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.

Uttar Pradesh Urban Building (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 – Section 21(1)(a) – Release of Shop – Mere receipt of notice having been sent under certificate of posting, in itself, may not be sufficient proof of service, but if the same is coupled with other facts and circumstances which go to show that the party had notice, the same could be held to be sufficient service on the party.

    SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH MOHD. ASIF NASEER — Appellant Vs. WEST WATCH COMPANY THROUGH ITS PROPRIETOR — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and Vineet Saran,…

SC Upholds The Constitutional Validity of Clause(f) of Section 43B of Income Tax Act, 1961 HELD that clause (f) seeks to mitigate a mischief i.e. the absence of this clause would entail in a double benefit to the employer- advance deduction from tax liability without any burden of actual payment and refusal to pay as and when occasion arises.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. EXIDE INDUSTRIES LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar, Hemant Gupta and Dinesh…

Kerala Public Service Commission – HELD as to whether the maxims – actus curiae neminem gravabitand lex non cogit ad impossibiliawill come to the aid of the appellants. From the analysis of factual matrix of the case on hand, it becomes evident that there was no complete interdiction of the first Ranked List (RL-I) published on 11.9.2013 until the order of status quo was passed on 3.11.2014 by this Court. It is true that despite the order of status quo, the second Ranked List (RL-II) came to be published on 26.5.2015. According to the respondents, the order of status quo must be construed as only restraining the respondents from giving effect to the first Ranked List (RL-I) in any manner.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ANEESH KUMAR V.S. AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ.…

Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 HELD the Bank in anticipation that the auction would be concluded and by the time the application was decided, the sale certificate in favour of the highest bidder would have been issued. There is nothing wrong in Bank moving such application before the conclusion of the auction process and issuance of a sale certificate, in anticipation. it may be appropriate to modify the operative order of the DRAT to the effect that the application filed by the Bank being I.A. No. 995/2017 in O.A. No. 11/2008 is partly allowed by ordering return of the original documents, except in respect of the land bearing Paimash No. 722/4 admeasuring 1.80 acres being subject matter of decree in O.S. No. 186/1976. This arrangement will meet the ends of justice in the facts of the present case.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. TRIPOWER ENTERPRISES (PRIVATE) LIMITED — Appellant Vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Ajay Rastogi,…

SC Upholds The Constitutional Validity Of Rule Empowering RAW To Compulsorily Retire Officers HELD We upheld the constitutional validity of Rule 135 of the RAW (Recruitment, Cadre and Services) Rules, 1975, which gives power to the Central government to voluntary retire RAW Officers whose identity is exposed or compromised.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NISHA PRIYA BHATIA — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. )…

Consent Of The State In Which Accused Resides Or Employed Not Necessary For CBI Investigation When The Offence Is Committed In NCT Of Delhi: SC HELD Central Bureau of Investigation can investigate into specified offence committed within Union Territory, by an accused residing in or employed in connection with the affairs of another State, without the consent of that state.

  Consent Of The State In Which Accused Resides Or Employed Not Necessary For CBI Investigation When The Offence Is Committed In NCT Of Delhi: SC [Read Judgment] The Supreme…

“Transit Marine Insurance Policy” HELD While construing a contract of insurance, it is not permissible for a court to substitute the terms of the contract. The court should always interpret the words used in a contract in a manner that will best express the intention of the parties. The NCDRC has incorrectly proceeded on the path that the ordinary course of transit would include assembling of the helicopter at New Delhi and the policy covered all risks till the time the helicopter did not reach Bhopal.

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BAJAJ ALLIANZ GENERAL INSURANCE CO LTD AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya…

Income Tax Act, 1961, Section 143(2) – HELD the factual basis on which the Officer formed his opinion in the assessment order dated 30.11.2000 (for assessment year 1998-1999), in regard to addition of Rs.2,26,000/- (Rupees two lakhs twenty six thousand only), stands dispelled by the affidavits and statements of the concerned unregistered dealers in penalty proceedings. That now being the indisputable position, it must necessarily follow that the addition of Rs.2,26,000/- cannot be justified,

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BASIR AHMED SISODIYA — Appellant Vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. ) Civil…

Income Tax – Doctrine of mutuality – The doctrine of mutuality bestows a special status to qualify for exemption from tax liability – It is a settled proposition of law that exemptions are to be put to strict interpretation – The appellant having failed to fulfil the stipulations and to prove the existence of mutuality, the question of extending exemption from tax liability to the appellant, that too at the cost of public exchequer, does not arise

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH YUM! RESTAURANTS (MARKETING) PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI — Respondent ( Before : A.M. Khanwilkar and Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ.…

CONSTITUTION BENCH :: Uttar Pradesh Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953 – Section 16 – Essential Commodities Act, 1955 – Section 3(2)(c) – Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 HELD By virtue of Entries 33 and 34 List III of seventh Schedule, both the Central Government as well as the State Government have the power to fix the price of sugarcane. The Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966 which has been issued under Section 16 of the U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953 confers power upon the State Government to fix the remunerative/advised price at which sugarcane can be bought or sold which shall always be higher than the minimum price fixed by the Central Government; Section 16 of the U.P. Sugarcane (Regulation of Supply and Purchase) Act, 1953 is not repugnant to Section 3(2)(c) of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 and Clause 3 of the Sugarcane (Control) Order, 1966

  SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CONSTITUTION BENCH WEST U.P. SUGAR MILLS ASSOCIATION AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Arun…

You missed