ACQUITTAL – Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 376(1) and 450 – Rape – Material contradictions – Benefit of doubt There is a delay in the FIR – The medical report does not support the case of the prosecution – FSL report also does not support the case of the prosecution – The manner in which the occurrence is stated to have occurred is not believable
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SANTOSH PRASAD @ SANTOSH KUMAR — Appellant Vs. THE STATE OF BIHAR — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and M.R. Shah, JJ. )…
Arbitration Act, 1940 – Arbitration proceedings – Contract agreement between Appellant and Respondent for construction of Sutlej Yamuna Link Canal (Punjab) HELD It is ordered that in addition to the Claim No.1 allowed by the High Court, the claimant is also entitled to the amount under Claim Nos.2, 3, 8 and 12
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH CHANDIGARH CONSTRUCTION COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED — Appellant Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and A.S. Bopanna, JJ.…
Nirbhaya Case : SC Dismisses Convict Vinay Sharma’s Challenge Against Mercy Rejection HELD .where the power is vested in a very high authority, it must be presumed that the said authority would act carefully after an objective consideration of all the aspects of the matter
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH VINAY SHARMA — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi, Ashok Bhushan and A.S. Bopanna, JJ. )…
…..“Awards must always be read supportively with an inclination to uphold rather than destroy, given the minimal interference possible with foreign awards under Section 48”,The Arbitration Act, – SC
[Enforcement of Foreign Awards] Minimal Interference by Courts in Terms of Section 48 Of The Arbitration Act, Holds SC[Read Judgment] Sanya Talwar 13 Feb 2020 9:39 PM “Awards must always…
Court Has To Appoint Amicus Curiae Or Request Legal Service Committee To Appoint An Advocate If Accused Is Unrepresented Before It: SC
Court Has To Appoint Amicus Curiae Or Request Legal Service Committee To Appoint An Advocate If Accused Is Unrepresented Before It: SC [Read Judgment] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 13 Feb 2020…
Supreme Court’s Six Mandatory Directions To Political Parties To End Criminalisation Of Politics
Supreme Court’s Six Mandatory Directions To Political Parties To End Criminalisation Of Politics[Read Judgment] LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK 13 Feb 2020 5:39 PM A two Judge Bench of Supreme Court on…
[Employee’s Compensation Act] Relevant Date For The Determination Of Compensation Payable Is The Date Of The Accident: SC HELD ….benefit of 2009 amendment of the Act which had deleted the provision that capped the monthly wages of an employee at Rs 4,000 does not apply to accidents that took place prior to its coming into force……. Award not interfered.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH K. SIVARAMAN AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. P. SATHISHKUMAR AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud and Ajay Rastogi, JJ.…
Swatantrata Sainik Samman Pension Scheme, 1980 – Section 7 – Rejection of the claim for pension – Participants of Goa Liberation Movement, Phase-II, the SSSP scheme was extended with the conditions that only those applicants shall be eligible to receive the benefits of the scheme who are in receipt of State Pension on 01.08.2002 HELD judgement Mukund Lal Bhandari and Others vs. Union of India and Others, (1993) supp. 3 SCC 2 not applicable
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SITAKANT S. DUBHASHI AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Ashok Bhushan and Navin Sinha, JJ.…
Partition – Settlement through arbitration proceedings – Arbitrators were also close relatives of the parties – With a view to further amicably settle the matter, the parties have negotiated and agreed
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BALWANT SINGH (DEAD) THR. LRS — Appellant Vs. DUNGAR SINGH (DEAD) THR. LRS. — Respondent ( Before : R. Banumathi and A.S. Bopanna, JJ.…
-Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Section 23 – Appeal – Breach of condition of Policy — HELD Fidelity Guarantee is different from contingency guarantee – The insurance under it, is for honesty, against negligence or for being faithful and loyal to its employees – The protection afforded is different than in normal insurance policies – Precisely, it is a contract whereby, for a consideration, one agrees to indemnify another, against loss, arising from the breach of honesty, integrity or fidelity of an employee or other person holding a position of trust”
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED — Appellant Vs. NATIONAL BULK HANDLING CORPORATION PRIVATE LIMITED — Respondent ( Before : Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and R. Subhash…





