Latest Post

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 5, 34, and 37 — Scope of Judicial Intervention — Minimum intervention of judicial authority in domestic arbitration matters is required under Section 5 — Challenge to an arbitral award under Section 34 is limited to specific grounds, including patent illegality or conflict with the public policy of India — Scope of interference by the Appellate Court under Section 37 is akin to and cannot travel beyond the restrictions laid down under Section 34 — Appellate Court cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award or re-interpret contractual clauses if the interpretation by the Arbitral Tribunal was a plausible view and upheld under Section 34 — Setting aside an arbitral award under Section 37, which was upheld under Section 34, based on providing a different interpretation of contractual clauses is unsustainable in law. (Paras 24, 25, 30, 31, 36, 37, 39, 50, 51) Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 54 — Suit for specific performance — Commencement of limitation period — Where the defendant subsequently executed an affidavit ratifying the agreement to sell and conveying no-objection to the transfer, the period of limitation commences from the date of the admitted affidavit, as this is the stage at which the executant finally refused to execute the sale deed to the extent of her share — Trial court and High Court erred in dismissing the suit on the ground of limitation calculated from an earlier disputed date. (Paras 13, 35, 36, 37) Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9(2) read with Rule 9(4) of 2001 Rules — Setting aside High Court judgment — High Court erroneously treated the date of filing of the Section 11 petition (28.06.2024) as the commencement date, leading to the conclusion that proceedings commenced beyond the statutory period — Where the arbitration notice was served (on 11.04.2024) well within the 90-day period from the ad-interim injunction order (17.02.2024), proceedings commenced in time as per Section 21 — High Court’s finding unsustainable, resulting in the restoration of the Trial Court’s initial ad-interim injunction order. (Paras 28, 31, 32) E. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Section 9 — Interim injunction — Dispute regarding existence Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — Section 2(28) — Definition of “motor vehicle” — Components — Definition has two parts: an inclusive part (mechanically propelled vehicle adapted for use upon roads) and an exclusive part — The second part expressly excludes “a vehicle of a special type adapted for use only in a factory or in any other enclosed premises” — Although Dumpers, Loaders, etc., may fall under the first part of the definition, they are excluded if their nature of use is confined to factory or enclosed premises, being special type vehicles/Construction Equipment Vehicles. (Paras 36, 37, 38, 39) Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities of BootLeggers, Dacoits, Drug-Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders etc. Act, 1986 — Section 3(2) — Preventive Detention — Grounds for Detention — Requirement of finding ‘prejudicial to the maintenance of public order’ — Detenu, a ‘drug offender’, was detained based on three criminal cases involving Ganja, with an apprehension that if released on bail, she would engage in similar activities — Held, mere apprehension that the detenu, if released on bail, would be likely to indulge in similar crimes would not be a sufficient ground for ordering preventive detention — Order of detention failed to indicate how the detenu’s activities were prejudicial to ‘public order’ as opposed to ‘law and order’ and was therefore unsustainable. (Paras 3, 5, 8, 9, 10, 11)

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Sections 5, 34, and 37 — Scope of Judicial Intervention — Minimum intervention of judicial authority in domestic arbitration matters is required under Section 5 — Challenge to an arbitral award under Section 34 is limited to specific grounds, including patent illegality or conflict with the public policy of India — Scope of interference by the Appellate Court under Section 37 is akin to and cannot travel beyond the restrictions laid down under Section 34 — Appellate Court cannot undertake an independent assessment of the merits of the award or re-interpret contractual clauses if the interpretation by the Arbitral Tribunal was a plausible view and upheld under Section 34 — Setting aside an arbitral award under Section 37, which was upheld under Section 34, based on providing a different interpretation of contractual clauses is unsustainable in law. (Paras 24, 25, 30, 31, 36, 37, 39, 50, 51)

Limitation Act, 1963 — Article 54 — Suit for specific performance — Commencement of limitation period — Where the defendant subsequently executed an affidavit ratifying the agreement to sell and conveying no-objection to the transfer, the period of limitation commences from the date of the admitted affidavit, as this is the stage at which the executant finally refused to execute the sale deed to the extent of her share — Trial court and High Court erred in dismissing the suit on the ground of limitation calculated from an earlier disputed date. (Paras 13, 35, 36, 37)

Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)-Section 300 – Murder – Custodial death – Case based on circumstantial evidence – Deceased allegedly brought to police station where he died of injuries from severe beating – No evidence about offence in regard to which deceased was brought to police station – No evidence to prove alleged beating – Prosecution case not supported by medical evidence – Circumstances not sufficient to prove guilt of accused – Conviction set-aside.

  AIR 1998 SC 370 : (1998) CriLJ 662 : (1998) 4 JT 384 : (1997) 7 SCALE 30 : (1998) 9 SCC 17 : (1997) 5 SCR 154 Supp…

Schedule Caste—Central and State Government directed to strictly enforce the provisions of SCST Act. Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989-Non implementation of provisions—There has been a failure on the part of the concerned authorities in complying with the provisions of the Act and Rules

2017(1) Law Herald (SC) 193 : 2016 LawHerald.Org 2528 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Chief Justice T.S. Thakur The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. D. Y.…

Indian Penal Code, 1860, S.302 & S.149–Murder–Unlawful Assembly- Common ; Object-After having held that the appellants formed an unlawful assembly carrying dangerous weapons with the common object to resorting to violence (as described in the charge) it was not open to the High Court to acquit some of the members

2017(1) Law Herald (SC) 547 : 2017 LawHerald.Org 677 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice A.K. Sikri The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud Criminal…

Urban Land (Ceiling & Regulation) Act, 1976, S.6(ii)-Surplus Area-Right of Legal heirs–Original owner of land died intestate in 1947 leaving behind a widow, two sons and two daughters-Competent authority declared surplus land keeping in view that sons of owner did not contested the said proceedings

2017(1) Law Herald (SC) 524 : 2017 LawHerald.Org 674 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Before The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Madan B. Lokur The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prafulla C. Pant…

You missed