vehicle/transport vehicle in respect of which a hire-purchase or lease or hypothecation agreement has been entered, is liable to tax from the date of taking possession of the said vehicle under the said agreement.

Feb 27, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAHINDRA AND MAHINDRA FINANCIAL SERVICES LIMITED — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna,…

State Laws

Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 – Sections 45 and 49(2) – Exemption notification should be strictly construed and given meaning according to legislative intendment – Statutory provisions providing for exemption have to be interpreted in the light of the words employed in them and there cannot be any addition or subtraction from the statutory provisions – Respondent was not entitled to the exemption from payment of purchase tax on the ground that it did not fulfill the eligibility criteria/conditions and there was a breach of declaration in Form.

Jan 29, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF GUJARAT — Appellant Vs. ARCELOR MITTAL NIPPON STEEL INDIA LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Sanjiv Khanna, JJ. )…

State Laws

Board Resolution be approved by General Body and the resolutions for the years 1995 ­2000 were not traced, it has been commented in the Report that the Board resolution is without authorisation – Respondent is a member of the Society and being entitled to allotment of a plot – Allotment being of the year 2000, construction has also been raised – Appeal dismissed.

Jan 16, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH VELAGACHARLA JAYARAM REDDY — Appellant Vs. M. VENKATA RAMANA AND OTHERS .ETC. — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, CJI, A.S. Bopanna and Hima…

State Laws

Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 – Sections 3(17) and 9(3) – Government Grants Act, 1895 – Transfer of land — Terms of the lease deed though provide for sub-lease for agricultural purposes but sub-lessees can claim no independent rights as a tenure holder – High Court rightly observed that appellants herein being sub-lessees would be tenure holder as per sub-Section 9(3) of the Ceiling Act – Appeal dismissed.

Jan 15, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HARDEV SINGH — Appellant Vs. PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY, KASHIPUR AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer and Krishna Murari, JJ. ) Civil…

State Laws

Demand raised by the appellants against the respondent company, of excise duty on the liquor lost in fire, is authorised by law and has rightly been raised as per the applicable provisions of the Act of 1910, the Excise Manual and the Rules of 1969. – Fire incident in question cannot be said to be that of an event beyond human control and the High Court has been in error in holding that no negligence could be imputed on the respondent company.

Jan 13, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH STATE OF UP THROUGH SECRETARY (EXCISE) AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M/S MCDOWELL AND COMPANY LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar, Dinesh…

State Laws

Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 – Section 42 – Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954 – Sections 13 and 13(A)(2) – Possession – Transfer of rights -Land allotted to Scheduled Caste – Declaration – Appellant-original defendant being a Scheduled Caste belonging to State of Punjab and being an ordinarily and permanent resident of the State of Punjab cannot claim the benefit of a Scheduled Caste in the State of Rajasthan for the purpose of purchase of the land belonging to a Scheduled Caste person of State of Rajasthan, which was given to original allottee as Scheduled Caste landless person,

Jan 5, 2022 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  BHADAR RAM (D) THR. LRS — Appellant Vs. JASSA RAM AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. )…

State Laws

Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1950 – Section 38E – Grant of ownership certificate -the protected tenants are deemed to be owners – Once the protected tenants are deemed to be owners, there could not be any occupancy rights certificate as the purchasers were divested of their ownership by virtue of the grant of ownership certificate under Section 38E of the Tenancy Act. Such certificate was also not disputed by the purchasers – Therefore, title of the protected tenants is complete and the ownership unambiguously vests with them.

Dec 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH P. SATYANARAYANA — Appellant Vs. NANDYALA RAMA KRISHNA REDDY — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ. ) SLP (Civil) No.…

State Laws

Karnataka Agricultural Produce Marketing (Regulation and Development) Act of 1966 – Sections 65 and Section 65(2-A) – Market fee – Liability – Merely imports notified agricultural produce from outside the State for the purpose of cleaning and processing without selling the processed produce within the market area is not liable to pay market fee.

