![[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)
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Sections 34 and 37 – Interferece with arbitral award – Alternative view – Jurisdiction – Merely because another view could have been taken, can hardly be a ground for the learned Single Judge to have interfered with the arbitral award
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UHL POWER COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, CJI, A.S. Bopanna and Hima Kohli,…
Ordinarily, this Court is cautious in interfering with an order of acquittal, especially when the order of acquittal has been confirmed upto the High Court. It is only in rarest of rare cases, where the High Court, on an absolutely wrong process of reasoning and a legally erroneous and perverse approach to the facts of the case, ignoring some of the most vital facts, has acquitted the accused, that the same may be reversed by this Court, exercising jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH RAJESH PRASAD — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER ETC — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai and B.V.…
Patna High Court holding NCCF to be “State” within the meaning of Article 12 of the Constitution of India was thus accepted by the NCCF and the appeals were consciously withdrawn. Mr. Dhingra, therefore, submits that in view of the change in the circumstances, especially in the light of withdrawal of the appeal by NCCF, liberty be granted to the petitioners to file appropriate proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to agitate and claim reliefs prayed by way of substantive prayer (b) in the instant petition. Allowed
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH N.C.C.F. EMPLOYEES UNION (REGD) (RECOGNIZED) AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and…
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 – any decision of such a Tribunal, including the one passed under Section 25 of the Act could be subjected to scrutiny only before a Division Bench of a High Court within whose jurisdiction the Tribunal concerned falls. This unambiguous exposition of law has to be followed scrupulously while deciding the jurisdictional High Court for the purpose of bringing in challenge against an order of transfer of an Original Application from one bench of Tribunal to another bench
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. ALAPAN BANDYOPADHYAY — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and C.T. Ravikumar, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 197…
The issue of maintenance has to be decided afresh by the concerned court/family court in accordance with law, taking into account all relevant factors including the income of the respective spouses, the number of persons actually dependent on the spouses etc. The parties shall make a disclosure of their income, assets, savings, etc. before the concerned court.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UMA PRIYADARSHINI S. — Appellant Vs. SUCHITH K NAIR — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos.…
Demand raised by the appellants against the respondent company, of excise duty on the liquor lost in fire, is authorised by law and has rightly been raised as per the applicable provisions of the Act of 1910, the Excise Manual and the Rules of 1969. – Fire incident in question cannot be said to be that of an event beyond human control and the High Court has been in error in holding that no negligence could be imputed on the respondent company.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH STATE OF UP THROUGH SECRETARY (EXCISE) AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M/S MCDOWELL AND COMPANY LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar, Dinesh…
NEET – Education – Admission – Reservation – Counselling on the basis of NEET-PG 2021 and NEET- UG 2021 shall be conducted by giving effect to the reservation as provided by the notice, including the 27 per cent reservation for the OBC category and 10 per cent reservation for EWS category in the AIQ seats.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NEIL AURELIO NUNES AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and A.S.…
Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 – Section 42 – Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954 – Sections 13 and 13(A)(2) – Possession – Transfer of rights -Land allotted to Scheduled Caste – Declaration – Appellant-original defendant being a Scheduled Caste belonging to State of Punjab and being an ordinarily and permanent resident of the State of Punjab cannot claim the benefit of a Scheduled Caste in the State of Rajasthan for the purpose of purchase of the land belonging to a Scheduled Caste person of State of Rajasthan, which was given to original allottee as Scheduled Caste landless person,
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHADAR RAM (D) THR. LRS — Appellant Vs. JASSA RAM AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. )…
Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulations, 2010 – Regulation 44 – Employee delinquent has no absolute right to avail the services by ex employee of the Bank as his DR in the departmental proceedings – it is observed that there is no absolute right in favour of the delinquent officer’s to be represented in the departmental proceedings through the agent of his choice and the same can be restricted by the employer. – High Court has committed an error in permitting respondent delinquent officer to be represented in the departmental enquiry through exemployee of the Bank.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE RAJASTHAN MARUDHARA GRAMIN BANK (RMGB) AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. RAMESH CHANDRA MEENA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and…
Termination of mandate – Appointment of fresh arbitrator – Earlier Arbitral Tribunal-Stationery Purchase Committee comprising of Additional Secretary, Department of Revenue as President and (i) Deputy Secretary, Department of Revenue, (ii) Deputy Secretary, General Administration Department, (iii) Deputy Secretary, Department of Finance, (iv) Deputy Secretary/Under Secretary, General Administration Department and (v) Senior Deputy Controller of Head Office, Printing as Members, has lost its mandate by operation of law in view of Section 12(5) read with Seventh Schedule and a fresh arbitrator has to be appointed under the provisions of the Arbitration Act, 1996
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ELLORA PAPER MILLS LIMITED — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. )…