![[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)
Madhya Bharat Land Revenue and Tenancy Act, 2007 – Sections 57, 158 and 159 – Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 – Sections 108, 114 and 258 – Pujari is only to perform puja and to maintain the properties of the deity – Circulars issued by Madhya Pradesh Government to delete the names of Pujari from revenue record so as to protect the temple properties from unauthorized sale by the Pujaris upheld.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. PUJARI UTTHAN AVAM KALYAN SAMITI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta…
Abkari Shops Departmental Management Rules, 1972 – Rule 13 – New rule or amendment – Retrospectivity cannot be presumed – No indication that Rule 13 applied retrospectively – There is profusion of judicial authority on the proposition that a rule or law cannot be construed as retrospective unless it expresses a clear or manifest intention, to the contrary.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ASSISTANT EXCISE COMMISSIONER, KOTTAYAM AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. ESTHAPPAN CHERIAN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and S. Ravindra…
Royalty – Benefit or privilege – Expression ‘Royalty’ has consistently been construed to be compensation paid for rights and privileges enjoyed by the grantee and normally has its genesis in the agreement entered into between the grantor and the grantee-Controlled release of water made available to INDSIL and CUMI, has always gone a long way in helping them in generation of electricity – For such benefit or privilege conferred upon them, the Agreements arrived at between the parties contemplated payment of charges for such conferral of advantage – Such charges were perfectly justified.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. INDSIL HYDRO POWER AND MANGANESE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and…
On the facts of the case the High Court noted that there was absence of common object–What was to be expected was an assault–It was held that A-2 to A-7 were guilty of offence punishable under Section 304 Part II, IPC–Trial Court and the High Court rightly found the appellant guilty–Reasoning given by the High Court finding appellant guilty does not suffer from any infirmity–Penal Code, 1860, Section 304 Part II.
2009(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 797 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. Mukundakam Sharma Criminal Appeal No. 1249…
Appeal against decision of High Court–At very initial stage it was contended by A2 that accident caused before the bus arrived at the scene–Later it was contended that bus driver was negligent therefore, accident was caused–A2 had not come forward to be examined as to how the accident had actually taken place–Reversal of award of MACT cannot be held to be preserve–Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Section 167.
2009(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 795 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Altamas Kabir The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Cyriac Joseph Civil Appeal No. 1104 Of 2009…
Relation witness–Mere statement that being relatives of the deceased they are likely to falsely implicate the accused cannot be a ground to discard the evidence which is otherwise cogent and credible.
2009(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 781 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Asok Kumar Ganguly Criminal Appeal No. 203 of…
Allotment of Petrol Pump–Appellant obtained 112 marks whereas respondent No. 5 obtained 110 marks–Appellant in a better candidate–Indian oil corporation to make allotment in favour of appellant.
2009(2) LAW HERALD (SC) 777 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.B. Sinha The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mukundakam Sharma Civil Appeal No. 804 of 2009…
Payment of due amount – Construction and improvement of road – the resurvey cannot take place but the measurement books of the work executed from time to time would form a reasonable basis for assessing the amount due and payable to the writ petitioner, but such process could be undertaken only by the agreed forum i.e., arbitration and not by the Writ Court as it does not have the expertise in respect of measurements or construction of roads.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. M/S PUNA HINDA — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. ) Civil…
(IPC) – Section 306, 498A read with Section 114 – to attract the applicability of Section 113-A of the Evidence Act, three conditions are required to be fulfilled :- (i) The woman has committed suicide, (ii) Such suicide has been committed within a period of seven years from the date of her marriage, (iii) The charged-accused had subjected her to cruelty – From the facts of the case at hands, all the three conditions stand fulfilled
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GUMANSINH @ LALO @ RAJU BHIKHABHAI CHAUHAN AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF GUJARAT — Respondent ( Before : S. Abdul Nazeer…
Appellants have gone through the process of selection provided under the scheme of the Act 1973 regardless of the fact whether the post is temporary or permanent in nature, at least their appointment is substantive in character and could be made permanent as and when the post is permanently sanctioned by the competent authority – It can safely be held that the appellants became entitled to claim their appointment to be in substantive capacity against the permanent sanctioned post and become a member of the teaching faculty of the Central University under the Act 2009 – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SOMESH THAPLIYAL AND ANOTHER ETC. — Appellant Vs. VICE CHANCELLOR, H.N.B. GARHWAL UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and…