Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up [September 24 to October 1]

JUDGMENTS THIS WEEK Goan Personal Law - Portugese Civil Code| Right To Property Of Highest Bidder Is Heritable And Not A Personal Right - Supreme Court A Division Bench of the Supreme Court of India observed that an heir's right to participate in licitation and claim a specific item of property, "at the appropriate stage – when owelty was to be demanded", was not merely a personal right which would extinguish upon the heir's death under the Portuguese Civil Procedure Code. Since a bid is offered by the heir in their capacity as a member of the family, an item of property for which they had bid successfully, but for which no owelty was demanded by the other heirs, would be heritable, the apex court clarified. There Can't Be Two Investigating Agencies With Respect To Different Co-Accused In Same Crime' : Supreme Court Transfers FIRs Against Navika Kumar To Delhi The Supreme Court, on Friday, directed that the FIRs registered Times Now anchor, Navika Kumar, over the remarks made by Nupur Sharma about Prophet Muhammed on a channel debate, be transferred to the IFSO unit of the Delhi Police. The FIR registered by the Delhi Police IFSO Unit shall be taken as the lead case. The direction will be applicable to future FIRs which may be registered with respect to the same telecast. Investigation of any subsequent complaint on the same News hour debate shall be transferred to IFSO Unit. Supreme Court Orders Reinstatement Of Watchman Who Was Illegally Dismissed 20 Years Ago The Supreme Court recently granted relief to a watchman who was wrongfully terminated from service in 2002, by ordering his reinstatement within 6 weeks. The Court further directed that the man should be paid backwages for the period from January 1, 2020 to January 1, 2022 . A bench comprising Chief Justice of India UU Lalit and Justice S Ravindra Bhat passed the judgment in a petition filed by one Jeetubha Khansangji Jadeja, who was appointed in 1992 as a watchman by the Kutch district panchayat. He was terminated from the services on 30.12.2002 for no cause, without notice and without following the procedure prescribed by the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. Employee Can Be Terminated For Suppression Or False Information Regarding Suitability: Supreme Court The Supreme Court observed that an employee can be terminated from service if it is found that he had suppressed or given false information in regard to the matters having a bearing on his fitness or suitability to the post. The suppression of material information and making a false statement in the verification Form relating to arrest, prosecution, conviction etc., has a clear bearing on the character, conduct and antecedents of the employee, the bench of Justices Surya Kant and JB Pardiwala observed. Section 14 SARFAESI Act - CMM/DM Not Required To Adjudicate Disputes Between Borrower/ Third Party And Secured Creditor: Supreme Court The Supreme Court observed that, while considering an application under Section 14 SARFAESI Act, the CMM/DM is not required to adjudicate the dispute between the borrower and the secured creditor and/or between any other third party and the secured creditor with respect to the secured assets. Once all the requirements under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act are complied with/satisfied by the secured creditor, it is the duty cast upon the CMM/DM to assist the secured creditor in obtaining the possession as well as the documents related to the secured assets, the bench of Justices MR Shah and observed. Permanent Injunction Cannot Be Sought On The Basis Of An Unregistered Agreement To Sell : Supreme Court The Supreme Court observed that a relief of permanent injunction cannot be sought on the basis of such an unregistered document/agreement to sell. A plaintiff cannot get the relief indirectly which otherwise he/she cannot get in a suit for for specific performance, the bench of Justices MR Shah and Krishna Murari observed. Leave Encashment Benefit Is Part Of Salary : Supreme Court The Supreme Court has held that leave encashment is part of salary. The Court held that the condition in Rajasthan Voluntary Rural Education Service Rules, 2010 that barred carry forward of balance privilege leave is an arbitrary and unconscionable condition, which cannot be enforced. Suit Is Liable To Be Dismissed If A "Necessary Party" Is Not Impleaded : Supreme Court The Supreme Court observed that a suit is liable to be dismissed if a "necessary party" is not impleaded. For being a necessary party, according to the court, the twin test has to be satisfied (1) there must be a right to some relief against such party in respect of the controversies involved in the proceedings (2) that no effective decree can be passed in the absence of such a party. Litigant Can't Be Expected To Wait Indefinitely For Reasons': Supreme Court Once Again Stresses On Need To...

Supreme Court Weekly Round-Up [September 24 to October 1]

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags