Unregistered Agreement Of Sale Can Be Used As An Evidence For Collateral Purpose
Prakash Sahu V. Saulal
The Supreme Court recently upheld a Trial Court order allowing the plaintiff to lead evidence on insufficiently stamped unregistered agreement of sale in his suit for recovery of earnest money said to be paid by him at the time executing the agreement for sale.
Order VII Rule 11 CPC: Plaint Can Be Rejected When It Does Not Disclose Clear Right To Sue
Colonel Shrawan Kumar Jaipuriyar @ Sarwan Kumar Jaipuriyar V. Krishna Nandan Singh
The Supreme Court observed that a plaint can be rejected Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure, when it is manifestly vexatious, meritless and groundless, in the sense that it does not disclose a clear right to sue. The bench comprising of Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and Justice Sanjiv Khanna also observed that a mere contemplation or possibility that a right may be infringed without any legitimate basis for that right, would not be sufficient to hold that the plaint discloses a cause of action.
HC Can't Interfere In The Manner Of Investigation In Exercise Of Powers Under Section 482 CrPC
State of UP vs. Aman Mittal
The Supreme Court reiterated that the High Court, while exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code, cannot interfere in the manner of investigation. The Allahabad High Court, while disposing a petition filed by accused under Section 482 CrPC had issued a slew of directions, including the direction to change the investigating officer and also to subject the erring officers/officials named in the supplementary report to disciplinary action.
Legal Metrology Act Excludes Only Those Offence With Regard To Weight Or Measure Under IPC
The Supreme Court held that though Section 3 of the Legal Metrology Act completely overrides the provisions of Chapter XIII of Indian Penal in respect of the offences and penalties with regard to weight or measure, but the prosecution for other offences under of IPC could be maintained.
Mere Government Inefficiency Not A Ground For Delay Condonation
State Of Odisha (Vigilance) V. Purna Chandra Kandi
The Supreme Court reiterated that mere government inefficiency cannot be a ground for condoning the delay. While dismissing the Special Leave Petition filed by the State of Odisha on the ground of delay, the bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice KM Joseph observed that it is for the state to 'put its own house in order'.
138NI Act-Proceedings Cannot Be Quashed On The Ground That Notice Not Served Within Statutory Period
Kishore Sharma vs. Sachin Dubey
The Supreme Court recently held that the proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act cannot be quashed on the ground that the demand notice not duly served within the statutory period.
The Real Point Is To Ascertain Which Contains The Truth: SC On Divergent Dying Declarations
Jagbir Singh vs. State NCT of Delhi
The Supreme Court recently came across an appeal filed by a man who was convicted for murder of his wife mainly relying on one of the dying declaration made by the deceased implicating him. In the Judgment disposing the appeal the bench comprising Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Justice KM Joseph summarized the principles to be followed in cases were dying declaration is the sole evidence available
Dismisses Plea To Direct Central Government To Enact Legislation Against Custodial Torture
Dr. Ashwani Kumar V. Union of India
The Supreme Court dismissed a plea of Former Law Minister and Senior Advocate Dr. Ashwani Kumar, seeking a direction to Central Government to enact a stand alone comprehensive legislation against custodial torture.'
Relief Of Specific Performance Can Be Refused For Non Performance Of An Essential Promise In Contract
Surinder Kaur (D) vs. Bahadur Singh (D)
The Supreme Court observed that a vendee who does not perform one of the essential promises in a contract is not entitled to the discretionary relief of specific performance of that very contract. The bench comprising Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Aniruddha Bose observed that the payment of rent was an essential term of the contract had failed to perform his part of the contract. A party cannot claim that though he may not perform his part of the contract he is entitled to specific performance of the same, the bench said.
Order IX Rule 9 CPC-Decree Against Plaintiff By Default Bars Fresh Suit On Same Cause Of Action By Successor In Title
Mayandi V. Pandarachamy
The Supreme Court observed that the decree against plaintiffs by default bars fresh suit on the same cause of action by their successor in title. The bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra and Justice MR Shah set aside a High Court order on the ground that in the previous suit filed by vendors of the plaintiff; a similar relief was prayed. The said suit was dismissed under the provisions of Order IX Rule 8 of the CPC as the counsel for defendants was present and counsel for the plaintiffs was absent.
