Supreme Court of India Judgements

46400 Judgements hosted as on 14/04/2024 - Search (FREE), Subscribe, Read & Download

Category: Will & Succession

Will & Succession

Hindu Minority and Guardianship Act, 1956 – Natural Guardians – Section 6 and 8 – A Karta is the manager of the joint family property – He is not the guardian of the minor members of the joint family – What Section 6 of the Act provides is that the natural guardian of a minor Hindu shall be his guardian for all intents and purposes except so far as the undivided interest of the minor in the joint family property is concerned HELD In such an eventuality it would be the mother alone who would be the natural guardian and, therefore, the document executed by her cannot be said to be a void document

Jan 8, 2020 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M. ARUMUGAM — Appellant Vs. AMMANIAMMAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer and Deepak Gupta, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No.…

Will & Succession

Succession Act, 1925 – Sections 250, 263, 268, 276, 278, 283, 283(1)C and 283(1) – Probate of Will – Revocation of – If it is accepted that in probate proceedings persons who have been dis-inherited in the Will on mere no objection certificates by them without either being called by probate court to appear and certify their no objections or to file any pleading will lead to unsatisfactory result and may cause prejudice to persons who were not aware of the proceedings and are yet claimed to have submitted no objections

Nov 17, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANJU PURI — Appellant Vs. RAJIV SINGH HANSPAL — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and Navin Sinha, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 8455…

Will & Succession

Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Sections 5(v), 7 and 7(1) – Special Marriage Act, 1954 – Section 24 – Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 101, 102 and 103 – Suit for partition – Certificate of registration of marriage – In the agreement of marriage, it is only stated that both parties are of same caste and with the permission and consent of both of their fathers, they have entered into this agreement of marriage – This type of marriage is not recognized in law as Section 7 of the Act

Nov 17, 2019 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RATHNAMMA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SUJATHAMMA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and Hemant Gupta, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…

You missed

Arbitration Constitution

Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 – Sections 34 and 37 – Curative petition – The Court found that the arbitral tribunal’s decision was not perverse or irrational and that the CMRS certificate did not conclusively prove that defects were cured within the cure period – The Court emphasized the tribunal’s domain to interpret the contract and the limited scope of judicial interference in arbitral awards – The Supreme Court concluded that the curative petition was maintainable and that there was no miscarriage of justice in restoring the arbitral award.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw
Acquittal

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302, read with 34 – Murder – The Supreme Court found that the High Court did not properly address whether the Trial Court’s acquittal was a plausible conclusion from the evidence – The Supreme Court emphasized that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution and that the accused do not have to prove their innocence unless there is a statutory reverse onus – The Supreme Court concluded that the evidence did not warrant overturning the acquittal, as the Trial Court’s view was possible and not perverse.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw
I P C

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 – Murder – Dispute over a blocked pathway – The Court found no evidence of provocation by the deceased that would justify the appellants’ brutal attack, nor any exercise of the right to private defence – The Court applied principles from previous judgments to determine the lack of private defence and the presence of intention to cause harm – The Supreme Court concluded that the appellants’ actions were not in self-defence and that their intention was to inflict harm, affirming the lower courts’ decisions.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw
Consumer

Consumer Law – Insurance Act, 1938 – Section 45 – Policy not to be called in question on ground of mis-statement after two years – The Court found no suppression of material facts and criticized the NCDRC for not requiring proper evidence from the respondent – The judgment discusses the principles of ‘uberrimae fidei’ (utmost good faith) and the burden of proof in insurance contracts – The Court concluded that the insurance company failed to prove the alleged suppression of facts, thus the repudiation was unjustified.

Apr 14, 2024 sclaw