Andhra Pradesh (Agricultural Produce and Livestock) Markets Act, 1966 – Section 2(v), 3 and 4 – Whether “ghee” is a “product of livestock” under the Act and if the government notification regarding “ghee” followed proper procedure – The court upheld that “ghee” is indeed a “product of livestock” and the 1994 government notification was valid – The court ruled that market fees must be paid for “ghee” from 1994 to 2009, with provisions for installment payments.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANGAM MILK PRODUCER COMPANY LTD. — Appellant Vs. THE AGRICULTURAL MARKET COMMITTEE AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sudhanshu Dhulia and S.V.N. Bhatti,…
Service Law – Recruitment Process – Public Employment – Merely because a recruitment agency is not in a position to satisfy the Court, a relief cannot be extended to a candidate deprived as it will have a cascading effect not only on the said recruitment, but also to numerous others as well.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE TELANGANA RESIDENTIAL EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS RECRUITMENT BOARD — Appellant Vs. SALUVADI SUMALATHA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : A. S. Bopanna and M.…
Special Court (Trial of Offences relating to transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 – Sections 3(2) and 3(3) – Attachment of Property – Properties of the person notified under Section 3(2) would stand attached automatically with effect from the date of notification by virtue of Section 3(3).
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUMAN L. SHAH — Appellant Vs. THE CUSTODIAN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Civil…
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 – Section 94 – Juvenile – Determination of Age – In the order of priorities, the date of birth certificate from the school stands at the highest pedestal whereas ossification test has been kept at the last rung to be considered, only in the absence of the criteria Nos. 1 and 2, i.e. in absence of both certificate from school and birth certificate issued by a Corporation/Municipal Authority/Panchayat.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH VINOD KATARA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF U.P. — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Writ Petition (Criminal) No(s).…
Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 306 – Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 – Section 3(2)(v) – Abetment of suicide – Necessary ingredients – This court ruled that the charge under the SC/ST Act was unwarranted because the prosecution did not allege that the offence under the IPC was committed based on the deceased’s caste – The court also found that the allegations in the suicide note were not sufficient to establish abetment of suicide under Section 306 of the IPC – Appeal Allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH PRABHAT KUMAR MISHRA @ PRABHAT MISHRA — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF U.P. AND OTHER — Respondent ( Before : B.R. Gavai and Sandeep…
Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Sections 47, 49(2) and 59 – Court observed that the appellant was not an illiterate person and had signed the agreement after being aware of the adjustable interest rate option – The Court also noted that the appellant had not produced any evidence to show that he had a better option of securing loan from another institution – The Court held that the email could not override the policy decisions of HDFC and that the appellant could not seek refund of the interest paid after having received the loan amount and repaid it as per the agreement.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJESH MONGA — Appellant Vs. HOUSING DEVELOPMENT FINANCE CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and M.M. Sundresh, JJ. )…
Bribery: Not protected by parliamentary privilege, as it is not in respect of anything said or any vote given by a member, and it is a criminal offence that does not arise out of the exercise of legislative functions Courts and House: Exercise parallel jurisdiction over allegations of bribery, as the House can take disciplinary action to restore its dignity, while the courts can prosecute the offenders under the criminal law The majority judgment in PV Narasimha Rao v. State (CBI/SPE) did not consider the evolution of law in the US and relied solely on the dissenting opinion in United States v. Brewster to conclude that members of Parliament in India are immune from prosecution for bribery under Article 105(2) of the Constitution
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA 7 JUDGE BENCH SITA SOREN — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, CJI, A.S. Bopanna, M.M. Sundresh, Pamidighantam…
Suit for Partition – The supreme court reversed the high court’s decision regarding two properties, and upheld the sale of one property by defendant no. 7 to defendant no. 9 – The Supreme court relied on the 1984 partition deed and the evidence on record.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SRINIVAS RAGHAVENDRARAO DESAI (DEAD) BY LRS. — Appellant Vs. V. KUMAR VAMANRAO @ ALOK AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : C.T. Ravikumar and…
“Upbringing vs. Biology: Supreme Court Prioritizes Stability Over Paternal Claim in Custody Battle” The Supreme Court allowed the appeal of the aunt and set aside the order of the High Court, which had directed the custody of the child to be handed over to the father – The Supreme Court relied on the principles of child welfare, stability, and preference, and found that the child was happy, intelligent, and categorical in her wish to live with the aunt
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SHAZIA AMAN KHAN AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF ORISSA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : C.T. Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal,…
Will was not surrounded by suspicious circumstances, as the testator was in good health and senses, the scribe and one of the witnesses were consistent, the testator had left sufficient property for his widow and daughter, and the respondent had taken care of the testator and his property – It also held that the high court was justified in interfering with the first appellate court’s findings, as they were perverse and contrary to the evidence on record
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THANGAM AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. NAVAMANI AMMAL — Respondent ( Before : C.T. Ravikumar and Rajesh Bindal, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No. 8935…