Supreme Court Weekly Digest (13th February 2023-19th February 2023)

Another week has passed in the hallowed halls of the Supreme Court of India, and Live Law's Supreme Court Weekly Digest is here to keep you up to date on all the latest developments. Our expert legal journalists have been hard at work, bringing you the most important updates from the Supreme Court, including key judgments, arguments, and discussions. Whether you are a legal professional, a law student, or simply someone who is interested in staying informed about the latest legal developments, Live Law's Supreme Court Weekly Digest is an invaluable resource. So, sit back and let us guide you through the complex world of Indian law with our expert analysis and coverage.Judgements/OrdersLicense Necessary To Operate As Cab Aggregator : Supreme Court Asks Uber To Apply For License From Maharashtra GovtCase Title : Uber India Systems Private Ltd and Another versus Union of India and others |SLP(c) No.5705/2022Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 108The Supreme Court directed Uber to apply for a license as per Section 93(1) of the Motor Vehicle Amendment Act, 2019 within a period of 3 weeks (on or before 6th March, 2023), to continue its services as an aggregator in the State of Maharashtra. At the same time, the Court also allowed Uber to make a representation to the State of Maharashtra to ventilate its grievances with regard to the conditions imposed while granting provisional license.Motor Vehicles Act | Aggregators License -States May Keep In Mind Centre's Guidelines While Framing Rules : Supreme CourtCase Title: Roppen Transportation Services Pvt Ltd v. Union of India & OrsCitation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 100The Supreme Court of India has held that when the State Government formulates rules in pursuance of its power under Section 96 of the Motor Vehicles Act, it may also bear in mind the Guidelines which have been framed by the Union Government in 2020 (Motor Vehicle Aggregators Guidelines, 2020). The observation by the court came in the order passed by Apex Court in Rapido's plea against the Maharashtra government's refusal to grant two-wheeler bike taxi aggregator license to the company.Company Secretary's Liability : Supreme Court Says Compliance Officer Should Ensure Compliance With SEBI's Buyback RegulationsCase Title: SEBI i vs V Shankar | Civil Appeal No 527 of 2023Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 101The Supreme Court has held that a Company Secretary, while acting as a compliance officer in terms with the SEBI (Buyback of Securities) Regulations 1998, has to ensure that there is compliance of the company with the regulations relating to buyback of shares.Supreme Court Upholds Rule Requiring Builders To Reserve Open Spaces In Developed PlotsCase Title : Association of Vasanth Apartments Owners vs V Gopinath and othersCitation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 105The Supreme Court has upheld a rule which mandated that builders should reserve open spaces in the plots developed by them. The rule in question was Rule 19 of the Development Control Rules for the Chennai Metropolitan Area. The Rule mandated that 10% of the area of any developmental plan having area 10,000 sq. meter or more should be reserved as open space for communal and recreational use and that such open space area must be transferred to the local authority free of cost through a registered gift deed.Supreme Court Upholds Sec 9D Central Excise & Salt Act; Asks Cigarette Company To Pay Rs 5 Lakh Cost For Cancer Affected ChildrenCase Title: GTC Industries Ltd (Now Known As Golden Tobacco Limited) Thr. Manager Legal And Anr. v. Collector of Central Excise And Ors. | Civil Appeal Nos. 8583-84 of 2010Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 107The Supreme Court, recently, endorsed the order of the Delhi High Court upholding the validity of Section 9D of the Central Excise and Salt Act, 1944 (Excise Act).High Courts Are Not Subordinate To Supreme Court, They Are Constitutional Courts : SCCase Title : Shankar Kumar Jha Vs The State Of Bihar & Ors | Special Leave Petition (Civil) Diary No(S). 40774/2022Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 114High Courts are too, are constitutional courts and are not subordinate to the Supreme Court, the Apex Court reiterated in a recent order.Ouster Of Civil Court's Jurisdiction Won't Have Retrospective Effect To Annul A Decree Validly Passed By Civil Court: Supreme CourtCase Title: Ananta Chandrakant Bhonsule (D) By Lrs. And Anr. v. Trivikram Atmaram Korjuenkar (D) By Lrd. And Anr. Civil Appeal No. 3936 of 2013]Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 109Division Bench of the Supreme Court comprising Justice V. Ramasubramanian and Justice Pankaj Mithal reiterated that ouster of jurisdiction of civil court can be expressed or implied, but it cannot have retrospective effect annulling a decree validly passed by the civil court.'It's Quality & Not Quantity Of Witnesses Which Matters' : Supreme Court Relies On Solitary Eyewitness Testimony To Affirm SentenceCase Title : Ajai alias Ajju and others vs State of Uttar PradeshCitation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 110"It is not the quantity...

Supreme Court Weekly Digest (13th February 2023-19th February 2023)

Padmakshi Sharma

Tags