![[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)
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Repudiation of claim – When the appellant was aware of the earlier insurance policy obtained from IFFCO-TOKIO by the respondent, there was no reason for not asking for such hydrology data of the previous year – As such, it cannot be said that there was non-disclosure of hydrology data or any fraud from the side of the respondent, as is projected by the appellant so as to repudiate the claim – There was no non-disclosure or fraud, as pleaded by the appellant to repudiate the claim – Appeal dismissed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE ORIENTAL INSURANCE CO. LIMITED — Appellant Vs. MALANA POWER COMPANY LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ.…
Real Estate ( R and D ) Act, 2016 – S 3(1) – Prior registration of real estate project with Real Estate Regulatory Authority – HELD its application is retroactive in character and the projects already completed or to which the completion certificate has been granted are not under its fold and therefore, vested or accrued rights, if any, in no manner are affected. It will apply after getting the ongoing projects and future projects registered under Section 3 to prospectively follow the mandate of the Act .
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH M/S. NEWTECH PROMOTERS AND DEVELOPERS PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. STATE OF UP AND OTHER ETC — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit,…
(CrPC) – S 482 – (IPC) – S 385 – Extortion – When a specific role was attributed to the accused, the High Court could not have quashed the FIR under Section 482 of the CrPC – cannot place reliance on a “draft charge-sheet” which is yet to be placed before the Magistrate to quash the criminal proceedings under Section 482.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH JITUL JENTILAL KOTECHA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS ETC — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and B.V. Nagarathna,…
(IPC) – S 307 read with S 34 – Attempt to murder – Appeal against conviction and sentence – When the deadly weapon – dagger has been used, there was a stab injury on the stomach and near the chest which can be said to be on the vital part of the body and the nature of injuries caused, it is rightly held that the appellants have committed the offence under Section 307 IPC
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SADAKAT KOTWAR AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and S. Bopanna, JJ. ) Criminal…
Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 – Illegal sand mining – Section 21(5) of the MMDR Act empowers the State Government to recover the price of the illegally-mined mineral, in addition to recovery of rent, royalty or tax – Penalty recommended by the Central Empowered Committee ‘CEC’ for illegal sand mining is in addition to the penalty that can be imposed by the State Government in terms of Section 21(5) of the Act
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH BAJRI LEASE LOI HOLDERS WELFARE SOCIETY THROUGH ITS PRESIDENT — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L.…
Chennai City Tenants Protection Act, 1921 – Section 2(4)(ii)(b) – Tamil Nadu City Tenants Protection Act, 1972 – Section 9 – Rent and eviction – While interpreting the expression “actual physical possession of land and building” would mean and require the tenant to be in actual physical possession – Rent and eviction – While interpreting the expression “actual physical possession of land and building” would mean and require the tenant to be in actual physical possession
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NATIONAL COMPANY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER — Appellant Vs. THE TERRITORY MANAGER, BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before :…
Service Law – Misconduct – Quantum of punishment – Scope of judicial review on the quantum of punishment is available but with a limited scope – Where the punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority is found to be shocking to the conscience of the Court, normally the disciplinary authority or the appellate authority should be directed to reconsider the question of imposition of penalty – after setting aside the penalty order, it is to be left to the disciplinary/appellate authority to take a call
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. EX. CONSTABLE RAM KARAN — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ.…
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI) – Section 138 – Dishonour of cheque – Name of the Managing Director first followed by the company’s name – Complaint not liable to be dismissed
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHUPESH RATHOD — Appellant Vs. DAYASHANKAR PRASAD CHAURASIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. ) Criminal…
Mining of sand – HELD A total ban on legal mining, apart from giving rise to illegal mining, also causes huge loss to the public exchequer – A balanced approach of sustainable development ensuring environmental safeguards, needs to be resorted to –
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH THE STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. PAWAN KUMAR AND OTHERS ETC — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao, Sanjiv Khanna…
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 34 – Setting aside of arbitral award – 2015 amendment to Section 34 will apply only to Section 34 applications that have been made to the Court on or after 23.10.2015, irrespective of the fact that the arbitration proceedings may have commenced prior to that date
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RATNAM SUDESH IYER — Appellant Vs. JACKIE KAKUBHAI SHROFF — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh ) Civil Appeal No.…