Waqf Act, 1995 – Sections 83 and 85 – Suit for permanent injunction – Bar of jurisdiction of civil court – to allow the plaintiff to ignore the Waqf Tribunal and to seek a decree of permanent injunction and mandatory injunction from a civil court, would be ignore the mandate of section 83 and 85 which speak of any dispute, question or other matter relating to a waqf or a waqf property – Therefore, a question as to the nature of the waqf and whether the plaintiff is a beneficiary of the waqf, has also arisen in this case – This question has necessarily to be decided by the Tribunal and not the civil court – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RASHID WALI BEG — Appellant Vs. FARID PINDARI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Hemant Gupta and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ. ) Civil Appeal…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 300 and 304-II – Culpable homicide not amounting to murder – The incident was stated to have occurred when initially there was an exchange of words between the ladies which then got converted into an incident where blows were exchanged – matter would be covered by Exception fourthly to Section 300 IPC and as such, the crime in question would not be “murder” but “culpable homicide not amounting to murder” – All the accused would be principally guilty of the offences under Section 304-II and Section 304-II read with Section 149 of the IPC.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH SITA RAM AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, S. Ravindra Bhat and Bela M.…
ESI – HELD interest demanded from the appellant is in terms of Regulation 31-A of the said Regulations. In the writ petition filed by the appellant before the Gujarat High Court, in Letters Patent Appeal and in this appeal, the appellant has not challenged the validity of the Regulation 31-A. It must be noted here that the Judgment and Order dated 10th July 2006 of the Gujarat High Court affirming the liability of the appellant to pay contribution from 30th March 1975 onwards has attained finality and therefore, the liability of the appellant to pay contribution as demanded cannot be questioned.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE TRANSPORT CORPN. OF INDIA LIMITED THROUGH SANTNU PATRA MANAGER – LEGAL — Appellant Vs. EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPN. AND OTHERS — Respondent (…
Murder – Cancellation of bail – There is a specific allegation that the second respondent has actively aided the commission of the crime by furnishing information about the movements of the deceased to the killers – High Court has failed to notice relevant circumstances bearing on the seriousness and gravity of the crime and the role attributed to the second respondent – Bail cancelled – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BHOOPENDRA SINGH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. )…
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)- Section 482 – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 306 – Abetment of suicide – Suicide note – Investigation stayed and Proceedings quashed – Appeal against – Alleged suicide is of a person who was working as a driver of a Special Land Acquisition Officer, who is a public servant and against whom serious and grave allegations of amassing wealth disproportionate to the known sources of income were made by the deceased. The suicide note contains a detailed account of the role of the accused in the events which led to the deceased committing suicide – order of High Court set aside – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MAHENDRA K C — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ. )…
Service Law – Termination – HELD the respondent-University is directed to reinstate the appellant as Assistant Professor in the Department of Political Science and also grant him the benefit of continuity of services only for the purpose of pension and retiral benefits, if any. The appellant will not, however, be entitled to any disbursement of salary for the period from 31st March, 2007, till the date of reinstatement as he has not worked for the said period on the principle of “no work, no pay”.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH DR. SUSHIL KUMAR TRIPATHI — Appellant Vs. JAGADGURU RAM BHADRACHARYA HANDICAPPED UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Vikram…
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 – Section (16)(1)(a)(i)(ii)- HELD High Court has recorded a finding of refusal on the part of the appellant to accept the report. The said finding is obvious erroneous as the endorsements on the postal envelope were not proved by examining the Postman. Moreover, the High Court has glossed over the mandatory requirement under subsection (2) of Section 13 of serving a copy of the report on the accused. Evidence adduced by the prosecution was of mere dispatch of the report. Hence, the mandatory requirement of sub-section (2) of Section 13 was not complied with. Therefore, the conviction and sentence of the appellant cannot be sustained.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NARAYANA PRASAD SAHU — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. )…
Central Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – Sections 37, 38 and 39(9) – Rectification and Returns – Matching and correction process happens on its own as per the mechanism specified in Sections 37 and 38, after which Form GSTR3 is generated for the purposes of submission of returns; and once it is submitted, any changes thereto may have cascading effect – HELD assessee cannot be permitted to unilaterally carry out rectification of his returns submitted electronically in Form GSTR3B, which inevitably would affect the obligations and liabilities of other stakeholders, because of the cascading effect in their electronic records.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. BHARTI AIRTEL LTD. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. ) Civil…
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 – Sections 20, 38, 39 and 43D(5) – Bail – Association with terrorist organisation – – The proviso imposes embargo on grant of bail to the accused against whom any of the offences under Chapter IV and VI have been alleged. The embargo will apply when after perusing charge sheet, the Court is of the opinion that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accusation against such person is prima facie true. Thus, if after perusing the charge sheet, if the Court is unable to draw such a prima facie conclusion, the embargo created by the proviso will not apply.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THWAHA FASAL — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No.…
Succession Act, 1925 – Section 70 – Revocation of unprivileged Will – In view of Section 70, revocation can be made only by following modes: (a) By Execution of another Will or codicil. (b) A writing executed by the testator declaring an intention to revoke the Will and executed in the manner in which an unprivileged Will is required to be executed. (c) By burning, tearing or otherwise destroying the same by the testator or by some person in his presence and by his direction with the intention of revoking the same.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BADRILAL — Appellant Vs. SURESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 6524…