Supreme Court Weekly Digest With Headnotes + Nominal/Subject Wise And Statute Wise Index [February 6 to12]

SUBJECT/STATUTE WISE INDEX & HEADNOTESAndhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) Abolition of Inams Act, 1955 - The land dedicated for pious and religious purpose is not immune from its vesting with the State. State of Andhra Pradesh v. A.P. State Wakf Board, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 136The Jurisdiction of the Atiyat Court would be limited to the disputes relating to Atiyat grants as defined in the Enquiries Act. State of Andhra Pradesh v. A.P. State Wakf Board, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 136Banking Law - Bank's Liability for acts of employees - Acts of bank/post office employees, when done during their course of employment, are binding on the bank/post office at the instance of the person who is damnified by the fraud and wrongful acts of the officers of the bank/post office. Post office / bank, can and is entitled to proceed against the officers for the loss caused due to the fraud etc., but this would not absolve them from their liability if the employee involved was acting in the course of his employment and duties. Pradeep Kumar v. Post Master General, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 139Bank's Liability for acts of employees - What is relevant is whether the crime, in the form of fraud etc., was perpetrated by the servant/employee during the course of his employment. Once this is established, the employer would be liable for the employee's wrongful act, even if they amount to a crime. Whether the fraud is committed during the course of employment would be a question of fact that needs to be determined in the facts and circumstances of the case. Pradeep Kumar v. Post Master General, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 139Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 - Order VII Rule 11 - A mere clever drafting would not permit the plaintiff to make the suit maintainable which otherwise would not be maintainable and/or barred by law. It has been consistently held by this Court that if clever drafting of the plaint has created the illusion of a cause of action, the court will nip it in the bud at the earliest so that bogus litigation will end at the earlier stage. Sree Surya Developers and Promoters v. N. Sailesh Prasad, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 143Order VII Rule 11 - Order XXIII Rule 3A - At the stage of deciding the application under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, the only thing which was required to be considered is whether the suit would be maintainable or not and that the suit challenging the Compromise Decree would be maintainable or not in view of Order XXIII Rule 3A CPC - Court is not required to consider on merits the validity of the Compromise Decree. Sree Surya Developers and Promoters v. N. Sailesh Prasad, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 143Order XIV Rule 2 - If the determination of the issue of limitation is not a pure question of law, it cannot be decided as preliminary issue. Mongia Realty and Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. v. Manik Sethi, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 148Order XIV Rule 2 - When issues of both law and facts arise in the same suit, the Court may dispose the suit by trying the issue of law first. For this purpose, the provision specifies two questions of law, which are (i) jurisdiction of the Court; and (ii) a bar to the suit created by any law for the time being in force. Mongia Realty and Buildwell Pvt. Ltd. v. Manik Sethi, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 148Order XXIII Rule 3A- A party to a consent decree based on a compromise to challenge the compromise decree on the ground that the decree was not lawful i.e., it was void or voidable has to approach the same court, which recorded the compromise and a separate suit challenging the consent decree has been held to be not maintainable. Sree Surya Developers and Promoters v. N. Sailesh Prasad, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 143Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 167(2) Proviso - Default Bail - Filing of a charge-sheet is sufficient compliance with the provisions of Section 167 CrPC - An accused cannot demand release on default bail under Section 167(2) on the ground that cognizance has not been taken before the expiry of 60 days. Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. Rahul Modi, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 138Section 167(2) Proviso - Default Bail - There is no additional requirement of cognizance having to be taken within the period prescribed under proviso (a) to Section 167(2), CrPC, failing which the accused would be entitled to default bail, even after filing of the charge-sheet within the statutory period. Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. Rahul Modi, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 138Section 167(2) Proviso - The accused continues to be in the custody of the Magistrate till such time cognizance is taken by the court trying the offence, which assumes custody of the accused for the purpose of remand after cognizance is taken. Serious Fraud Investigation Office v. Rahul Modi, 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 138Section 173 (2) - Evidentiary Value of a Final Report - Final Report, is nothing but a piece of evidence. It forms a mere opinion of the investigating officer on the materials collected by him. He takes note of the offence and thereafter, conducts an investigation to identify the offender, the...

Supreme Court Weekly Digest With Headnotes + Nominal/Subject Wise And Statute Wise Index [February 6 to12]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Citations from 136 to 160

Tags