SC Judgments
A Person Cannot Be Deemed To Be In Service When First Dismissal Order Is In Force: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Krishna Murari and Bela M Trivedi has held that when the first dismissal order against a person in service is in force, irrespective of all pending litigations or his age of superannuation, he cannot be deemed to be continuing in service. Factual background of the Civil Appeal including its Judicial HistoryThe brief facts of the appeal goes that...
Difference In Pay-scale Based On Academic Qualifications Valid Even If Nature Of Work Is The Same : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices MR Shah and CT Ravi Kumar have held that academic qualifications are a valid criteria to differentiate pay scale for different employees even when the nature of the work undertaken by them is more or less the same. Issue posed before the Top CourtThe issue before the top court was, "Whether in a case where the educational qualifications for the post...
Sec 24(2) RFCTLARR Act - Benefit Of Lapse Not Available If Delay In Taking Possession Was Due To Pending Litigation: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices MR Shah and CT Ravi Kumar has held that delay in taking possession of land because of a pending litigation does not entitle the original owner of the land the benefit of lapse under Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013. Facts of the Civil Appeal with its...
Grant Of Remission - Presiding Judge Should Give Adequate Reasons While Giving Opinion Under Section 432(2) CrPC : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Bela M. Trivedi held that while giving opinion regarding grant of remission under Section 432(2) Cr.P.C. the Presiding Judge needs to give reasons with regard to the factors to be taken into consideration as laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Laxman Naskar vs. Union of India.Facts of the Criminal Writ Petition in Brief ...
Party Estopped From Questioning Amount Levied As Per Contract After Signing It : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has held that signing a contract and issuing an undertaking in accordance with the contract would estop the parties from challenging the amount of consideration as specified within the terms of the contract. The issue before the Supreme Court bench comprising Justices S Ravindra Bhat and PS Narasimha in this Civil Appeal was whether a party to a contract is entitled to...
Supreme Court Bench Delivers Split Verdict In Civil Appeal From Specific Performance Suit
The Supreme Court bench comprising Justices MR Shah and BV Nagarathna delivered a split verdict in a civil appeal arising out of a suit seeking specific performance of an agreement of sale. Brief Facts leading to the Civil Appeal with its Judicial HistoryThe brief facts leading to the Civil Appeal are that the plaintiff and the defendants had entered into an agreement to sell dated...
Section 300 CrPC Bars The Trial of a Person Not Only For The Same Offence But Also For Any Other Offence On The Same Facts: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court has reiterated that Section 300 CrPC bars the trial of a person not only for the same offence but also for any other offence on the same facts.The court was hearing a Criminal Appeal that was filed assailing the judgment and order passed by the High Court of Kerala in Criminal Appeal Nos. 947 and 948 of 2009 by which the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed...
Supreme Court Quarterly Digest on Motor Vehicles Act [July - September, 2022]
Motor Accident Claims - The owner of the vehicle is expected to verify the driving skills and not run to the licensing authority to verify the genuineness of the driving license before appointing a driver. Therefore, once the owner is satisfied that the driver is competent to drive the vehicle, it is not expected from the owner thereafter to verify the genuineness of the...
The State of Manipur & Ors. v. Surjakumar Okram & Ors- 2022 LiveLaw(SC) 113 - Repeal Of Statute -Saving Clause Of Unconstitutional Law
2022 LiveLaw (SC) 113 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION L. NAGESWARA RAO, J; B.R. GAVAI, J; B.V. NAGARATHNA, J. Civil Appeal Nos. 823-827 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.2001-2005 of 2021) W I T H Civil Appeal Nos. 828-832 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos.2386-2390 of 2021) February 01, 2022 The State of Manipur & Ors. v. Surjakumar Okram...
Pappu Tiwary & Law Tiwary v.State of Jharkhand - 2022 LiveLaw(SC) 107 - Evidence Act- Plea Of Alibi
2022 LiveLaw SC 107 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Sanjay Kishan Kaul; M.M. Sundresh; JJ. January 31, 2022 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1492 OF 2021 PAPPU TIWARY v. STATE OF JHARKHAND CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1202-1203 OF 2014 LAW TIWARI @ UPENDRA KUMAR TIWARI v. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND Evidence Law - Plea of Alibi - The burden on the accused is rather...
Shiv Developers Through Its Partner v. Aksharay Developers & Ors -2022 LiveLaw (SC) 104 -Section 69(2) Partnership Act
2022 LiveLaw (SC) 104 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION DINESH MAHESHWARI; VIKRAM NATH, JJ. CIVIL APPEAL NO. 785 OF 2022 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (C) NO. 20262 OF 2018); January 31, 2022 SHIV DEVELOPERS THROUGH ITS PARTNER SUNILBHAI SOMABHAI AJMERI v. AKSHARAY DEVELOPERS & ORS. Partnership Act, 1932 - Section 69 – Effect of Non-registration – Whether...
Plea Of Bias Can't Be Taken After Participating In Selection Process With Knowledge About Composition Of Panel : Supreme Court
While rejecting the challenge against the appointment of Dinkar Gupta IPS as the Punjab Director General of Police in 2019, the Supreme Court observed that a person can't take the plea of bias after having participated in the selection process with full knowledge about the composition of the selection panel.In this case, the appellant officer, who challenged the DGP's appointment, argued that...