| 1 |
Does Acknowledgment Of Partial Debt Would Extend The Limitation Period For The Entire Debt? |
The Supreme Court Observed That The Acknowledgment Of Partial Debt Would Not Extend The Limitation Period For The Entire Debt Under Section 18 Of The Limitation Act, 1963. |
M/S. Airen And Associates Versus M/S. Sanmar Engineering Services Limited |
27 July |
2 Jb |
Download PDF link
|
| 2 |
Can An Amendment To A Complaint Can Be Made At The Post-Cognizance Stage? |
The Supreme Court Ruled That An Amendment To A Complaint Can Be Made At The Post-Cognizance Stage, Provided That No 'Prejudice' Is Caused To The Accused And The Complainant's Cross-Examination Is Awaited. |
Bansal Milk Chilling Centre Versus Rana Milk Food Private Ltd. & Anr. |
26 July |
2 Jb |
- |
| 3 |
Does A Registered 'Will' Carries A Presumption Of Due Execution And Genuineness? |
The Supreme Court On Monday (July 21) Reiterated That A Registered 'Will' Carries A Presumption Of Due Execution And Genuineness, And The Burden Of Proof Lies Heavily On The Party Challenging The Will. |
Metpalli Lasum Bai (Since Dead) And Others Versus Metapalli Muthaih(D) By Lrs. |
22 July |
2 Jb |
Download PDF link
|
| 4 |
Is There A N Administrative Requirement That Mandates Personal Appearance Of Litigants At The High Court For Issuance Of Photo Affidavits.? |
The Supreme Court Has Dismissed A Writ Petition Challenging The Administrative Requirement Of The Allahabad High Court That Mandates Personal Appearance Of Litigants At The High Court For Issuance Of Photo Affidavits. |
Biswajit Chowdhury V. Registrar General, Hon'ble High Court Of Allahabad & Anr. |
17 July |
2 Jb |
Download PDF link
|
| 5 |
Whether Pension Can Be Denied Without The Authority Of Law? |
The Court Reiterated That Pension Is An Employee's Right To Property, Which Is A Constitutional Right, That Cannot Be Denied Without The Authority Of Law, Even If An Employee Was Compulsorily Retired On Account Of Misconduct. |
Vijay Kumar Versus Central Bank Of India & Ors. |
17 July |
2 Jb |
Download PDF link
|
| 6 |
Whether Existence Of Civil Disputes Between Parties Warrant The Quashing Of Criminal Proceedings? |
The Supreme Court Reiterated That The Existence Of Civil Disputes Between Parties Does Not Warrant The Quashing Of Criminal Proceedings Where A Prima Facie Case Is Made Out. |
Kathyayini Versus Sidharth P.S. Reddy & Ors. |
16 July |
2 Jb |
Download PDF link
|
| 7 |
Whether A Partnership Firm With More Than Two Partners Dissolve Upon The Death Of One Partner? |
The Supreme Court Observed That A Partnership Firm With More Than Two Partners Does Not Dissolve Upon The Death Of One Partner, Provided The Partnership Deed Contains A Clause Allowing The Firm's Continuity. |
Indian Oil Corporation Limited & Ors. Versus M/S Shree Niwas Ramgopal & Ors. |
16 May |
2 Jb |
Download PDF link
|
| 8 |
Whether Stem Cell Banking Services, Including Enrolment, Collection, Processing, And Storage Of Umbilical Cord Blood Stem Cells, Constitute “Healthcare Services”? |
The Supreme Court Held That Stem Cell Banking Services, Including Enrolment, Collection, Processing, And Storage Of Umbilical Cord Blood Stem Cells, Constitute “Healthcare Services” Which Were Exempted From Service Tax As Per The Notifications Issued By The Ministry Of Finance In 2012 And 2014 Under The Finance Act, 1994. |
M/S. Stemcyte India Therapeutics Pvt. Ltd Vs Commissioner Of Central Excise And Service Tax, Ahmedabad – Iii |
16 July |
2 Jb |
- |
| 9 |
Does Grant Of Mandatory Injunction Under Section 39 Of The Specific Relief Act, 1963 (“Sra”) Discretionary? |
The Supreme Court Observed That A Grant Of Mandatory Injunction Under Section 39 Of The Specific Relief Act, 1963 (“Sra”) Is Discretionary, And Can Be Granted Only Upon The Breach Of An Enforceable Legal Obligation. The Court Said That A Mandatory Injunction Cannot Be Granted Unless There Exists A Legal Right And There's A Breach Of That Legal Right. |
Estate Officer, Haryana Urban Development Authority And Ors. Versus Nirmala Devi |
15 July |
2 Jb |
- |
| 10 |
Does Plea Of 'Res Judicata' Be Decided In An Application Filed Under Order Vii Rule 11 Of The Code Of Civil Procedure For Rejection Of A Plaint.? |
The Supreme Court Held That A Plea Of 'Res Judicata' Cannot Be Decided In An Application Filed Under Order Vii Rule 11 Of The Code Of Civil Procedure For Rejection Of A Plaint. The Court Held That Res Judicata Is An Issue To Be Decided In Trial And Cannot Be Summarily Decided In An Application To Reject The Plaint. |
Pandurangan V. T. Jayarama Chettiar And Another |
15 July |
2 Jb |
Download PDF link
|
| 11 |
Does Victim Need Necessarily Be A Complainant/Informant For Filing An Appeal Under Proviso To Section 372 Crpc? |
Reiterating That The Victim Need Not Necessarily Be A Complainant/Informant For Filing An Appeal Under Proviso To Section 372 Crpc, The Supreme Court Ruled That A Company That Suffers Loss/Damages Due To Acts Of The Accused Can Filed Appeal Against Acquittal As A 'Victim' Under Proviso To Section 372 Crpc. |
Asian Paints Limited Versus Ram Babu & Another |
14 July |
2 Jb |
Download PDF link
|
| 12 |
Is Secretly Recorded Telephonic Conversation Of The Spouse Is Admissible As Evidence ? |
Sc Held That A Secretly Recorded Telephonic Conversation Of The Spouse Is Admissible As Evidence In Matrimonial Proceedings |
Vibhor Garg V. Neha |
14 July |
2 Jb |
Download PDF link
|
| 13 |
Is There Any Illegality In Awarding Interest On Future Prospects In Motor Accident Compensation Claim Cases.? |
