Latest Post

Haryana School Education Act, 1995, Section 22 — Civil Court Jurisdiction — Ouster of jurisdiction by statute must be express or implied — Section 22 only ousts jurisdiction where Government or its officers have power to adjudicate — Recovery of fees by a school is not a power conferred on Government/authorities — Civil court jurisdiction not ousted in matters of reasonable fee recovery. Penal Code, 1860 — Section 498A — Cruelty by husband or relatives of husband — Allegations in FIR were vague, general, and filed one year after admitted separation of the parties — No specific instances of cruelty were mentioned — Criminal proceedings are liable to be quashed. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 482 — Quashing of FIR — Court can quash FIR if allegations, taken at face value, do not constitute any offence — Vague and general allegations of marital discord, without specific instances, do not prima facie constitute an offence under Section 498A IPC. Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 376(2), 450 — Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 — Section 4 — Sexual assault on a minor — Evidence of prosecutrix — Conviction can be based solely on the prosecutrix’s testimony if it inspires confidence — Corroboration of testimony of prosecutrix is not a requirement of law, but a guidance of prudence — Minor contractions or small discrepancies should not be a ground for throwing out the evidence of the prosecutrix. State Financial Corporations Act, 1951 — Section 29 — Liability of Financial Corporation taking possession of industrial unit for dues — Corporation acts as a trustee, liable only to the extent of funds in its hands after settling its dues, not personally liable. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Section 80 — Notice to Government or public officer — Mandatory requirement before instituting suit — Failure to issue notice or obtain leave renders suit not maintainable and decree a nullity, even if impleaded later. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Section 62; Section 14(1)(d) — Appeal against NCLAT order setting aside NCLT order directing return of property — NCLT had directed return of property based on CoC decision that property not required by corporate debtor — NCLAT set aside NCLT order invoking Section 14(1)(d) barring recovery of property during CIRP — Supreme Court held that Section 14(1)(d) not applicable as CoC and Resolution Professional initiated the process for returning property due to financial burden of rentals, and not a simple recovery by owner — Commercial wisdom of CoC regarding non-retention of property given primacy — NCLAT order set aside, NCLT order restored.

Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands, Act, 1948 – Section 63 – Transfers to non-agriculturists barred – Section 63 of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 debars an agriculturist from parting with his agricultural land to a non-agriculturist through a “Will”.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH VINODCHANDRA SAKARLAL KAPADIA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit, Indu Malhotra and A.S. Bopanna,…

Service Matters

Madhya Pradesh State Administrative Service (Classification, Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1975 – Rule 13 – Probation – Departmental examination – Matter referred to High Court consider the effect of non-consideration of Rule 13 of 1975 Rules on the earlier occasion as well as the impact of the decisions of this Court

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH WARAD MURTI MISHRA — Appellant Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND ANOTHER. — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and Indu Malhotra,…

Stamp Act, 1899 – Section 47A – Suo motu – Power of – There is nothing in the scheme of the Act which purports to restrict the exercise of suo motu power under Section 47-A, and confines it to cases where knowledge of any illegality or infirmity in the proceedings undertaken by the subordinate officers must be gathered from sources other than through a pending appeal

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION, TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS. — Appellant K. BASKARAN — Respondent ( Before : Uday Umesh Lalit and Indu…

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Sections 10 and 25 – Succession Act, 1925 – Section 270 – Suit for partition – Transfer of – A petition u/s 25 of the Code, however, is not decided on consideration on the “First past the post” . Bombay High Court, which is hearing the Testamentary petition (Probate), will decide the partition suit as well.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SINGLE BENCH SHAMITA SINGHA AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. RASHMI AHLUWALIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose, J. ) Transfer Petition (Civil)…

Motor Vehicle – Just and Proper compensation – Enhancement of compensation – Horse cart was hit by a bus resulting into deaths – Deduction on account of contributory negligence held to be unsustainable – Therefore total compensation payable to the appellants in the first appeal at Rs.11,96,000/. Child death cosiderations determination shall not depend upon financial position of the victim or the claimant but rather on the capacity and ability of the deceased to provide happiness in life to the claimants had she remained alive.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJENDRA SINGH AND OTHERS @APPELLAN Vs. NATIONAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Navin Sinha and B.R. Gavai, JJ.…

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Sections 156(3) and 173 – Protest petition – When a complaint sent to police under/S 156(3) for investigation and then a protest petition is filed, the Magistrate after accepting the final report of the police under Section 173 and discharging the accused persons has the power to deal with the protest petition.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUBHASH SAHEBRAO DESHMUKH — Appellant Vs. SATISH ATMARAM TALEKAR AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Navin Sinha and Indira Banerjee, JJ. )…

Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 – Section 3 – Muslim divorce – Maintenance – Whether the family court has jurisdiction to try application filed by Muslim divorced woman for maintenance under Section 3 of Muslim Women (Protection of Rights on Divorce) Act, 1986 – Matter be placed before Hon’ble the Chief Justice of India for referring the matter to the Larger Bench.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RANA NAHID @ RESHMA @ SANA AND ANOTHERS — Appellant Vs. SAHIDUL HAQ CHISTI — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and Indira…

You missed