Supreme Court Weekly Digest (13th March 2023-19th March 2023)

With another week gone at Supreme Court of India, Live Law is back with its Supreme Court Weekly Digest to keep our readers up to date with the latest legal developments in the Apex court of the country. Judgements/OrdersDistrict Judges Appointment - Only 10% Posts Can Be Filled Through Limited Competitive Examination : Supreme CourtCase Title: Rajendra Kumar Shrivas v. State of Madhya Pradesh And Ors.| 2023 LiveLaw (SC)181 |Civil Appeal No. 1514 of 2023Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 181The Supreme Court directed the Madhya Pradesh High Court to comply with the directions of the Apex Court in All India Judges’ Association And Ors. v. UoI And Ors. (2010) 15 SCC 170, particularly, the one asking the High Courts to reserve only 10% seats in the higher judiciary to be filled up by limited departmental competitive examination.Bhopal Gas Tragedy : Supreme Court Dismisses Centre's Curative Petition Seeking Additional Compensation From UCCCase Title: UoI And Ors. v. M/s. Union Carbide Corporation And Ors. Curative Petition (C) No. 345-347/2010]Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 200A Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court dismissed the curative petition filed by Central Government seeking to reopen the settlement with the Union Carbide Corporation (now Dow Chemicals) to claim additional compensation for victims of the Bhopal Gas Tragedy of 1984.MP Nagar Tatha Gram Nivesh Adhiniyam - Scheme Will Not Lapse Merely Because It Was Not Completed Within 3 Years Despite Substantial Steps : Supreme CourtCase Title: Indore Development Authority Versus Burhani Grih Nirman Sahakari Sanstha Maryadit Sneh Nagar And Others | Civil Appeal No. 5071 Of 2022Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 183The Supreme Court of India set aside the judgments of the Madhya Pradesh High Court which held the acquisition proceedings initiated by the Indore Development Authority and the State of Madhya Pradesh for a residential scheme as lapsed.Amend Consumer Protection Rules On Appointment Process Of Commission Members Within 3 Months : Supreme Court To Centre, StatesCase Title: In Re: Inaction of the Governments in appointing President and Members/Staff of Districts and State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and inadequate infrastructure across India v. UoI And Ors. SMW(C) No. 2/2021]Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 201The Supreme Court observed that the direction in Secretary, Ministry of Consumer Affairs v. Dr.Mahindra Bhaskar Limaye And Ors. that, the Central and State Governments are required to make certain amendments to the Consumer Protection Rules, 2020 pertaining to the appointment process at the Consumer Dispute fora is to be carried out on an urgent basis, preferably within 3 months’ time.Article 226(2) - Supreme Court Explains Tests To Determine If Cause Of Action Has Arisen Within Jurisdiction Of High CourtCase Title : State of Goa vs Summit Online Trade Solutions (P) Ltd and othersCitation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 184In a notable judgment explaining the concept of 'cause of action' under Article 226(2) of the Constitution of India, the Supreme Court held that only those facts, which are relevant to the grant of the relief, will give rise to 'cause of action'.Murder Trial- Prosecution's Omission to Explain Injuries On Accused Assumes Importance When Evidence Consists Of Interested Witnesses : Supreme CourtCase Title: Nand Lal And Ors. v. State of Chhattisgarh | Criminal Appeal No. 1421 of 2015Citation: (2023) LiveLaw SC 186The Supreme Court reiterated that omission on the part of the prosecution to explain injuries on the person of the accused assumes greater importance where the evidence consists of interested witnesses or where the defence gives a version which competes in probability with that of the prosecution.KVAT Act | Dealer Claiming Input Tax Credit Must Prove Transaction Beyond Reasonable Doubt : Supreme CourtCase Title: State of Karnataka v. M/s. Ecom Gill Coffee Trading Private Limited| Civil Appeal No. 230 of 2023Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 187The Supreme Court has held that under Section 70 of the Karnataka Value Added Tax Act, 2003, a dealer claiming Input Tax Credit on purchase ought to prove and establish actual physical movement of goods and genuineness of transaction. Cause Of Action For Redemption Suit Is Successive, Second Suit By Mortgagor Not Barred By Default Dismissal Of First Suit : Supreme CourtCase Title : Ganesh Prasad vs Rajeshwar Prasad and othersCitation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 189The Supreme Court has held that a second suit by a mortagor for redemption of mortgage is not barred merely because the first suit was dismissed for default, unless the right to redemption of mortgage has been extinguished.Will Can't Be Presumed To Be Genuine Merely Because It Is Aged More Than 30 Years Old : Supreme CourtCase Title: Ashutosh Samanta Versus Ranjan Bala Dasi & Ors | Civil Appeal No.7775 Of 2021Citation : 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 190The Supreme Court has held that the presumption under Section 90 of the Indian Evidence Act regarding the...

Supreme Court Weekly Digest (13th March 2023-19th March 2023)

Padmakshi Sharma

Tags