Consumer—Electricity–Question whether consumer of electricity is covered by the definition of ‘consumer’ as defined in Section 2(o) of the Act–Matter remitted to national commission to record a positive finding on the aspect.
2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 3271 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Jusitce Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Jusitce P. Sathasivam Civil Appeal No. 4734 of…
Rejection of Plaint–That if the plaint does not contain necessary averments relating to limitation, the same is liable to be rejected. Rejection of Plaint–While deciding the application, few lines or passage should not be read in isolation and the pleadings have to be read as a whole to ascertain its true import.
2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 3264 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Jusitce Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Jusitce P. Sathasivam Civil Appeal No. 4626 of…
Redemption of Mortgage—Provision in the agreement that the mortgagee will have a right of pre-emption, operates as a clog on the right of redemption of the mortgagor.
2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 3261 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Jusitce A.K. Mathur The Hon’ble Mr. Jusitce Markandey Katju Civil Appeal No. 3008 of…
Penal Code, 1860, Section 302—Evidence Act, 1872, Section 32—Murder—Dying Declaration—Principles governing dying declaration—Summed up
2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 3246 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.V. Raveendaran The Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.Sudershan Reddy Criminal Appeal No.1315 of 2005…
Sections 33 or 35 are not concerned with any copy of the instrument and party can only be allowed to rely on the document which is an instrument within the meaning of Section 2(14). There is no scope for the inclusion of the copy of the document for the purposes of the Stamp Act. Copy of the instrument cannot be validated by impounding and this cannot be admitted as secondary evidence under the Stamp Act, 1899.
2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 3239 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice B.N. Agrawal The Hon’ble Mr. Jusitce P.P. Naolekar The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P. Sathasivam…
Appointment–Election–Qualification–Appointment/selection made on regional language (Kannada) which was not required qualification, as per Govt. orders–Appointment selection quashed.
2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 3232 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice P. Sathasivam Civil Appeal No. 4480 of…
Termination – Seasonal Worker–Terminated after serving for a period of 109 days –Order would not amount to retrenchment.
2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 3229 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Arijit Pasayat The Hon’ble Mr. Lokeshwar Singh Panta Civil Appeal No. 1827 of…
Divorce—Transfer—Divorce petition by husband transferred to place where wife filed matrimonial petition, prior to petition by husband.
2007(4) LAW HERALD (SC) 3228 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tarun Chatterjee The Hon’ble Mr. Justice R.V.Raveendran Transfer Petition (civil) No. 1013 of…
Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section – 16(c) – Specific performance of a contract – Appeal from the judgment of the High Court of Karnataka decreeing the suit filed by the Respondents for specific performance of contract for sale of the suit land executed by the Appellant-Defendant in favour of the Respondents- Plaintiffs
(2000) 8 JT 13 : (2000) 9 SCC 214 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA BORAMMA — Appellant Vs. KRISHNA GOWDA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Shivaraj V. Patil,…
The application for condonation of delay was rejected by Single Judge of the High Court. The Supreme Court, however, allowed the application with the direction to deposit the claim amount and case remitted to the High Court. On remand no notice shall be issued to the claimants. The claimants shall appropriate the amount deposited by the appellant
(2000) ACJ 1037 : (2000) 7 JT 575 : (2000) 9 SCC 218 SUPREME COURT OF INDIA NATIONAL INSURANCE CO. LTD., JODHPUR — Appellant Vs. BHAGU DEVI AND OTHERS…