![[Bombay Public Trust Act, 1950, S. 80] | [Civil court jurisdiction barred for disputes concerning public trusts unless specific conditions are met.]](https://i0.wp.com/sclaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Code-of-Civil-Procedure.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
Judicial review becomes necessary where there is an illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety. A policy decision which is totally arbitrary; contrary to the law, or a decision which has been taken without proper application of mind, or in total disregard of relevant factors is liable to be interfered with, as that also is the mandate of law and the Constitution.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEVESH SHARMA — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose and Sudhanshu Dhulia, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
Abkari Act – Offence in question is 2003, Final report after delayed investigation was submitted in 2006, Accused-appellant was convicted in 2008, and that more than 20 years have passed since the commission of the offence – It fit to modify the sentence of the Accused-appellant to serve a period of three months – Appeal partly allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SATHYAN — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 2363…
No Constitutional Court can issue a writ of mandamus to a legislature to enact a law on a particular subject in a particular manner – Court may, at the highest, record its opinion or recommendation on the necessity of either amending the existing law or coming out with a new law.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. K. PUSHPAVANAM AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ.…
Release of rosewood logs and lorry – Illicit rosewood logs. 37 such logs were found beneath 92 bunches of bananas and 26 bags of rice husk – Lorry nor the rosewood logs are available as both have been sold by the state and the amount is lying with the exchequer, hence cannot be returned back – Release order upheld.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASSISTANT WILD LIFE WARDEN AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. K. K. MOIDEEN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh…
Imposition of the minimum 75% eligibility condition, therefore, does not subserve the object of introducing the sports quota, but is, rather destructive of it; the criterion, in that sense subverted the object and is discriminatory; it therefore, falls afoul of the equality clause, in Article 14 of the Constitution
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DEV GUPTA — Appellant Vs. PEC UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Ravindra Bhat and Aravind Kumar, JJ. )…
Adverse possession – A party claiming adverse possession must prove that his possession is “nec vi, nec clam, nec precario”, that is, peaceful, open and continuous. The possession must be adequate in continuity, in publicity and in extent to show that their possession is adverse to the true owner. It must start with a wrongful disposition of the rightful owner and be actual, visible, exclusive, hostile and continued over the statutory period.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GOVERNMENT OF KERALA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. JOSEPH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ. )…
Insurance Policy – Mere knowledge on the part of the insurer that there was a breach of warranty would not amount to a waiver in the absence of an express representation to that effect.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HIND OFFSHORE PVT. LTD. — Appellant Vs. IFFCO – TOKIO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and M.M. Sundresh,…
Jammu and Kashmir Civil Service Regulations, 1956 – Article 77D – Claim for Pay Protection – High Court was erroneous when it came to the conclusion that the appellant was not appointed on a substantive basis and, therefore, she does not satisfy the criteria laid down by Article 77D – Benefit of pay protection granted.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASMA SHAW — Appellant Vs. THE ISLAMIA COLLEGE OF SCIENCE AND COMMERCE SRINAGAR KASHMIR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka…
Uttar Pradesh Gangsters and Anti-Social Activities (Prevention) Act, 1986 – Sections 2 and 3 – Quashing of FIR – Final report was filed by the investigation officer stating that no case was made out to proceed against the appellant for the alleged offences – Final report having been accepted by the Additional Sessions Judge, nothing more requires to be adjudicated upon in the present matter – Appeal disposed of.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MOHMOOD ALI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Held, although a person working in a Nationalised Bank is a public servant, yet the provisions of Section 197 of the CrPC would not be attracted at all as Section 197 is attracted only in cases where the public servant is such who is not removable from his service save by or with the sanction of the Government
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH A. SREENIVASA REDDY — Appellant Vs. RAKESH SHARMA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…