![[MPID Act, S. 2(c) & 2(d)] – Amounts advanced with promise of return and interest qualify as “deposit” accepted by “financial establishment” under the Act. – Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 Section 2(c) and Section 2(d) — Deposit and Financial Establishment — Amounts advanced to individuals with promise of repayment with interest constitute a “deposit” under Section 2(c) and the recipients are “financial establishments” under Section 2(d) of the MPID Act, irrespective of the transaction being termed as a “loan” — The nomenclature of the transaction is not determinative; the essential attributes of the transaction are key.](https://i0.wp.com/sclaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/State-Laws.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
![[Central Sales Tax Act, 1956, S. 3] – No State can levy VAT on inter-State sales; taxation power for inter-State trade vests exclusively with the Union. – Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 269 — Taxes on sale or purchase of goods in the course of inter-State trade or commerce — Levied and collected by Union but assigned to States — Parliament’s power to formulate principles for determining when such sale/purchase takes place — State legislature’s power restricted to intra-State sales.](https://i0.wp.com/sclaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Constitution-of-India.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
Repudiation of insurance claim – Consumer – HELD National Commission ought not to have gone beyond the grounds of repudiation and into the nature of coverage, also when the only ground on which repudiation of the claim was made was lack of financial coverage. Matter remanded to State Commission
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JSK INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD. — Appellant Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) Civil…
Right to make representation is a fundamental right of the detenu under Article 22(5) of the Constitution and supply of the illegible copy of documents which has been relied upon by the detaining authority indeed has deprived him in making an effective representation and denial thereof will hold the order of detention illegal and not in accordance with the procedure contemplated under law.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF MANIPUR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. BUYAMAYUM ABDUL HANAN @ ANAND AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and…
Section 11 CPC is not the foundation of the doctrine of res judicata but is merely the statutory recognition thereof HELD doctrine of res judicata is on a high pedestal, treating it to be a part of rule of law.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH S. RAMACHANDRA RAO — Appellant Vs. S. NAGABHUSHANA RAO AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) Civil…
Advocates Act, 1961 – Section 32 – Wife contesting as an GPA of party subsequently enrolled as and Advocate – Will continue as GPA as HC already decided matter – subsequent proceedings on issue hit by res judicata HELD High Court has mischaracterised the issue before it. Appeal allowed
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH S. RAMACHANDRA RAO — Appellant Vs. S. NAGABHUSHANA RAO AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) Civil…
Income Tax Act, 1961 – Section 10(23C) – Exemption – Charitable institution, society or trust etc. – Requirement of the charitable institution, society or trust etc., to ‘solely’ engage itself in education or educational activities, and not engage in any activity of profit, means that such institutions cannot have objects which are unrelated to education.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH M/S NEW NOBLE EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY — Appellant Vs. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1 AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh…
Arbitration – Death of arbitrator – Appointment of fresh arbitrator – This Court Appoint Shri Justice K. Chandru, Former Judge of Madras High Court as the Sole Arbitrator in place of Shri Ram Prakash Bajaj, Retired District Judge (now deceased), to settle the dispute between the parties.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUNIL JAIN (D) THR. LRS. AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. CHANDRA KALA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari,…
Compassionate Appointment – HELD in the facts and circumstances of the case, the department rightly appointed the respondent’s daughter on the post of Assistant Meter Reader considering her qualification at the time of making the application for compassionate appointment.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DELHI JAL BOARD — Appellant Vs. NIRMALA DEVI — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and Krishna Murari, JJ. ) Civil Appeal N0. 7047…
Commercial Courts Act, 2015 – S 3 – A and C Act, 1996 – Ss 2(1)(e) 9, 14 and 34 -HELD Civil Judge (Senior Division) designated as Commercial Court to decide the applications or appeals arising out of arbitration under the provisions of Act, 1996 cannot be said to be illegal and bad in law. On the contrary, the same can be said to be absolutely in consonance with Sections 3 & 10 of Act, 2015.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JAYCEE HOUSING PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. REGISTRAR (GENERAL), ORISSA HIGH COURT, CUTTACK AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah…
Sections 11, 12, 12-A and 13 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 HELD Section 11(4A) must be interpreted harmoniously with Section 2(15), with which there is no conflict. Carrying out activity in the nature of trade, commerce or business, or service in relation to such activities, should be conducted in the course of achieving the general public utility object, and the income, profit or surplus or gains must, therefore, be incidental.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTIONS) — Appellant Vs. AHMEDABAD URBAN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI., S. Ravindra…
NDPS, 1985 – Section 2(xvii)(a) and 15 – Once a Chemical Examiner established that the seized ‘poppy straw’ tests positive for the contents of ‘morphine’ and ‘meconic acid’, no other test would be necessary for bringing home the guilt of the accused under the provisions of Section 15 of the 1985 Act.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH — Appellant Vs. NIRMAL KAUR @ NIMMO AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ.…