100 Important Supreme Court Judgments Of 2022 [Part 3]

As is the annual tradition, LiveLaw brings to you the list of 100 important Supreme Court judgments of the current year - a much awaited article by our dear readers.The judgments are selected based on the following criteria - (i) importance to the general public; (ii) settlement of a contested position of law; (iii) utility for practising lawyers and.A disclaimer is added here that the judgments included in the list are not necessarily good or the best judgments; some of them are controversial and regarding some others, there are strong counter-views. Yet, these judgments are worthy of being noted and discussed upon, considering their general importance and impact on litigation and general socio-political arena. Hence, the inclusion in this list. The judgments are arranged in the chronological order. The reports about the judgments are hyperlinked at the case description.The list of 100 judgments will be published in three parts and this is the third part containing 33 judgments. First part[1-33] can be read here. Second part [34-66] can be read here.67. When There Are Contradictory Dying Declarations, Which One To Accept? Supreme Court Answers "Difficult Question"In a case of conflicting dying declarations, the Supreme Court relied on the one recorded after a medical examination with regard to the fitness of the deceased.The Court explained the "difficult question" before it as follows :"In the present case, we are faced with two dying declarations, which are totally inconsistent and contradictory to each other. Both are recorded by Judicial Magistrates. A difficult question that we have to answer is which one of the dying declarations is to be believed".The bench comprising Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice PS Narasimha opined that the court was required to examine as to whether a dying declaration was true and reliable; as to whether it had been recorded by a person at a time when the deceased was fit physically and mentally to make the declaration and; whether it had been made under any tutoring/duress/prompting.Case : MAKHAN SINGH v. THE STATE OF HARYANA | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 67768. Pre-Institution Mediation Under Section 12A Commercial Courts Act Is Mandatory; Suits Filed Violating This Liable To Be RejectedIn a judgment having far reaching impact in commercial litigations, a bench comprising Justices KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy declared that Section 12A of the Commercial Courts Act, which mandates pre- institution mediation, is mandatory and suits which are filed violating this mandate are liable to be rejected at the threshold under Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure.The Court has however made this declaration effective from August 22, 2022.Case : M/s Patil Automation Private Limited and others versus Rakheja Engineers Private Ltd| 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 67869. Section 3(2) Of Benami Transactions Prohibition Act Declared As UnconstitutionalA bench comprising CJI NV Ramana, Justice Krishna Murari and Hima Kohli declared that Section 3(2) of the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act 1988 as unconstitutional on the ground of being manifestly arbitrary.Section 3(2) prescribes the punishment for entering into benami transaction.The Court further held that Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act 2016 cannot be applied retrospectively. The Court held that the 2016 amendment cannot be held as merely procedural."Unduly Harsh" : Why Supreme Court Lifted Blanket Ban On Benami Transactions?PMLA Judgment Allowing ED To Take Possession Of Property Before Trial In Exceptional Cases Leaves Scope For Arbitrariness : Supreme CourtCase : Union of India vs Ganpati Dealcom Pvt. Ltd | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 70070. 'Don't Confuse Or Confound Readers" : Supreme Court Issues Guidelines On Writing Simple & Lucid JudgmentsObserving that the purpose of a judgment is not to "confuse or confound the readers", the Supreme Court has urged the Courts and Tribunals to "provide an easy-to-understand analysis of the issues of law and fact" in their verdicts.A bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna made this crucial observation while dealing with a judgment of the Himachal Pradesh High Court which was found to be "incomprehensible".Case : State Bank of India vs Ajay Kumar Sood | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 71071. Family May Take Form Of Unmarried Or Queer Relationships, Atypical Families Also Entitled To Protection Of Law : Supreme CourtIn a notable order, the Supreme Court has made certain significant observations which expand the traditional meaning of family."Familial relationships may take the form of domestic, unmarried partnerships or queer relationships", the Court observed, while holding that atypical family units are also entitled to the equal protection of law.A bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and AS Bopanna made these observations in a judgment delivered on August 16(but which was uploaded a few days ago), while granting the relief of maternity leave to a Central Government employee regardless of the...

100 Important Supreme Court Judgments Of 2022 [Part 3]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags