Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up

Execution Of A Will Can Be Held To Be Proved When It Is Found To Be Ordinarily Free from Suspicious Circumstances [Jarnail Singh vs. Bhagwanti]The Supreme Court reiterated the settled law that execution of a Will must be held to have been proved not only when the statutory requirements for proving the Will are satisfied but the Will is also found to be ordinarily free from suspicious circumstances.Derivative Suit Filed by Shareholders Maintainable Only If the Company Is Amenable to Court’s Jurisdiction [Ahmed Abdulla Ahmed Al Ghurair vs. Star Health And Allied Insurance Company Limited]The Supreme Court held that while considering the territorial jurisdiction over a derivative suit initiated to protect the beneficial interest of a company, the issue qua the existence of such an interest can only be decided on the condition that the said company is amenable to such a jurisdiction. Even Long Delay In Registration Of FIR Can Be Condoned If Witness Has No Motive For Falsely Implicating The Accused [Palani V. State of Tamil Nadu]The Supreme Court observed that even a long delay in registration of First Information Report (FIR) can be condoned if the witness has no motive for falsely implicating the accused. The bench comprising Justice R. Banumathi and Justice Indira Banerjee was considering an appeal against conviction of one Palani in a murder case.Consumer Complaints By ‘Subsequent Transferee’ Of Flats Not Always Barred [CCI Projects (P) Ltd. vs. Vrajendra Jogjivandas Thakkar]The Supreme Court held that consumer complaints by ‘subsequent transferee’ of flats are not always barred. The bench comprising Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice R. Subhash Reddy clarified that the decision in Haryana Urban Development Authority v. Raje Ram cannot be stretched to say that in every case where there is a transfer, the complaint by the subsequent transferee would not be maintainable at all. Correctness Of HC Judgment Approved By SC Can’t Be Examined In Full Bench Reference [Dr. Babloo Singh & Ors. V. State of U.P.]The Supreme Court upheld a full bench order of the Allahabad High Court turning down a reference to it seeking to examine correctness of a division bench judgment which was approved by the apex court.An ‘Aggrieved’ Third Party Can File Review Petition [Union Of India V. Nareshkumar Badrikumar Jagad]The Supreme Court observed that even a third party to the proceeding, if he considers himself an aggrieved person may take recourse to the remedy of review petition. The bench comprising Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice AM Khanwilkar observed thus while disposing a review petition filed by Union of India against a 2011 judgment in National Textile Corporation Ltd. Versus Nareshkumar Badrikumar Jagad.Section 482 CrPC: HC Can’t Examine Mens Rea Aspect Before Completion Of Investigation [Narayan Malhari Thorat V. Vinayak Deorao Bhagat]The Supreme Court observed that before an investigation is complete, a high court, in a petition filed by the accused under Section 482 CrPC, could not go into the aspect whether there was requisite mental element or intention on part of the accused.Proper Psychological/Psychiatric Evaluation To Assess Probability And Possibility Of Reform Of Criminal To Be Done Before Awarding Death Sentence [Chhannu Lal Verma vs. State of Chhattisgarh]The Supreme Court held that, before awarding death sentence, a proper psychological/psychiatric evaluation is to be done by courts to assess probability and possibility of reform of the criminal. A three-judge bench comprising of Justice Kurian Joseph, Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Hemant Gupta commuted death penalty awarded to a man convicted for murder of three persons.Development Activities In Industrial Areas Also Fall Within The Scope Of Karnataka Town And Country Planning Act [Bangalore International Airport Area Planning Authority V. Birla Super Bulk Terminal]The Supreme Court on Tuesday held that the development activities, including the industrial areas fall within the scope of the authority under the Karnataka Town and Country Planning (KTCP) Act and the industries, while obtaining the approval from the authority for its plan, is bound to pay the betterment charges, road cess and other charges as per the laws.Employer Can Consider Antecedents And Suitability Of Candidate Even After Disclosure Made By Him Of Pending Criminal Cases [State of Madhya Pradesh V. Abhijit Singh Pawar]The Supreme Court observed that even after disclosure is made by a candidate about criminal cases pending against him, the employer would be well within his rights to consider the antecedents and the suitability of the candidate.Employer (State) Should Give Plausible Reason For Not Filling Up Posts With Selected Candidates [Dinesh Kumar Kashyap vs. South East Central Railway]The Supreme Court observed that when a large number of posts are lying vacant and selection process has been followed, then the employer must satisfy the court as to why it did not resort to and...

Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up

ashok kini

Tags