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…
The question involved in the present appeal is the enforceability of the foreign award, against NAFED. HELD the award is ex facie illegal, and in contravention of fundamental law, no export without permission of the Government was permissible and without the consent of the Government quota could not have been forwarded to next season. The export without permission would have violated the law, thus, enforcement of such award would be violative of the public policy of India.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH NATIONAL AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVE MARKETING FEDERATION OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. ALIMENTA S.A. — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra, M.R. Shah and B.R.…
Central Excise Act, 1944 – Sections 5A and 11B – Determination of refund of excise duty – Subsequent notifications/industrial policies which were impugned before the respective High Courts are clarificatory in nature and are issued in public interest and in the interest of the Revenue and they seek to achieve the original object and purpose of giving incentive/exemption while inviting the persons to make investment on establishing the new undertakings and they do not take away any vested rights conferred under the earlier notifications/industrial policies and therefore cannot be said to be hit by the doctrine of promissory estoppel
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER ETC. ETC. — Appellant Vs. M/S V.V.F LIMITED AND ANOTHER ETC. ETC. — Respondent ( Before : Arun…
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS) – Sections 2(viia), 2(xxiiia) and 21 – Mixture of narcotic drugs or psychotropic substance – Determination of Small quantity or commercial quantity – HELD In case of seizure of mixture of Narcotic Drugs or Psychotropic Substances with one or more neutral substance(s), the quantity of neutral substance(s) is not to be excluded and to be taken into consideration along with actual content by weight of the offending drug, while determining the “small or commercial quantity” of the Narcotic Drugs or Psychotropic Substances.
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH HIRA SINGH AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra, Indira Banerjee and M.R.…