Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up

SC Asks NGO To Show Its Locus In Land Grab Complaint Against Yeddyurappa & D K Shivakumar The Chief Justice S.A.Bobde granted two weeks time to petitioner-NGO Samaj Parivartan Samudaya to show that it has earlier brought the matter to the attention of the concerned Lokayukta. The case was regarding a plea to rekindle a 2008 land-grabbing case against Karnataka CM B.S.Yeddyurappa and former Congress minister D.K.Shivakumar. SC dismissed centre's appeal against TDSAT order to refund Rs.104 crores to Reliance Communications. [Union of India v. Reliance COmmunication Ltd. & Anr.] In a relief to Reliance Communications Ltd., the apex court dismissed the appeal filed by Central Government against the order of Telecom Disputes Settlement & Appellate Authority directing refund of around Rs.104 crore to telecom company. A bench of justices R F Nariman and S Ravindra Bhat said, "We don't find any merits in the appeal". The TDSAT had on December 21, 2018 directed the Centre to return around Rs 104 crore after encashing bank guarantee of Rs 908 crore against deferred spectrum charges of Rs 774 crore. The Department of Telecom has already adjusted Rs 30.33 crore. Plaintiff seeking temporary injunction in specific performance suit has to show string prima facie case on undisputed facts. [Ambalal Sarabhai Enterprise Ltd. v. KS Infraspace LLP & Anr. & Haryana Containers Ltd. v. KS Infraspace LLP & Anr.] The Supreme Court has observed that strong prima facie case on undisputed facts is necessary for getting the relief of temporary injunction in a suit for specific performance of contract. This is because of the fact that specific performance by itself is a discretionary remedy, explained a bench comprising Justices Ashok Bhushan and Navin Sinha. The bench also said that the conduct of parties is also a relevant consideration for interim injunction, in addition to the factors of prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury. SC clarifies that Vijay Mallya cannot cite cases pending in India to stall insolvency proceedings abroad. Calling out the evasive tactics of fugitive liquor baron Vijay Mallya, the Supreme Court declared that the pendency of his plea before it shall not serve as a tool for halting proceedings in other jurisdictions. Solicitor General Tushar Mehta brought to the attention of the bench headed by Chief Justice S. A. Bobde that Mallya has been hanging the dream of a pay-back before the consortium of banks for years and not a rupee has been forthcoming, and that he is using the pendency of this proposal for settlement in the apex court to stall insolvency proceedings moved by the SBI in a UK court. SC urges Nusli Wadia & Ratan Tata to resolve differences. The Supreme Court adjourned the criminal defamation case filed by Nusli Wadia against Ratan Tata by urging both the billionaire businessmen to resolve their differences. The bench comprising CJI S A Bobde, Justices B R Gavai and Surya Kant was hearing a special leave petition filed by Wadia challenging the Bombay High Court's judgment which quashed the criminal defamation case filed by him against Ratan Tata and ten others. SC asks new Assam NRC coordinator to explain his 'communal' facebook post. The Supreme Court bench headed by Chief Justice S. A. Bobde required recently-appointed Assam NRC coordinator Hitesh Dev Sarma to explain the comments posted by him on his Facebook page prior to his appointment. Sarma's views regarding "East Pakistani Muslims" residing in the state have been widely criticised as being indicative of his approach towards the already-controversial NRC exercise. SC asks Govt. to look into the matter in a PIL alleging exchange of currency defaced by Kasmiri separatists. A PIL seeking CBI enquiry into the Jammu Regional Branch of the Reserve Bank of India's decision exchanging defaced Indian currencies worth 30 crore, done by alleged separatist group in 2013, came up for hearing before the apex court bench headed by Chief Justice SA Bobde. The plea says, the RBI's act accepting the imperfect bank notes is against its refund rules 2009. The bench, also comprising justices BR Gavai and Surya Kant, said " the issue is of national interest" and asked Solicitor General Tushar Mehta to seek instructions from the government and inform the court in two weeks. Gujarat public works contract disputes Arbitration Tribunal can pass interim orders u/s 17 Arbitration & Conciliation Act. [State of Gujarat v. Amber Builders] The bench comprising Justices Deepak Gupta and Aniruddha Bose has held that Gujarat Public Works Contract Disputes Arbitration Tribunal has jurisdiction to make interim orders in terms of Section 17 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. The Tribunal is constituted under Section 3 of the Gujarat Public Works Contracts Disputes Arbitration...

Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up

Arabhi Anandan

Tags