Supreme court
Appeals Of Accused & Victims Under NIA Act Can't Be Dismissed On Ground That Delay Can't Be Condoned Beyond 90 Days : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court today (January 4) directed that appeals filed by accused or victims in matters under the National Investigation Agency Act 2008 would not be dismissed on reason that delay beyond a period of 90 days cannot be condoned. The bench of CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan was hearing a batch of pleas challenging S. 21(5) of the NIA Act 2008. The...
Supreme Court Rejects NHAI Plea To Prospectively Apply 2019 Judgment Allowing Solatium & Interest For National Highway Land Acquisitions
The Supreme Court today dismissed plea(s) filed by NHAI seeking a clarification that the Court's 2019 ruling in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh on grant of solatium and interest to landowners shall apply prospectively.A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan rendered the decision, stating,"Granting such clarification would nullify the very relief that Tarsem Singh intended to...
'One-Sided Forfeiture Clause In Apartment Buyer Agreements Unfair Trade Practice' : Supreme Court Rejects Builder's Appeal
In a major relief to homebuyers, the Supreme Court (Feb. 3) ruled that earnest money forfeited upon flat booking cancellation must be reasonable and not excessive enough to be considered a penalty under Section 74 of the Contract Act, 1872. The Court criticized real-estate developers for including one-sided, excessive forfeiture clauses in builder-buyer agreements, deeming them "unfair...
S. 74 Contract Act | Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Permissible If It's Not Excessive Amounting To Penalty : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court today (Feb. 3) clarified that forfeiting a reasonable earnest money deposit in a contract does not constitute a penalty under Section 74 of the Contract Act, 1872. “It can be seen that this Court has held that if the forfeiture of earnest money under a contract is reasonable, then it does not fall within Section 74 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, inasmuch as, such...
Laws Intended To Protect Women From Cruelty & Dowry Harassment Shouldn't Be Misused To Settle Personal Scores : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court recently, while quashing a case involving allegations of cruelty and dowry said that criminal law should not be used as a tool for harassment. It added that courts must be cautious while dealing with such cases to prevent misuse of the law. While the provisions are intended to protect women from cruelty and dowry harassment, they should not be used to settle personal scores...
Supreme Court Reiterates Narrow Scope Of Interference Under Section 37 Arbitration Act
The Supreme Court reiterated that in appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the Court has a narrower scope to review the arbitral award if the award has already been upheld under Section 34 (application for setting aside arbitral awards). Reliance was placed on the recent decision in Larsen Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Company vs Union of India, wherein the...
Supreme Court Weekly Round-up: January 27, 2025 To February 02, 2025
Nominal IndexCitationsHarshit Harish Jain & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 110Surendra G. Shankar & Anr v. Esque Finamark Pvt. Ltd & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 928 of 2025 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 111Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 112Ramesh Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors., SLP(C) No. 1399/2025 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 113Maulvi Syed Shad Kazmi @...
Supreme Court Allows All Disabled Candidates To Take Scribe In Exams Without Meeting Benchmark Disabilities
The Supreme Court today(February 3) allowed a writ petition filed by a candidate suffering from Focal Hand Dystonia(a type of a writ's camp), seeking to avail the benefit of the scribe by relying on landmark Vikas Kumar v. UPSC (2021) in which it held that benchmark disability is not the precondition to obtaining a scribe. The Court has held that the facility of scribe and other...
'Court Fee Refund Only If Case Settled Through ADR Mechanisms' : Supreme Court Rejects Refund Claim For Private Out-of-Court Settlement
The Supreme Court held that litigants who resolve their disputes privately outside of court are not entitled to a refund of court fees. The Court said that the refund of the court fees is permissible only “if the matter is referred to Arbitration, Conciliation, judicial settlement, including through Lok Adalat or mediation for settlement and the case is decided in terms of such a...
'Once Arrest Is Found Illegal, Duty Of Court To Release Accused On Bail' : Supreme Court Rejects ED Appeal
The Supreme Court recently declared the arrest by the Enforcement Directorate (ED) as illegal and unconstitutional because the agency failed to secure the presence of the arrestee before the magistrate within 24 hours of the arrest. The arrestee was detained on 5th March 2022 at 11 AM at IGI Airport, Delhi by the Immigration Bureau in view of the Look Out Circular issued by the ED, however,...