![[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)
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 provide for the remedy of appeal to Supreme Court only with respect to the orders which are passed by the NCDRC in its original jurisdiction or as the court of first instance (original orders) and no further appeal lies against the orders which are passed by the NCDRC in exercise of its appellate or revisional jurisdiction.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S UNIVERSAL SOMPO GENERAL INSURANCE CO. LTD. — Appellant Vs. SURESH CHAND JAIN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj…
Medical bills which have been issued by Hospital and Research Centre, as per which appellant had incurred expenditure – – Direction to pay the amount, Rs.4,09,000/- in terms of Medical bills with interest of 7% per annum from the date of filing of the complaint before the District Forum till its realisation – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HEM RAJ — Appellant Vs. THE NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD. — Respondent ( Before : B.V. Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ. ) Civil…
Labour Law – Settlement – Model Standing Order – Any settlement, the employee Union enters into with the Employer would not override the Model Standing Order, unless it is more beneficial to the employees.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHARATIYA KAMGAR KARMACHARI MAHASANGH — Appellant Vs. M/S. JET AIRWAYS LTD. — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay Karol, JJ. )…
Under Section 102 (1) of Cr.P.C., the Police have the power to seize the passport but there is no power to impound the same – Even if the power of seizure of a passport is exercised under Section 102, the Police cannot withhold the said document and the same must be forwarded to the Passport Authority – It is for the Passport Authority to decide whether the passport needs to be impounded or not.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHENNUPATI KRANTHI KUMAR — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal,…
Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 – Section 8 – Reference to Arbitration – Non-family shareholdings, in any event, cannot be bound by the terms of Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) since they are not parties to the document – Order referring the suit to arbitration under Section 8 of the Act, 1996 set aside – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH VINOD KUMAR SACHDEVA (DEAD) THR LRS. — Appellant Vs. ASHOK KUMAR SACHDEVA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI.,…
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Section 100 – Second Appeal – Substantial questions of law – In appeals arising out of the state of Punjab or the State of Haryana, courts are not required to frame substantial questions of law as per section 100 of CPC.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GURBACHAN SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS — Appellant Vs. GURCHARAN SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LRS AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and…
Right to vote – Voter’s right to know about the full background of a candidate is an added dimension to the rich tapestry of our constitutional jurisprudence – Democracy has been held to be a part of one of the essential features of the Constitution.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHIM RAO BASWANTH RAO PATIL — Appellant Vs. K. MADAN MOHAN RAO AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Ravindra Bhat and Aravind…
De-sealing of property – If a property sealed by the Cantonment Board is alleged to have unauthorized construction cannot be requested to be ‘de-sealed’ when building plan not sanctioned.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAM KISHAN (DECEASED) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. MANISH KUMAR AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 – Murder – Acquittal – Once there is no eye-witness of the incident the prosecution will have to establish a motive for the commission of the crime inasmuch as in a case of direct evidence, motive may not have a major role
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHATRUGHAN — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Ahsanuddin Amanullah, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.437 of…
Accused could only be attributed with the knowledge that it was likely to cause an injury which was likely to cause the death – Case on hand does not fall within clause thirdly of Section 300 of the IPC – Conviction of the accused under Section 304 Part I of the IPC is altered to one under Section 304 Part II of the IPC – Appeal partly allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANBAZHAGAN — Appellant Vs. THE STATE REPRESENTED BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. )…