Latest Post

[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. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) — Section 432 — Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 72 & 161— Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 473 & 477 — Premature release of a prisoner — Rejection of recommendation — Non-speaking order — Order rejecting premature release must provide reasons and reflect due application of mind — Absence of reasons renders the order bald and impossible to ascertain if relevant factors were considered — Violates principles of natural justice and frustrates judicial review. [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. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) — Order 15 Rule 5 — Striking off defence for non-deposit of rent — This is a drastic consequence and the power to strike off a defence is not to be exercised mechanically — The court must consider whether there has been substantial compliance and whether the default is wilful or contumacious. [ Landlord and Tenant — Eviction Suit — Pleading and Proof Satisfied — In this case, the plaint contained material facts of co-landlord status and eviction grounds — Evidence, including affidavits and documents like share certificates, was provided to support these pleaded facts, fulfilling both pleading and proof requirements.

High Court had imposed a blanket ban on the operation of DJ services in Uttar Pradesh reason that noise generated by DJ is unpleasant and obnoxious level – Appeal against same – Persons may be permitted to play the music/DJ only in accordance with law and after obtaining the requisite license/permission from the concerned authorities

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SACHIN KASHYAP AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SUSHIL CHANDRA SRIVASTAVA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Vineet Saran and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ.…

Policy decision not to grant Study Leave to doctors for a certain length of time, in apprehension of a rise in COVID-19 cases, to ensure the availability of as many doctors, as possible for duty, is neither arbitrary, nor discriminatory, nor violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH DR. ROHIT KUMAR — Appellant Vs. SECRETARY OFFICE OF LT. GOVERNOR OF DELHI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and V.…

Service Matters

Enhancement of Age of superannuation – HELD enhancement of the age of superannuation is a ‘public function’ channelised by the provisions of the statute and the service regulations, the doctrine of promissory estoppel cannot be used to challenge the action of NOIDA – Though NOIDA sought the approval of the State government for the enhancement with ‘immediate effect’ , it never intended or portrayed to have intended to give retrospective effect to the prospectively applicable Government order

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. B. D. SINGHAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud…

Exparte decree against minor – Appointment of guardian – High Court found that the exparte decree was a nullity, as it was passed against a minor without the minor being represented by a guardian duly appointed in terms of the procedure contemplated under Order 32, Rule 3 of the Code – Therefore, the High Court, exercising its power of superintendence under Article 227 of the Constitution, set aside the exparte decree itself . ORDER UPHELD

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K.P. NATARAJAN AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. MUTHALAMMAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ. ) Special Leave…

Murder – Cancellation of Bail – High court grants bail in second bail application without discussion or analysis of circumstances – Observations made by the High Court “considering the contentions put forth by counsel for the petitioner, I deem it proper to allow the second bail application” does not constitute the kind of reasoning which is expected of a judicial order

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KUMER SINGH — Appellant Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud and M. R. Shah, JJ.…

As held, it is declared that Part IXB of the Constitution of India is operative only insofar as it concerns multi State cooperative societies both within the various States and in the Union territories of India – Part IX B of the Constitution consists of Articles 243ZH to 243ZT – Article 243ZH is the definition Article which defines co-operative societies in sub-clause (c) as meaning society registered or deemed to be registered under a State law, as opposed to a multi-State cooperative society defined in sub-clause (d), which is a society with objects not confined to one State and registered under a law for the time being in force relating to such cooperatives

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UNION OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. RAJENDRA N. SHAH AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : R. F. Nariman, B.R. Gavai and K.M. Joseph,…

CrPC – S 482 – IPC – Ss 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 477A read with 120B – In exceptional cases with caution and circumspection, giving brief reasons, High Court has power passed to pass an protection interim order. there may be allegations of abuse of process of law, converting a civil dispute into a criminal dispute, with a view to pressurize the accused. High Court has given elaborate reasons as to how the allegations of bank fraud were developed during the proceedings concerning allegations of election fraud.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH A P MAHESH COOPERATIVE URBAN BANK SHAREHOLDERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION — Appellant Vs. RAMESH KUMAR BUNG AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Indira Banerjee…

You missed