![[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.](https://i0.wp.com/sclaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/State-Laws.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
![[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.](https://i0.wp.com/sclaw.in/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/Constitution-of-India.jpg?resize=150%2C150&ssl=1)
Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 90 and 114(e) – Relief of permanent injunction – Presumption Admissibility in evidence of thirty years old documents – Two reports of the Pleader Commissioner also confirmed the possessory title of the appellants along with property tax registers and municipal tax receipts – Appellants had more than sufficiently established their lawful possession of the suit property – Appeal allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH IQBAL BASITH AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. N. SUBBALAKSHMI AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : R.F. Nariman, Navin Sinha and Krishna Murari, JJ.…
HELD Investigation appears to be a sham, designed to conceal more than to investigate – Police has the primary duty to investigate on receiving report of the commission of a cognizable offence. This is a statutory duty under the Code of Criminal Procedure – Shri Satyarth Anirudh Pankaj, I.P.S. as the senior officer, State of Uttar Pradesh to carry out further investigation
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH AMAR NATH CHAUBEY — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : R.F. Nariman, Navin Sinha and Krishna Murari, JJ.…
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Ss 8 & 11 – Landlord-tenant disputes governed by the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 are arbitrable as they are not actions in rem but pertain to subordinate rights in personam that arise from rights in rem overrule the ratio laid down in Himangni Enterprises vs. Kamaljeet Singh Ahluwalia, (2017) 10 SCC 706 and hold that landlord-tenant disputes are arbitrable as the Transfer of Property Act does not forbid or foreclose arbitration – However, landlord-tenant disputes covered and governed by rent control legislation would not be arbitrable
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH VIDYA DROLIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. DURGA TRADING CORPORATION — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, Sanjiv Khanna And Krishna Murari, JJ. )…
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 13B – Divorce by mutual consent – Settlement agreement – the transfer petition is disposed of in terms of the settlement agreement – Parties shall honour their commitments under the agreement mutually.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SINGLE BENCH KRITIKA — Appellant Vs. ROHIT GURBAKSH LAL BHOLA — Respondent ( Before : V. Ramasubramanian, J. ) Transfer Petition (Civil) No. 920 of 2019…
It is no doubt true that Mahanadi Coal Fields Ltd. is a subsidiary of the petitioner, namely, Coal India Ltd. But both are different and distinct legal entities. When no relief is sought against the petitioner herein in the writ petition and the company against whom relief is sought in the writ petition is not seeking a transfer, I do not know how the petitioner is entitled to seek transfer
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SINGLE BENCH COAL INDIA LIMITED — Appellant Vs. M/S. VASUNDHARA COAL CARRIERS PRIVATE LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : V. Ramasubramanian, J. ) Transfer…
Since the appeal arises out of conviction of Accused No. 2, the applicant herein who was accused No. 3 and was acquitted, is not a necessary party. Hence, the application for deletion of respondent no. 2 is allowed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SINGLE BENCH GOPI RAM — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : V. Ramasubramanian, J. ) I.A. No. 124145 of…
HELD that the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act has no overriding effect over the right of residence of a woman in a shared household within the meaning of the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act.
Section 3 of the Senior Citizens Act, 2007 cannot be deployed to over-ride and nullify other protections in law, particularly that of a woman’s right to a “shared household‟ under…
HELD – for substitution to bring on record the lrs. of deceased respondent no.2 & I.A.No.186338/2019 for condonation of delay of 5792 days in filing substitution application are dismissed.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA SINGLE BENCH CHANDIGARH HOUSING BOARD — Appellant Vs. TARSEM LAL AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : V. Ramasubramanian, J. ) I.A. No. 186336 of 2019…
No State run university can afford to have a laidback attitude, when their own performance is being measured by international standards – Therefore, the power of the universities to prescribe enhanced norms and standards, cannot be doubted – While universities cannot dilute the standards prescribed by AICTE, they certainly have the power to stipulate enhanced norms and standards.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH APJ ABDUL KALAM TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. JAI BHARATH COLLEGE OF MANAGEMENT AND ENGINEERING TECHNOLOGY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before…
(IPC) – Sections 148 and 307 – ideal that independent witnesses come forward to substantiate the prosecution case but it would be unfair to expect the presence of third parties in every case at the time of incident, for most violent crimes are seldom anticipated. Any adverse inference against the non – examination of independent witnesses thus needs to be assessed upon the facts and circumstances of each case
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH ROHTAS AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent ( Before : N.V. Ramana, Surya Kant and Aniruddha Bose, JJ. ) Criminal…