Latest Post

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Order 7 Rule 11 — Rejection of plaint — Abuse of process — Family arrangement (KBPP) and Conciliation Award — Allegations of undue influence, coercion, misrepresentation, and fabrication — Grounds for challenge were distinct for KBPP and Award — Lower courts erred in rejecting plaint by treating documents as one Conciliation Award and dismissing allegations of fraud due to admitted execution of KBPP — Allegations of coercion need not be limited to life threat and can arise from subservience — Rejection of plaint was erroneous as prima facie cause of action disclosed, suit not vexatious or abuse of process. Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 — Section 108, 80, 103, 85 — Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 — Sections 3, 4 — Offences — Abetment to suicide, Dowry death, Murder — Allegations of extra-marital relationship, demand of money/dowry — Deceased died of poisoning/injection — Autopsy findings — Prosecution case not strong at bail stage. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Section 33(1) — Requirement for employer to seek permission before altering service conditions or stopping work of workmen during pendency of dispute — Failure to do so constitutes a breach of the Act. Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 — Sections 10(1), 12 — Reference of industrial dispute — Apprehended dispute — Appropriate Government’s power to refer — The appropriate Government has the power to refer an industrial dispute for adjudication if it is of the opinion that such dispute exists or is apprehended. The initiation of conciliation proceedings under Section 12 does not statutorily require a prior demand notice to the employer as a pre-condition to approaching the Conciliation Officer. The management’s argument that a prior demand notice is essential, based on certain previous judgments, fails as it ignores the provision for referring an apprehended dispute, which can be invoked to prevent industrial unrest Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) — Section 175(4) — Complaints against public servants alleged to have committed offenses in discharge of official duties — Interpretation — This provision is not a standalone provision, nor is it a proviso to Section 175(3) — It must be read in harmony with Section 175(3), with Section 175(4) forming an extension of Section 175(3) — The power to order investigation under Section 175(3) is conferred upon a judicial magistrate, while Section 175(4) also confers such power but prescribes a special procedure for complaints against public servants — The expression “complaint” in Section 175(4) does not encompass oral complaints and must be understood in the context of a written complaint supported by an affidavit, as required by Section 175(3) — This interpretation ensures that the procedural safeguard of an affidavit, mandated by Priyanka Srivastava v. State of U.P., is not undermined even when dealing with public servants — The intention is to provide a two-tier protection: first, at the threshold stage under Section 175(4) with additional safeguards, and second, at the post-investigation stage under Section 218(1) regarding previous sanction. (Paras 26, 31, 37.1, 37.2, 37.4, 37.5, 37.6, 37.8, 38, 39, 40, 42, 43, 44)

V IMP : LEVY OF SERVICE TAX BY INCORPORATED CLUBS – HELD – We are also of the view that from 2005 onwards, the Finance Act of 1994 does not purport to levy service tax on members’ clubs in the incorporated form. The expression “body of persons” may subsume within it persons who come together for a common purpose, but cannot possibly include a company or a registered cooperative society. Thus, Explanation 3(a) to Section 65B(44) does not apply to members’ clubs which are incorporated. Consequently, show-cause notices, demand notices and other action taken to levy and collect service tax from incorporated members’ clubs are declared to be void and of no effect in law.

1.The definition of “club or association” contained in Section 65 (25a) makes it plain that any person or body of persons providing services for a subscription or any other amount…

Society Matters – we are of the view that the only way to bring to an end all the litigations between the parties before various fora is to set aside the impugned order and the elections held pursuant thereto and to appoint an Advocate Commissioner to convene the General Body as well as the Executive Committee for the election of office bearers.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  VIRUDHUNAGAR HINDU NADARGAL DHARMA PARIBALANA SABAI AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. TUTICORIN EDUCATIONAL SOCIETY AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Rohinton Fali Nariman…

Service Matters

Entitlement Rules for Casualty Pensionary Awards, 1982 – Rule 14 – Grant of disability pension – Provision of grant of disability pension is a beneficial provision but, mental disorder at the time of recruitment cannot normally be detected when a person behaves normally – Since there is a possibility of non-detection of mental disorder, therefore, it cannot be said that Schizophrenia is presumed to be attributed to or aggravated by military service.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  NO. 14666828M EX CFN NARSINGH YADAV — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : L. Nageswara Rao and Hemant…

Madhya Pradesh Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam, 1973 – Sections 58 and 86 – Allotment of land – considered view that directing the Indore Development Authority to revisit the matter afresh at this stage when the lease deed of the plot has been executed and the appellant has raised construction – No purpose.

We are of the considered view that directing the Indore Development Authority to revisit the matter afresh at this stage when the lease deed of the plot has been executed…

Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section 16(1)(c) – Suit for specific performance of agreement – Readiness and willingness – The application for extension of time made after expiry of the time prescribed is sufficient evidence for the incapacity of the plaintiff to perform his obligations demonstrating readiness and willingness

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  RAVI SETIA — Appellant Vs. MADAN LAL AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Navin Sinha and Indira Banerjee, JJ. ) Civil Appeal No(s).…

Conviction under Section 302/149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) – The appellants were undoubtedly the members of an unlawful assembly some of whom were also armed with spears and assaulted the deceased. All the accused surrounded the deceased obviously to prevent his escape.The fact that the co-accused may have assaulted on the head again cannot be considered very relevant to eschew the absence of common object.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH  FAINUL KHAN — Appellant Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND — Respondent ( Before : Navin Sinha and B.R. Gavai, JJ. ) Criminal Appeal No(s). 937…

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Section 9A (inserted by the Maharashtra Amendment Act, 1977) – word “jurisdiction” – include the issue of limitation as the expression has been used in the broader sense and is not restricted to conventional definition under pecuniary or territorial jurisdiction

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH  NUSLI NEVILLE WADIA — Appellant Vs. IVORY PROPERTIES AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Arun Mishra, M.R. Shah and B.R. Gavai, JJ. )…

You missed