Contract Act-'Undue Influence' Can't Be Inferred Merely Because Family Member Was Taking Care Of Elderly Person
Raja Ram vs. Jai Prakash Singh
The Supreme Court, in a judgment delivered observed that 'undue influence' in execution of contract cannot be inferred merely because a family member was looking after his family elder.
Appointment Of Arbitrator: SC/HC Jurisdiction Confined To The Examination Of Existence Of Arbitration Agreement
Mayavti Trading Pvt. Ltd. vs. Pradyuat Deb Burman
The Supreme Court held that, after introduction of Section 11(6A) to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the jurisdiction of the Supreme Court/High Court, while considering a petition to appoint arbitrator, is confined to the examination of the existence of an arbitration agreement
Economic Offences Constitute A Class Apart: SC Cancels Bail Granted To Bhushan Steel Ltd CFO Nittin Johari
Serious Fraud Investigation Office V. Nittin Johari & Anr
While cancelling the bail granted to Nittin Johari, the Chief Financial Officer and Whole Time Director (Finance) of Bhushan Steel Ltd., the Supreme Court reiterated that the economic offences constitute a class apart and stringent view must be adopted while deciding bail applications.
Executing Court Cannot Travel Beyond The Order Or Decree Under Execution
S. Bhaskaran vs. Sebastian (Dead)
The Supreme Court reiterated a settled proposition that an executing court cannot travel beyond the order or decree under execution. In the appeal the bench comprising Justice NV Ramana, Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and Justice Ajay Rastogi observed that, by allowing the Judgment Debtors to re-open the question of trusteeship by way of an application in an execution petition, the High Court has gone beyond the decree to be executed and exceeded its revisional jurisdiction under Section 115 of the CPC.
A Party To An Agreement Cannot Be An Arbiter In His Own Cause
M/S. Tulsi Narayan Garg V. The M.P. Road Development Authority, Bhopal
The Supreme Court reiterated that a party to an agreement cannot be an arbiter in his own cause. The bench comprising Justice NV Ramana, Justice Indira Banerjee and Justice Ajay Rastogi observed that as long as the dispute remained pending adjudication, it was not justified on the part of the authorities to initiate recovery proceedings invoking the procedure under the Land Revenue Act without awaiting the outcome of the arbitral proceedings.
SC Enhances Compensation To Family Of Carpenter Who Died In Accident
Chameli Devi & Ors. V. Jivrail Mian
What proof they can lead except to lead oral evidence, remarked Supreme Court while enhancing the compensation awarded to the family of a carpenter who died in an accident.
SC Orders 20 Lakhs Compensation To Compulsorily Retired Judicial Officer
Yogesh M. Vyas V. Registrar, High Court Of Gujarat
The Supreme Court granted Rupees Twenty Lakhs compensation to a former judicial officer who was compulsory retired. Penalty of compulsory retirement was imposed on Yogesh M. Vyas while he was working as Civil Judge (JD) and JMFC, Visnagar. Allegations against him were of granting bail orders illegally and corruption.
Non Payment Of Debt After Issuance Of Recovery Certificate Not A 'Continuing Wrong'
Vashdeo R Bhojwani V. Abhyudaya Co-Operative Bank Ltd
The Supreme Court held that non-payment of debt after the issuance of recovery certificate cannot be regarded as a continuing wrong so as to give rise to a continuing cause of action under the Limitation Act. The bench of Justices R F Nariman and Surya Kant held so while allowing an appeal against an order of NCLAT which allowed the admission of an insolvency petition with respect to a financial debt.
Mere 'Simple Allegations' Of Fraud Does Not Make A Dispute Non-Arbitrable
Rashid Raza vs. Sadaf Akthar
The Supreme Court reiterated that mere allegation of fraud simplicitor may not be a ground to nullify the effect of arbitration agreement between the parties. The bench comprising Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, Justice R. Subhash Reddy and Justice Surya Kant noticed that two tests have been laid down in the judgment in A. Ayyasamy v. A. Paramasivam.
Succession And Inheritance Of Goan Domicile Shall Be Governed By Portuguese Civil Code
Jose Paulo Coutinho vs. Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira
The Supreme Court held that the rights of succession and inheritance of a Goan domicile shall be governed by the Portuguese Civil Code, 1867 as applicable in the State of Goa. Rights of succession and inheritance even in respect of properties of a Goan domicile situated outside Goa, anywhere in India, will also be governed by the Code, the bench comprising Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Aniruddha Bose has held.
Service Rendered In 'Work Charged' Establishment Should Be Treated As Qualifying Service For Pension
Prem Singh V. State of U.P.
The Supreme Court held that services rendered in the work-charged establishment should be treated as qualifying service for grant of pension. The bench consisting of Justices Arun Mishra, Abdul Nazeer and M R Shah delivered the judgment allowing the appeals filed by employees against the Uttar Pradesh government.
No Attempt Made To Frame Uniform Civil Code Despite Judicial Exhortation
Jose Paulo Coutinho V. Maria Luiza Valentina Pereira
The Supreme Court, in a judgment delivered, observed that no attempt has been made yet to frame a Uniform Civil Code applicable to all citizens of the country despite exhortations by it.
Protection From SARFAESI Act Not Available To 'Tenant-In-Sufferance' : SC Clarifies Interplay Between SARFAESI And Tenancy Laws
Bajarang Shyamsunder Agarwal vs. Central Bank Of India
Clarifying the interplay between laws of tenancy and debt recovery, the Supreme Court held that protection from recovery proceedings under the SARFAESI Act is not available to a 'tenant-in-sufferance', i.e a tenant who continues to be in possession even after the expiry of the lease period.
Non Recovery Of Weapon Of Assault Not Always Fatal To Prosecution Case
Prabhash Kumar Singh vs. State of Bihar
The Supreme Court held that a prosecution case cannot be disbelieved merely because the weapon of assault or the bullet was not recovered. The main contention in the appeal before the Supreme Court against concurrent conviction of the accused in a murder case was that the medical evidence is inconclusive to connect killing of the deceased victim with bullet injury. It was contended that the bullet or any part thereof was also not recovered.
Grant Of Leave Is A Necessary Prerequisite To Entertain A Suit Under Section 92 CPC
Bhupinder Singh vs. Joginder Singh (D)
The Supreme Court observed that in every suit filed under Section 92 of the Code of Civil Procedure the grant of leave is necessary before the suit can be said to be properly instituted. Though the bench found that the defendant was legally right that the suit could not have been instituted without taking leave, it dismissed the appeal taking note of the fact that the defendant had not raised the issue before the Trial Court.
Consumer Forum Has Jurisdiction To Adjudicate Dispute Concerning Validity Of Statutory Due Arising Out Of Deficiency In Service
Punjab Urban Planning and Development Authority (Now GLADA) vs Ram Singh
The Supreme Court held that determination of the dispute concerning the validity of the imposition of a statutory due arising out of a "deficiency in service", can be undertaken by the consumer fora as per the provisions of the Consumer Protection Act. A three judge bench comprising of Justice NV Ramana, Justice Mohan M. Shanthanagoudar and Justice Ajay Rastogi was answering a reference from a two judge bench which had doubted the correctness of the judgment in HUDA vs. Sunita, (2005) 2 SCC 479.
Acquittal By Criminal Court Does Not Preclude Departmental Inquiry Against Delinquent Officer
Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited vs. C. Nagaraju
The Supreme Court reiterated that acquittal by a Criminal Court does not preclude a Departmental Inquiry against the delinquent officer and the Disciplinary Authority is not bound by the judgment of the Criminal Court if the evidence that is produced in the Departmental Inquiry is different from that produced during the criminal trial. The bench comprising Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice Hemant Gupta observed thus while setting aside the High Court that had quashed a dismissal order of an employee on the ground that it could not have been passed since he was honourably acquitted by the Criminal Court.
Burden Of Proof Ordinarily Rests On Those Who Attack The Deed
Ali Hussain(D) vs. Rabiya
The Supreme Court reiterated that the burden of proof rests ordinarily on those who attack the deed. he bench comprising Justice NV Ramana, Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and Justice Ajay Rastogi noted that there are no pleadings in support that the plaintiff was a pardanasheen illiterate lady and was entitled for protection of law and the burden was on the defendant to prove that the alleged power of attorney was the result of fraud.
Appellate Authority Cannot Override Mandatory Statutory Requirements Of Pre-Deposit To Maintain Appeal
Tecnimont Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Punjab
While upholding Section 62(5) of Punjab Value Added Tax Act, the Supreme Court observed that the Appellate Authority cannot override statutory requirement of pre-deposit when the statute mandates that no appeal can be entertained unless such requirement is satisfied.
Shebait/Archak Duty bound To Protect Temple Property; Cannot Usurp It For Their Own Gains
Sri Ganapathi Dev Temple Trust V. Balakrishna Bhat
The Supreme Court observed that it is the bounden duty of the shebait, archak to protect the temple property, and they cannot usurp such property for their own gains. Allowing the appeal, the bench comprising Justice NV Ramana, Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and Justice Ajay Rastogi observed that the appellant temple has the right, through its present managing trustee, to undertake proceedings for the benefit of the idol for having such wrongful entries set aside, and such wrongful entries would not be binding on the temple.
Refund Claim U/s 27 Customs Act Cannot Be Entertained Unless Order Of Assessment Or Self-Assessment Is Modified
ITC Limited vs. Commissioner Of Central Excise
The Supreme Court has held that the claim for refund under Section 27 of the Customs Act cannot be entertained unless the order of assessment or self-assessment is modified in accordance with law by taking recourse to the appropriate proceedings. The bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra, Justice Navin Sinha and Justice Indira Banerjee observed that in case any person is aggrieved by any order which would include self-assessment, he has to get the order modified under Section 128 or under other relevant provisions of the Act and that it would not be within the ken of Section 27 to set aside the order of self assessment and reassess the duty for making refund.
Benefit Of Doubt: SC Acquits 'Wife' Accused Of Murdering Her 'Husband'
Gargi V. State of Haryana
Setting aside concurrent convictions by the High Court and Trial Court, the Supreme Court acquitted a woman accused of murder of her husband. Gargi was accused of murder of her husband Tirloki Nath by strangulation. The prosecution case was that, with the help of her brothers, she allegedly hanged the dead body in one of the rooms in the house, as if it were a case of suicide. The Trial Court accepted this version and had convicted Gargi and her brothers.
NDPS Act- Court Should Be Satisfied That Confession Is Voluntary And Accused Was Apprised Of His Rights
Mohammed Fasrin vs. State
The Supreme Court has observed that, even if confessions made to investigating officers are held to be admissible under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, the Court has to be satisfied that it is a voluntary statement, free from any pressure and also that the accused was apprised of his rights before recording the confession. In, the conviction of the accused under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, was mainly based on the confessional statement he and his co-accused had made to the investigating officer.
There Is No Concept Of Negative Equality Under Article 14 Of Constitution State of Odisha vs. Anup Kumar Senapati
The Supreme Court has observed that there is no concept of negative equality under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.The bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra, Justice S. Abdul Nazeer and Justice MR Shah observed thus while considering an appeal wherein the issue whether the employees are entitled to claim grant-in-aid as admissible under the Orissa (Non-Government Colleges, Junior Colleges and Higher Secondary Schools) Grant-in-aid Order, 1994 after its repeal in the year 2004.
Article 14- Classification Should Never Be Arbitrary, Artificial Or Evasive
Vasant Ganpat Padave (D) vs. Anant Mahadev Sawant (D)
While reading down Section 32-F of Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, the Supreme Court reiterated that while the law may recognise 'degrees of harm', but the classification should never be arbitrary, artificial or evasive. The bench of Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, Justice R. Subhash Reddy and Justice Surya Kant was concerned with the interpretation of Section 32-F of Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948. It held that Section 32-F to be read in conformity with Article 14 of the Constitution of India
Conducting Separate Interviews For General And Reserved Category Candidates Wholly Illegal
Pradeep Singh Dehal vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
The Supreme Court observed that the process of conducting separate interviews for general and reserved category candidates is wholly illegal. The bench comprising Justice L. Nageswara Rao and Justice Hemant Gupta observed thus while taking note that separate interviews were conducted in respect of appointment to the post of Assistant Professor in the Department of Education in the International Centre for Distance Education and Open Learning, Shimla.
Courts Can Interfere With Administrative Actions Only If It Suffers From Vice Of Illegality, Irrationality Or Procedural Impropriety
Municipal Council Neemuch vs. Mahadeo Real Estate
The Supreme Court reiterated that while exercising its powers of judicial review of administrative action, Courts could not interfere with the administrative decision unless it suffers from the vice of illegality, irrationality or procedural impropriety. The bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra, Justice MR Shah and Justice BR Gavai observed thus while setting aside a Madhya Pradesh High Court judgment that had interfered with an order passed by Revenue Commissioner of Ujjain in a matter of issuing tenders for allotment of land on lease, for a period of 30 years.
Specific Performance: Self-Serving Statements On Income Without Any Proof Of Financial Resources Won't Suffice To Prove Readiness & Willingness
Ritu Saxena v. J.S. Grover
The Supreme Court observed that self-serving statements on income without any proof of financial resources is not sufficient to prove that plaintiff in a suit for specific performance was ready and willing to perform her part of the contract.
Larger Public Interest: SC Upholds Withdrawal Of Excise Duty Exemption For Pan Masala
Union of India vs. Unicorn Industries
The Supreme Court upheld the withdrawal of the exemption from payment of Excise Duty to the pan masala with tobacco and pan masala sans tobacco by the Central Government observing that the same is in the larger public interest. The three judge bench comprising of Justice Arun Mishra, Justice MR Shah and Justice BR Gavai termed the judgment of the Division bench of Sikkim High Court 'totally erroneous' and 'shocking'.
Sec 3J Of National Highways Act, To The Extent It Excludes Solatium & Interest As Per Land Acquisition Act, Unconstitutional
Union of India & ors v. Tarsem Singh and ors.
The Supreme Court has declared Section 3J of the National Highways Act 1956, to the extent it excludes solatium and interest as per Land Acquisition Act 1894 to acquisitions done under the NH Act to be unconstitutional. "We, therefore, declare that the provisions of the Land Acquisition Act relating to solatium and interest contained in Section 23(1A) and (2) and interest payable in terms of section 28 proviso will apply to acquisitions made under the National Highways Act.
Disability Pension Is Not Admissible When Army Officer Sustained Injuries During Household Acts
The Secretary, Government of India vs Dharambir Singh
The Supreme Court held that an army official is entitled to disability pension only if the disability is attributable to or aggravated by military service. On this reasoning, the bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao and Hemant Gupta set aside the judgment of Armed Forces Tribunal (Chandigarh bench) which granted disability pension to an official for injuries sustained by him in an accident while going in a scooter to purchase household materials.
NGOs 'Substantially Financed' By Government Amenable To RTI Act
D.A.V. College Trust And Management Society vs. Director Of Public Instructions
In an important judgment delivered today, the Supreme Court has held that non-governmental organisations [NGO] substantially financed, whether directly or indirectly, by the appropriate government fall within the ambit of 'public authority' under Section 2(h) of the Right to Information Act, 2005.
Section 138 NI Act- No Provision For Consolidation Of Multiple Cases Arising Out Of Single Notice
Vani Agro Industries V. State of Gujarat
While refusing a plea to consolidate multiple cheque bounce cases against the accused which emanated from a single notice, the Supreme Court observed that there is no provision of consolidation of cases in the Code of Criminal Procedure.
SC Allows Woman To Proceed With Complaint Filed U/s 498A IPC At The Place She Was Residing
Priti Kumari vs. State of Bihar
Reiterating its view on the jurisdiction of courts entertaining complaints under Section 498A IPC, the Supreme Court allowed a woman to proceed with her complaint filed in a Court at the place where she was residing. The bench comprising Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Aniruddha Bose, while allowing the appeal against the order of the High Court which held that no cause of action has arisen where she was residing, observed that the matter is squarely covered by the judgment in Rupali Devi v. State of U.P.
"A Judge Is Also Judged By the Quality And Purity of His Character", SC Upholds Dismissal Of Magistrate Who Passed Favourable Orders For A Lady Lawyer
Shrirang Yadavrao Waghmare V. State of Maharasthra
Refusing to show any leniency to a Magistrate who was dismissed from service for passing certain judicial orders in favour of clients and relatives of a lady lawyer, with whom he allegedly had proximate relationship, the Supreme Court observed that the Judicial Officers must possess impeccable integrity in their public and personal life.
Succession To Mutawalliship By Descendant Through Female Line Not Barred
Md. Abrar vs. Meghalaya Board of Wakf
The Supreme Court held that there is no legal bar on cognatic heirs of the waqif from succeeding to mutawalliship. The bench comprising Justice NV Ramana, Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and Justice Ajay Rastogi reiterated that in order to establish a claim of hereditary succession to mutawalli-ship, the intention of the waqif, as manifested either through the directions given in the waqf deed or the creation of a custom, is of paramount importance.
Female Descendant Cannot Be Mutawalli If Wakif Intended To Exclude Them
Syeda Nazira Khatoon (D) vs. Syed Zahiruddin Ahmed Baghdadi
The Supreme Court observed that, though women can also hold the office of Mutawalli under Mohammedan law, but if the wakif intended to create the Mutawalliship only in favour of male descendants, a female descendant cannot stake any claim to the Mutawalliship of the wakf estate. The bench comprising Justice NV Ramana, Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar and Justice Ajay Rastogi observed thus while affirming the cancellation of the appointment of one Nazira Khatoon as the permanent Mutawalli of a wakf estate.
Specific Performance- Illegal Agreement To Sell Can't Be Enforced In Favour Of Plaintiff
Narayanamma vs. Govindappa
The Supreme Court observed that an agreement contrary to law cannot be enforced by the court in favour of plaintiff in a suit for specific performance, even if the defendant, who was also party to such illegality stands benefitted by it.
Police Cannot Attach Immovable Property Under Sec.102 CrPC During Investigation
Nevada Properties Private Limited V. State Of Maharashtra And Anr
The Supreme Court held that police does not have the power to attach immovable property during investigation under Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The judgment was delivered by the bench comprising CJI Ranjan Gogoi, Justices Deepak Gupta and Sanjiv Khanna. However, police does have authority to freeze moveable properties of the accused, clarified the bench.
Crucial Date For Deciding Bonafide Requirement Of Landlord Is The Date Of Application For Eviction
D. Sasi Kumar vs. Soundararajan
The crucial date for deciding the bonafide requirement of landlord is the date of application for eviction, the Supreme Court reiterated. The High Court, in this case, while setting aside the concurrent eviction orders passed by Rent Control Authorities under, had observed that the bonafide occupation as sought should be not only on the date of the petition but it should continue to be there on the date of final adjudication of rights.
Section 34 Arbitration Act- Additional Evidence Can Be Adduced Only In Exceptional Cases
Canara Nidhi Limited vs. M. Shashikala
The Supreme Court held that proceedings under Section 34 of Arbitration and Conciliation Act will not ordinarily require anything beyond the record that was before the arbitrator and only in exceptional case, additional evidence can be permitted to be adduced. The bench comprising Justice R. Banumathi and Justice AS Bopanna was considering an appeal against a High Court order which grant opportunity to a party to Section 34 Proceedings to adduce additional evidence.
Chief Judicial Magistrates Competent To Entertain Applications U/s 14 SARFAESI Act
Authorized Officer, Indian Bank v D Visalakshi and other
In an important judgment, the Supreme Court held that a Chief Judicial Magistrate is equally competent to deal with the application moved by the secured creditor under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act (SARFAESI).
Section 138 NI Act: Legal Heirs Of Deceased Convict Can Challenge Conviction
M. Abbas Haji vs. T.N. Channakeshava
The Supreme Court held that legal heirs of a deceased accused convicted under Section 138 of Negotiable Instrument Act have a right to challenge the conviction of their predecessor only to show that he was not guilty of any offence.
Donee Not Required To Examine Attesting Witness If There Is No Specific Denial Of Execution Of Gift
Govindbhai Chhotabhai Patel vs. Patel Ramanbhai Mathurbhai
The Supreme Court held that, when the execution of the gift deed was not specifically denied in the suit filed, it is not necessary for the Donee to examine one of the attesting witnesses in terms of proviso to Section 68 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872.
Section 102 CrPC- Expression 'Any Property' Does Not Include 'Immovable Property'
Nevada Properties Private Limited Vs. State Of Maharashtra
The Supreme Court held that the expression 'any property' appearing in Section 102 of the Code of Criminal Procedure would not include 'immovable property'. The bench comprising Chief Justice Ranjan Gogoi, Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Sanjiv Khanna observed thus while holding that a power of a police officer under Section 102 of the Criminal Procedure Code to seize any property, which may be found under circumstances that create suspicion of the commission of any offence, would not include the power to attach, seize and seal an immovable property.
IBC- Article 137 Limitation Act Applies To Section 7 Applications; Not Article 62
Gaurav Hargovindbhai Dave Vs. Asset Reconstruction Company (India) Ltd.
The Supreme Court held that Article 62 of the Limitation Act would only apply to suits and not to "an application" which is filed under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, which would fall only within the residuary Article 137.
Rent Controller's Power To Strike Out Defence Of Tenant On Failure To Pay Rent Is Discretionary
Dina Nath (D ) vs. Subhash Chand Saini
The Supreme Court held that the power to strike out the defence vested in the Rent Controller under Section 15(7) of the Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 is discretionary and not mandatory. Mere failure to pay rent on the part of the tenant is not enough to justify an order striking out the defence and it is only a wilful failure or deliberate default or volitional of non-performance that can call for the exercise of the extraordinary power vested in the Court, the bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra, Justice MR Shah and Justice Ajay Rastogi held.
Father's Self Acquired Property Given To Son By Will/Gift Retains Character Of Self Acquired Property Unless The Deed Intends Otherwise
Govindbhai Chhotabhai Patel and ors v Patel Ramanbhai Mathurbhai
The Supreme Court held that as per Mitakshara Law of Succession, father's self-acquired property given to son by way of Will/gift will retain the character of self acquired property and will not become ancestral property, unless a contrary intention is expressed in the testament.The bench comprising Justices L Nageswara Rao and Hemant Gupta was dealing with an appeal from the High Court of Gujarat.
Right Of Minority Educational Institutions Not Absolute; Are Amenable To Regulations
Andhra Kesari College of Education & Anr V. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors
While turning down the plea challenging certain G.O.Ms issued by Government of Andhra Pradesh, the Supreme Court observed that the right of minority institutions is not absolute, and is amenable to regulation and that the protection granted to Minority Educational Institutions to admit students of their choice is subject to reasonable restrictions.
Medium Of Instruction Of School Irrelevant To Discover Whether It Is A Linguistic Minority Institution Or Not
Chandana Das (Malakar) v. State of West Bengalwhile
The Supreme Court observed that the medium of instruction, whether it be Hindi, English, Bengali or some other language would be wholly irrelevant to discover as to whether the said school was founded by a linguistic minority for the purpose of imparting education to members of its community. The bench comprising Justice Rohinton Fali Nariman, Justice R. Subhash Reddy and Justice Surya Kant made this observation answering reference made to it after a division bench delivered split verdict in an appeal against the judgment of Calcutta High Court.
Date Of Default Alone Is Relevant For Triggering Limitation For Winding Up Petition: SC Dismisses IL&FS Petition Against La-Fin
Jignesh Shah & Anr. V. Union of India
The Supreme Court held that the the date of default alone is relevant for the limitation of filing of a winding up petition against a company. It cannot be said that the limitation period will start only after the company has gone into commercial insolvency or has lost the substratum of its business, added the Court.
Fundamental Right Of Minorities To Administer Educational Institutions Cannot Be Waived
Chandana Das (Malakar) v. State of West Bengal
The Supreme Court reiterated that the fundamental right of Minorities under Article 30 of the Constitution of India to administer educational institutions cannot be waived. The bench comprising Justice RF Nariman, Justice R.Subhash Reddy and Justice Surya Kant was answering a reference which arose out of a split judgment by division bench (Justice TS Thakur and Justice R Banumathi) in which one of the judges (Justice Banumathi) held that the school having accepted the special constitution in terms of Rule 8(3) of the Rules, the school is estopped from contending that it is a minority institution governed by special rules to be framed by the State under Rule 33 of the Rules.
Concession In Law Made By Lawyer Not Binding On Client[Director Of Elementary Education,
Odisha & Ors. V. Pramod Kumar Sahoo
The Supreme Court observed that concession by a counsel (lawyer) as to matters of law before a Court is not binding on the client. In this case, Odisha Administrative Tribunal had allowed an application filed by Pramod Kumar Sahoo, a Teacher. In his OA, the applicant had claimed that he is entitled to pay scale of Rs.840 to Rs.1240 from the very day of his appointment and pay scale of Rs. 1080-1800 after Orissa Revised Scales of Pay Rules, 1989 as amended in the year 1990.
A Plaintiff Can Claim Title To The Property Based On Adverse Possession
Krishnamurthy S. Setlur (D) vs. O. V. Narasimha Setty (D)
A plaintiff can claim title to the property based on adverse possession, the Supreme Court reiterated. In this case, the appeal arose from a suit filed by a plaintiff who claimed that he was in possession of the land from 1963 to 1981 claiming ownership as against defendant and that his possession had matured into title.
Witnesses To Sale Deed/Will Need Not Necessarily Know Its Contents
Hemkunwar Bai vs. Sumersingh
The Supreme Court observed that the witnesses to documents such as Sale Deeds and Wills need not necessarily know what is contained in them. The plaintiff in the suit had prayed for a declaration that she be declared to be the owner in possession of the suit property and also prayed that the defendants be injuncted from interfering in her possession. It was contended that the two sale-deeds and the Will in favour of defendants are sham and fraudulent documents and not binding upon her. The Trial Court decreed the Suit. However, the High court dismissed the Suit allowing the appeal filed by the defendants.
Issue Of Invalidity Of Sanction To Be Raised During Trial, Not At Stage Of Discharge Application
Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) Vs. Pramila Virendra Kumar Agarwal
The Supreme Court held that though the absence of sanction can be agitated during stage of discharge application, but the issue of invalidity of the sanction is to be raised during the trial.
NDPS Act - Non Production Of Entire Contraband By Itself Not A Ground For Acquittal
State of Rajasthan V. Sahi Ram
The Supreme Court held that non-production of contraband material, by itself, is not a ground for acquittal, if its seizure is otherwise proved. On this ground, the bench of Justices U U Lalit and Vineet Saran set aside the acquittal ordered by the High Court in a case under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act 1985.
[Exception 4 To Section 300 IPC] Accused Party Armed With Weapons Can't Claim the Benefit Of Sudden Fight
Guru @ Gurubaran vs. State
The Supreme Court observed that when the accused party came armed at the scene of crime, it clearly indicates that the occurrence did not take place in the heat of passion, upon a sudden quarrel to claim the exception 4 to Section 300 IPC. In this appeal the contention of the accused convicted for murder was that the offence was not of murder but may amount to culpable homicide not amounting to murder and that the case would fall within Exception 4 to Section 300 IPC.
Is A Wife Divorced By Husband On Ground Of Desertion Entitled To Maintenance ? SC Answers
Dr. Swapan Kumar Banerjee vs. State of WB
The Supreme Court observed that a wife, who has been divorced by the husband, on the ground that the wife has deserted him, is entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The bench comprising Justice Deepak Gupta and Justice Aniruddha Bose, refusing the plea to refer this issue to a larger bench, observed that this view has been consistently taken by the Supreme Court and is in line with both the letter and spirit of the Criminal Procedure Code.
Land Used For Quarrying Not Exempted From Applicability Of Kerala Land Reforms Act
KH Nazar vs. Mathew K. Jacob
The Supreme Court upheld the Judgment of Kerala High Court that the land which is used for quarrying is not covered by the expression 'commercial site' and therefore not exempted from the applicability of the Kerala Land Reforms Act, 1963.
Other Significant Orders And Proceedings