Telangana Value Added Tax Rules, 2005 – Rule 64 – Service of orders and notices – When any statutory or administrative order, visits a citizen or entity with adverse consequences, such an order has to be served upon the concerned person; especially so, when that order is appealable or subject to revision by higher authorities.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. NEERAJA PIPES PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : S. Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Datta,…
Murder – Acquittal – Failed to prove of motive – panch witnesses for their recovery also did not support the prosecution – Remaining circumstances relied on by the prosecution and held as proved by the courts below would not unerringly point to the guilt of the appellants –
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHANKAR — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 954…
Dishonour of cheque – Liability – the criminal proceedings under Section 138 of the NI Act will stand terminated only in relation to the corporate debtor if the same is taken over by a new management – Section 138 proceedings in relation to the signatories/directors who are liable/covered by the two provisos to Section 32A(1) will continue in accordance with law.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH AJAY KUMAR RADHEYSHYAM GOENKA — Appellant Vs. TOURISM FINANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Abhay S.…
Murder – Acquittal – Conviction based on oral testimony of witnesses – Delay in lodging the FIR – Names not mentioned in FIR – Taking into consideration the delay in lodging the FIR, with the circumstance of their names not being mentioned in the contemporaneous documents, the possibility of the accused being falsely implicated cannot be ruled out – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH NAND LAL AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF CHHATTISGARH — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai, Vikram Nath and Sanjay Karol, JJ.…
Any order passed at this stage may affect number of persons and further may result in unsettling many positions which have already settled with the lapse of time. Hence, we do not find that a case is made for interference by this Court.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANOJ KUMAR JINDAL — Appellant Vs. RAJNI MAHAJAN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Civil…
Extra Judicial Confession – Evidentiary value of such confession also depends on the person to whom it is made. Going by the natural course of human conduct, normally, a person would confide about a crime committed by him only with such a person in whom he has implicit faith – Normally, a person would not make a confession to someone who is totally a stranger to him –
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PAWAN KUMAR CHOURASIA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF BIHAR — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016- Sections 18 and 25 – Exclusion of assets owned by a third-party, but in the possession of the Corporate Debtor held under contractual arrangements, from the definition of the expression “assets”, is limited to Section 18 – In other words, the Explanation under Section 18 does not extend to Section 25.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VICTORY IRON WORKS LIMITED — Appellant Vs. JITENDRA LOHIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : V. Ramasubramanian and Pankaj Mithal, JJ. ) Civil…
Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 – Sections 507(a) – Special provisions as to rural areas – Once there is a notification issued by the competent authority in exercise of power under Section 507(a) which is a special provision in reference to rural areas, such of the rural areas cease to be included therein upon issuance of the notification and shall thereafter include in and form part of the urban areas in terms of the notification.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH MOHINDER SINGH(DEAD) THROUGH LRS AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. NARAIN SINGH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi, C.T. Ravikumar and Bela…
Constitution of India – Article 226(2) – Even if a small part of the cause of action arises within the territorial jurisdiction of a high court, the same by itself could not have been a determinative factor compelling the High Court to keep the writ petitions alive against the appellant to decide the matter qua the impugned notification, on merit.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF GOA — Appellant Vs. SUMMIT ONLINE TRADE SOLUTIONS (P) LTD AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Ravindra Bhat and…
Wills cannot be proved only on the basis of their age – the presumption under Section 90 as to the regularity of documents more than 30 years of age is inapplicable when it comes to proof of wills, which have to be proved in terms of Sections 63(c) of the Succession Act, 1925, and Section 68 of the Evidence Act, 1872.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASHUTOSH SAMANTA (D) BY LRS. AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SM. RANJAN BALA DASI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : S. Ravindra Bhat…