Murder—Motive—Accused hit the deceased with the wooden log, there is absence of extreme cruelty—Accused acquitted
(2018) AIR(SC) 2386 : (2018) CriLR 509 : (2018) 7 SCALE 350 2018(2) Law Herald (SC) 629 : 2018 LawHerald.Org 1007 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH KUMAR — Appellant…
IMP::: In view of the decision of this Court in Sukhdev Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in (2013) 9 SCC 566, there cannot be any dispute on this aspect. This Court has settled the law that uncommunicated and adverse ACRs cannot be relied upon in the process. The competent authority is directed to ignore the uncommunicated adverse ACRs and take a fresh decision in accordance with law.
HEAD NOTE:::: Uncommunicated Adverse Annual Confidential Reports Can’t Be Relied Upon To Deny Promotion, Reiterates SC… In view of the decision of this Court in Sukhdev Singh Vs. Union of…
‘One who holds possession on behalf of another, does not by mere denial of the other’s title, make his possession adverse so as to give himself the benefit of the statute of limitation.’… Can’t Acquire Adverse Possession By Simply Remaining In Permissive Possession For Howsoever Long It May Be: SC Exposits Law On Adverse Possession
Can’t Acquire Adverse Possession By Simply Remaining In Permissive Possession For Howsoever Long It May Be: SC Exposits Law On Adverse Possession ‘One who holds possession on behalf of another,…
Section 15 of the Act provides that it shall be lawful for either party to marry again after dissolution of a marriage if there is no right of appeal against the decree. A second marriage by either party shall be lawful only after dismissal of an appeal against the decree of divorce, if filed. If there is no right of appeal, the decree of divorce remains final and that either party to the marriage is free to marry again. In case an appeal is presented, any marriage before dismissal of the appeal shall not be lawful. The object of the provision is to provide protection to the person who has filed an appeal against the decree of dissolution of marriage and to ensure that the said appeal is not frustrated.
HEAD NPOTE Section 15 of the Act provides that it shall be lawful for either party to marry again after dissolution of a marriage if there is no right of appeal…
IMP ::: Housing—Delay in Delivery—Merely saying that time is not specified in the agreement and the Housing Board cannot take whatever time period is convenient for them to complete the promised amenities—It amounts to unfair trade practice.
2017(1) Law Herald (SC) 756 (NCDRC) : 2017 LawHerald.Org 811 IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Before The Hon’ble Mrs. Presiding Member M. Shreesha Revision Petition No. 1188 of…
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, S.12–insurance–Life Policy-Mere non disclosure of the earlier policy taken by the insured while filling the proposed form for obtaining the second policy does not amount to suppression of material fact
2017(1) Law Herald (SC) 754 (NCDRC) : 2017 LawHerald.Org 810 IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Before The Hon’ble Mr. Presiding Member Dr. B.C. Gupta The Hon’ble Mr. Member…
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, S.12–lnsurance–Medical Policy-Merely because it has been mentioned that insurance under the policy was subjects to conditions, clauses, warranties, exclusion, etc. attached, in the absence of attaching aforesaid conditions, exclusion, etc., it cannot be presumed that expenses incurred in treatment of disease were excluded from the coverage.
2017(1) Law Herald (SC) 752 (NCDRC) : 2017 LawHerald.Org 809 IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Before The Hon’ble Mr. Presiding Member K.S. Chaudhari Revision Petition No. 911 of…
Consumer Protection Act, 1986, S. 12—Medical Negligence—Patient was brought with the complaints of acute abdominal pain i.e. acute appendicitis-Performing of surgery for appendictis was not a wrong occasion—No doubt, that the child was subsequently diagnosed with a cancerous tumour in the liver—The death was not due to appendicectomy operation but it was due to fatal malignant tumour-Doctor held to be not negligent
2017(1) Law Herald (SC) 750 (NCDRC) : 2017 LawHerald.Org 808 IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Before The Hon’ble Mr. Presiding Member Dr. S.M. Kantikar First Appeal…
Held; complainant is a renowned export/buying house recognized by Ministry of Commerce involved in large scale business which is run with the assistance of number of employees- Therefore, by no stretch of imagination, it can be said that complainant has been running its business exclusively for the earning livelihood by way of self employment-Complaint dismissed.
2017(1) Law Herald (SC) 747 (NCDRC) : 2017 LawHerald.Org 807 IN THE NATIONAL CONSUMER DISPUTES REDRESSAL COMMISSION Before The Hon’ble Mr. Presiding Member Ajit Bharihoke The Hon’ble Mr. Member…
Held, when the plaintiff could be shown the indulgence, the same equity should have been mated out to the appellant (defendant)-Since it was suit for recovery of money-The Court should have put the parties at least to terms and then disposed of the matter on merits-Ex parte Decree set side.
(2017) 100 ACrC 264 : (2017) 175 AIC 263 : (2017) 2 ICC 443 : (2017) 1 LAR 643 : (2017) 1 LawHerald(SC) 746 : (2017) 2 LJR 661 : (2017) 4 LW 283…