Dec 19, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH APMC YASHWANTHAPURA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY — Appellant Vs. M/S. SELVA FOODS THROUGH ITS MANAGING PARTNER — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy and…

State Laws

Punjab Security of Land Tenures Act, 1953 – Sections 14A and 25 – Jurisdiction of Civil Court — Expression “validity of the decision or the Order” in Section 25 of the Act, would not include a case where, despite a dispute projected, that there was no landlord-tenant relationship, the Authority decides the said issue in the course of the Order of Eviction, under Section 14A, after brushing aside the tenant’s objection relating to his position, viz., that he is not a tenant. In such a situation, the validity is tied-up with the fundamental aspect of absence of power of the Authority to decide on the question of landlord-tenant relationship.

Nov 21, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASSA SINGH (D) BY LRS. — Appellant Vs. SHANTI PARSHAD(D) BY LRS. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : K.M Joseph and S. Ravindra…

State Laws

Kerala Private Forests (Vesting and Assignment) Act, 1971 – Sections 3 and 8 – Forest lands – Settlement of disputes – Respondent successfully urged before the High Court that what was demarcated was only 100 hectares and the others were not demarcated since they were cultivated – This was borne out by the final report – Possession with respect to 100 hectares of uncultivated forest lands was also covered by draft statement of land furnished to the Board in proceedings under the KLR Act – Appeal dismissed.

Nov 4, 2021 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF KERALA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. M/S POPULAR ESTATES (NOW DISSOLVED) AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and S.…

You missed

I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 120-B read with Section 420 – Cheating – The case involves fraudulent transactions by accused in connivance with Indian Bank officials resulting in interest-free advances to the petitioners – The main issue is whether the petitioners were involved in cheating the bank and if they availed any undue benefit from the fraudulent transactions – The petitioners argued that they were not involved in the cheating, had not availed any undue benefit, and that the transactions were normal business dealings – The court dismissed the Special Leave Petitions, upholding the Trial Court’s conviction of the petitioners for cheating the bank through unauthorized transactions.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Limitation

Limitation Act, 1963 – Section 5 – Condonation of Delay – Delay of 1663 days – The State of U.P. filed a SLP against an order dated 13.11.2009 by the Allahabad High Court, with a delay of 1,633 days – The main issue was the condonation of the significant delay in filing the SLP – The State argued that the delay was due to the time taken for obtaining legal opinion and permissions, and later, the realization that the appeal was not filed initially – The application for condonation of delay was dismissed, and consequently, the SLP was also dismissed – The court found the explanation for the delay unsatisfactory, especially since the State was aware of the High Court’s order when it was passed – The court did not find sufficient cause to condone the delay, leading to the dismissal of the SLP.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Property Matters

Partition Suit – The dispute involves partition of properties left by Late ‘R’ with the main contention over roof rights of a property in Kota and another in Jaipur – The primary issue is the valuation of roof rights for further construction and the equal distribution of property among co-sharers – The appellants argue that the valuation report failed to assess the value of roof rights, which would affect the overall property valuation and entitlement of co-sharers – The respondents maintain that the property valuation and shares were appropriately determined by the approved Valuer and upheld by both the Trial Court and High Court – The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, finding no merit in revaluating the property or altering the determined shares of the parties – The Court emphasized the importance of family ties over property disputes and suggested alternative dispute resolution methods for amicable settlements – The Court referenced the case of Afcons Infrastructure Limited vs. Cherian Varkey Construction Company Private Limited, advocating for ADR in family-related property disputes – The Supreme Court concluded that revisiting the valuation and partition would only prolong litigation and upheld the decisions of the lower courts.

May 5, 2024 sclaw
Constitution Municipal Laws

West Bengal Municipal(Building) Rules, 2007 – Rule 50 – Open spaces for building in areas other than municipalities in hill areas – The appellants challenge the High Court of Calcutta’s order regarding a contempt petition related to their residential property construction and its compliance with Rule 50 of Rules, 2007 – The appellants argue that the writ petition was a private matter and should not have been entertained by the High Court – They also claim that municipal authorities are unfairly pressuring them due to the contempt proceedings – The respondent claims that the appellants violated the sanctioned building plan, justifying the High Court’s direction for an enquiry – The Supreme Court allowed the appellants to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, ensuring their objections would be considered objectively without prejudice from the contempt or writ proceedings – The court expressed reservations about the High Court’s exercise of writ jurisdiction in a private dispute and suggested the civil court as the appropriate forum for grievances – The appeal was disposed of with the appellants given the liberty to challenge the enquiry report and show cause notice, without cost order.

May 5, 2024 sclaw