Top Stories

Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up- 4 (Jan 25-29)

Ashok KM
31 Jan 2016 2:07 PM GMT
Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up- 4 (Jan 25-29)
Your free access to Live Law has expired
To read the article, get a premium account.
    Your Subscription Supports Independent Journalism
Subscription starts from
(For 6 Months)
Premium account gives you:
  • Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.
  • Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.
Already a subscriber?

De novo CBI investigation in Raju Pal murder case

Recently, The apex court in Pooja Pal vs. Union of India, directed the CBI, to conduct a de novo investigation in the incident of murder of Raju Pal, the slain BSP MLA, by allowing an appeal filed by his wife Mrs.Pooja Pal. Apex Court Bench comprising of Justices V. Gopala Gowda and Amitava Roy said that pendency of the trial and the examination of the witnesses so far made is not a disarming factor to consider the necessity of entrusting the investigation to the CBI.

Second complaint to consumer forum maintainable

Supreme Court, on Thursday, reiterated that second complaint to a Consumer District Forum is maintainable, if relevant Consumer Protection Rules do not expressly prohibit it. Apex Court Bench of Justices Madan B. Lokur and R.K. Agrawal made this observation in Indian Machinery Company vs. M/s. Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd.

Invokes Doctrine of Transferred malice

The Supreme Court, on Thursday, in State of Rajasthan vs. Ram Kailash alias Ram Vilas restored the conviction of a murder accused under Section 302 IPC by setting aside the Judgment of High Court of Rajasthan which had altered it to conviction under Section 304 Part I IPC. The Apex Court Bench comprising of M.Y. Eqbal and Arun Mishra held that the High Court failed to take into consideration the doctrine of transfer of malice as provided in Section 301 of the IPC.

On Promissory Notes and cheques

In a judgment delivered on Thursday, a Division Bench of the Supreme Court has held that once liability and consideration were proven by the endorsement made on the Promissory Note, it cannot be contended that the cheques were issued merely as security. The Bench, comprising Chief Justice T.S. Thakur and Justice Kurian Joseph, hence ruled that the offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was proven and set aside the judgment delivered by the High Court.

Power of attorney

The Supreme Court on Thursday, reiterated the settled principle of law relating to power of attorney, that any document executed or thing done by an agent on the strength of power of attorney is as effective as if executed or done in the name of principal, i.e., by the principal himself.

Sale Co terminus with registration

The Supreme Court, on Friday has observed that though in practical terms sale precedes the event of registration, in normal circumstances and as the law stands, it is co-terminus with registration of a new motor vehicle. Apex Court bench comprising of Justices Dipak Misra and Shiva Kirti Singh dismissed the appeal in Commissioner of Commercial Taxes, Thiruvananthapuram, Kerala vs.  M/s K.T.C. Automobiles.

NDPS disposal guidelines

Supreme Court issued guidelines on the disposal of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic and controlled Substances and Conveyance. Apex Court bench comprising of the Chief Justice T.S. Thakur and Justice Kurian Joseph made this observation in Union of India vsMohanlal in order to ‘avoid any confusion arising out of the continued presence of two notifications on the same subject’

De Novo investigation even after Trial commenced

 A two Judge Bench of the Supreme Court in Dharam Pal v. State of Haryana held that an Investigation by another agency including CBI can be ordered by the Constitutional Court even after commencement of Trial.

No Promissory estoppel in altering concessional Tariff benefit

Supreme Court on Friday, held that State would not be estopped from altering/modifying the benefit of concessional tariff. Three Judge Bench of Apex Court comprising of Justices Ranjan Gogoi, Arun Mishra and Prafulla C. Pant made this observation in M/s. Kothari Industrial Corporation Ltd. vs. Tamil Nadu Electricity Board.

Contract to be interpreted in a way parties intended it to be

Supreme Court has observed that the terms of the contract, especially Arbitration agreements will have to be understood in the way the parties wanted and intended them to be. Apex Court Bench comprising of Justices Anil R. Dave, Kurian Joseph and Amitava Roy made this observation in Bharat Aluminium Company vs. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc.

Other news

Kindling a ray of hope in the minds for lakhs of nurses working under pitiable conditions, the Supreme Court on Friday asked the Centre to set up within four weeks an expert committee to look into grievances pertaining to service conditions of nurses employed with private hospitals and private nursing homes across the country.

The Apex Court on Friday stayed the criminal proceedings pending before an Andhra Pradesh court against ODI captain Mahendra Singh Dhoni in a case lodged against him for allegedly portraying himself as Lord Vishnu in an advertisement. Dhoni is currently touring in Australia in a five ODI and three T20 series against the hosts from January 12th to January 31st.

The Apex Court, headed by Chief Justice Tirath Singh Thakur has approved appointments to the High Courts of Madras, Chhattisgarh, Karnataka, Allahabad, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh and Bihar. The Law Ministry has reportedly started working on the procedure of appointment of these candidates.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday, issued notice to the Centre and Arunachal Pradesh Governor J P Rajkhowa on a petition challenging the imposition of President’s rule in the state on the ground that there was a failure of constitutional machinery.

Recalling its December 16 order appointing former Allahabad High Court judge Justice VirendraSiingh as the Uttar Pradesh Lokayukta finding it “somewhat inaccurate”, the Supreme Court on Thursday, made a new appointment and slammed the state government for creating a confusion by not placing the state Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud’s opposition to the choice of Singh in time before it passed the earlier order.

Next Story
Share it