Specific performance -There is a distinction between readiness and willingness to perform the contract and both ingredients are necessary for the relief of Specific Performance – While readiness means the capacity of the Plaintiff to perform the contract which would include his financial position, willingness relates to the conduct of the Plaintiff.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH U.N. KRISHNAMURTHY (SINCE DECEASED) THR. LRS. — Appellant Vs. A. M. KRISHNAMURTHY — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. )…
HELD On account of competition between the existing and new sugar factory, it would be the farmers who will be the beneficiary as they would have an option to select the sugar mill which provides better service in the manner of payment of price. Keeping in view the recommendations of the Rangarajan Committee and the fact that the Central Government has exercised its jurisdiction to grant extension in time, the ultimate beneficiary would be the farmer and not the existing or the new sugar factory.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH SWAMI SAMARTH SUGARS AND AGRO INDUSTRIES LTD. — Appellant Vs. LOKNETE MARUTRAO GHULE PATIL DNYANESHWAR SAHAKARI SAKHAR KARKHANA LTD AND OTHERS — Respondent (…
Preliminary Assessment to try Juvenile as Adult – While considering a child as an adult one needs to look at his/her physical maturity, cognitive abilities, social and emotional competencies.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH BARUN CHANDRA THAKUR — Appellant Vs. MASTER BHOLU AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and Vikram Nath, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal…
Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 8 and 27 – Discovery of weapon – Disclosure statement – Evidence of discovery would be admissible as conduct under Section 8 of the Act quite apart from the admissibility of the disclosure statement under Section 27.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH SHAHAJA @ SHAHAJAN ISMAIL MOHD. SHAIKH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA — Respondent ( Before : Surya Kant and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. )…
(CrPC) – Section 374(2) – Appeal against conviction – Appeal was already admitted – No ground to dismiss an appeal against conviction, which was already admitted for final hearing, for non-prosecution without adverting to merits.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH DHANANJAY RAI @ GUDDU RAI — Appellant Vs. STATE OF BIHAR — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. )…
Assam Rifles – Order of discharge passed against the appellant herein is hereby set aside – Appellant shall be treated to have been in service till the time he would have completed the qualifying service for grant of pension.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH AMARENDRA KUMAR PANDEY — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Surya Kant and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. ) Civil…
Expression “falsely charges” in Section 221 IPC cannot mean giving false evidence as a prosecution witness against an accused person during the course of a criminal trial – An investigation may be transferred to the CBI only in “rare and exceptional cases”
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH HIMANSHU KUMAR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. )…
Parens patriae – Habeas Corpus proceeding brought by one parent against the other for the custody of their child, the court has before it the question of the rights of the parties as between themselves, and also has before it
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH RAJESWARI CHANDRASEKAR GANESH — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ.…
Dying declaration – An oral dying declaration – Whole idea of accepting a statement in the name of dying declaration comes from a maxim “Nemo moriturus praesumitur mentire” which means that a man will not meet his maker with a lie in his mouth –
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH KAMAL KHUDAL — Appellant Vs. STATE OF ASSAM — Respondent ( Before : Surya Kant and J.B. Pardiwala, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No. 470…
IBC – when admission is opposed on the ground of existence of an award or a decree in favour of the Corporate Debtor, and the Awarded/decretal amount exceeds the amount of the debt, the Adjudicating Authority would have to exercise its discretion under Section 7(5)(a) of the IBC to keep the admission of the application of the Financial Creditor in abeyance
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISON BENCH VIDARBHA INDUSTRIES POWER LIMITED — Appellant Vs. AXIS BANK LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…