![[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)
Service Law – Selection – HELD determining the legality of the selection list and perusing the entire selection list to determine whether the selection of the appellant was arbitrary was erroneous as the Division Bench transgressed the limits of challenge in the writ petition – Impugned judgment and order of High Court set aside – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SRI SRINIVAS K GOUDA — Appellant Vs. KARNATAKA INSTITUTE OF MEDICAL SCIENCES AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Ss 363, 366, 376, 376D and 506 – Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 – Ss 3 and 4 – Kidnapping and gang rape – insofar as the incident of rape attributed to the appellant it does not disclose that all the accused had committed rape on her or had the common intention and aided the commission – Charge of gang rape has not been established with convincing evidence – Appellant is liable to be convicted under Section 376 IPC and not under Section 376D IPC, the appropriate sentence to be imposed needs consideration.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MANOJ MISHRA @ CHHOTKAU — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. )…
Language used in Section 19 of the MSME Act, 2006 and the object and purpose of providing deposit of 75% of the awarded amount as a pre-deposit while preferring the application/appeal for setting aside the award, it has to be held that the requirement of deposit of 75% of the awarded amount as a pre-deposit is mandatory.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GUJARAT STATE DISASTER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY — Appellant Vs. M/S ASKA EQUIPMENTS LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. )…
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 – Section 25B and 25F – Challenge to termination – Jurisdiction of civil court – Civil court lacks jurisdiction to entertain a suit structured on the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MILKHI RAM — Appellant Vs. HIMACHAL PRADESH STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD — Respondent ( Before : R. Subhash Reddy and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. ) Civil…
(NI) – Section 138 – Dishonour of cheque – Appellants are the Directors of the Company and they are incharge – Indisputedly, on the presentation of the cheque of Rs.10,00,000/ (Rupees Ten Lakhs only) dated 2nd June 2012, the cheque was dishonoured due to “funds insufficient” in the account and after making due compliance, complaint was filed and after recording the statement of the complainant, proceedings were initiated by the learned Magistrate and no error has been committed by the High Court in dismissing the petition filed under Section 482 CrPC under the impugned judgment.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASHUTOSH ASHOK PARASRAMPURIYA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. M/S. GHARRKUL INDUSTRIES PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay…
Second Appeal – Specific performance of the contract – Non service of notice due to change of address – While dealing with the issue of condonation of delay in respect of matters pending at the appellate stage, has clearly observed that advocates usually inform the litigants who are to be in contact. Sometimes, they assure their clients that will give information to them as and when matter would be ripe for hearing – High Court erred in dismissing the second appeal solely on the ground of limitation.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DR. YASHWANTRAO BHASKARRAO DESHMUKH — Appellant Vs. RAGHUNATH KISAN SAINDANE — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and J.K. Maheshwari, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
Preliminary Enquiry by CBI – Institution of a Preliminary Enquiry in cases of corruption is not made mandatory before the registration of an FIR under the CrPC, PC Act or even the CBI Manual, for this Court to issue a direction to that affect will be tantamount to stepping into the legislative domain – In case the information received by the CBI, through a complaint or a “source information” under Chapter 8, discloses the commission of a cognizable offence, it can directly register a Regular Case
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION (CBI) AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THOMMANDRU HANNAH VIJAYALAKSHMI @ T. H. VIJAYALAKSHMI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before :…
IMP: On a fair reading of Section 23A of the Hindu Marriage Act, the respondent in any proceedings for divorce or judicial separation or restitution of conjugal rights, may not only oppose the relief sought on the ground of adultery, cruelty or desertion, but also make a counterclaim for any relief under Hindu Marriage Act, i.e, on the ground of petitioner’s adultery, cruelty or desertion and if the petitioner’s adultery, cruelty or desertion is proved, the court may give to the respondent any relief under Hindu Marriage Act
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NITABEN DINESH PATEL — Appellant Vs. DINESH DAHYABHAI PATEL — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. ) Civil Appeal Nos.…
Income Tax Act, 1961 – Ss 143(3), 263 and 263(2) – Assessment – Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue -Receipt of the order passed under Section 263 by the assessee has no relevance for the purpose of counting the period of limitation – The order was made/passed by the learned Commissioner on 26.03.2012 and it was dispatched on 28.03.2012. The relevant last date for the purpose of passing the order under Section 263 considering the fact that the assessment was for the financial year 200809 would be 31.03.2012 and the order might have been received as per the case of the assessee. Wrongly held passed by the learned Commissioner was barred by period of limitation
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CHENNAI — Appellant Vs. MOHAMMED MEERAN SHAHUL HAMEED — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ.…
Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act, 1994 – Section 91(3) – Rajasthan Services Rules, 1951 – Rule 86 – Termination – HELD Single Judge erred in entertaining the petition in the year 2012 challenging the order of termination passed in the year 1996, on the ground of delay and laches and more particularly when even otherwise if the termination order would not have been passed the deceased employee would have retired on attaining the age of superannuation in the year 1999.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SURJI DEVI — Respondent ( Before : M.R. Shah and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. ) Civil…