The Supreme Court Observed That There's No Illegality In Awarding Interest On Future Prospects In Motor Accident Compensation Claim Cases. The Court Advised The Insurance Companies To Settle The Claim On A Computation Proactively, On Receipt Of Intimation Of The Accident, At Least Provisionally, To Avoid Interest On Future Prospects And Driving Into Protracted Litigation. |
The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. Versus Niru @ Niharika & Ors. |
14 July |
2 jb |
Download PDF link
|
| 14 |
Whether tere sould be a subsisting plaint to seek an injunction order |
The Supreme Court observed that there ought to be a subsisting plaint to seek an injunction order. The Court added that an injunction order loses its validity upon rejection of the plaint and would be back in operation only when the plaint is restored/revived. |
Ieee Mumbai Section Welfare Association Versus Global Ieee Institute For Engineers |
31 May |
2 JB |
Download PDF link
|
| 15 |
Concept of motive |
The Court explained that proving one's motive is a difficult task, “as it remains hidden in the deep recess of the mind of the person concerned and in the absence of any open declaration by the person concerned himself, the motive has to be inferred from the activities and conduct of the person.” “The law is now well-settled that while proof of motive certainly strengthens the prosecution case based on circumstantial evidence, failure to prove the same cannot be fatal.” |
Chetan Versus The State Of Karnataka |
31 May |
2 JB |
Download PDF link
|
| 16 |
Based on communication of rounds of arrest U/A 22 (1) of COI |
The Supreme Court held that when a person is arrested pursuant to a warrant, the obligation to separately communicate the grounds of arrest under Article 22(1) of the Constitution does not arise, as the warrant itself constitutes the grounds for the arrest to be supplied to the arrestee under Article 22(1). |
Kasireddy Upender Reddy Versus State Of Andhra Pradesh And Ors. |
26 May |
2 JB |
Download PDF link
|
| 17 |
Whether "last seen together" theory alone is enough to sustain a conviction ? |
Observing that the "last seen together" theory alone is not enough to sustain a conviction unless supported by other compelling evidence, the Supreme Court acquitted a man who was convicted just because the deceased was last seen with the accused, and the time gap between the last sighting and the death was unclear. |
Padman Bibhar Versus State Of Odisha |
23 May |
2 JB |
Download PDF link
|
| 18 |
Whether minimum practice of three years as an advocate is necessary for a candidate to apply for entry-level posts in judicial service.? |
In an important judgment relevant to several judiciary aspirants, the Supreme Court the condition that a minimum practice of three years as an advocate is necessary for a candidate to apply for entry-level posts in judicial service. |
All India Judges Association Vs Union Of India (Minimum Practice & LDCE Issue) |
20 May |
3 Jb |
Download PDF link
|
| 19 |
2 JB Can the statements of accused recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. be used against co-accused at the stage of anticipatory or regular bail.? |
The Supreme Court observed that the statements of accused recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. (police interrogation) cannot be used against co-accused at the stage of anticipatory or regular bail. |
P Krishna Mohan Reddy Versus The State Of Andhra Pradesh |
19 May |
2 JB |
Download PDF link
|
| 20 |
2 JB Can Appellate Court invoke its powers to enhance the sentence when neither the state, the victim, nor the complainant has filed an appeal or revision seeking such enhancement.? |
The Supreme Court held that, in an appeal against conviction, an Appellate Court cannot invoke its powers to enhance the sentence when neither the state, the victim, nor the complainant has filed an appeal or revision seeking such enhancement. |
Sachin Versus State Of Maharashtra |
17 May |
2 JB |
Download PDF link
|
| 21 |
Specifications about the caste certificate under the recruitment advertisement |
The Supreme Court observed that to apply under the recruitment advertisement, the caste certificate must be submitted in the specific format prescribed therein, and a candidate cannot claim exemption from this requirement merely on the basis of belonging to that category. |
Mohit Kumar Versus State Of Uttar Pradesh And Ors |
17 May |
2 JB |
Download PDF link
|
| 22 |
Does Arbitral Tribunal has the power to award different rates of interest for different phases.? |
The Supreme Court held that under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, an Arbitral Tribunal has the power to award different rates of interest for different phases. |
M/S. Interstate Construction Versus National Projects Construction Corporation Ltd. |
16 may |
2 JB |
Download PDF link
|
| 23 |
Whether Section 10 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (“TPA”), apply to government allotments, as such transactions are neither inter vivos nor commercial in nature but are in the public interest.? |
The Supreme Court clarified that Section 10 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 (“TPA”), which invalidates absolute restraints on alienation, does not apply to government allotments, as such transactions are neither inter vivos nor commercial in nature but are in the public interest. |
The State Of Telangana & Ors. Versus Dr. Pasupuleti Nirmala Hanumantha Rao Charitable Trust |
14 May |
2 Jb |
- |
| 24 |
whether police officers may be considered reliability as witnesses extend to their testimony regarding witness statements recorded under Section 161 Cr. P.C.? |
The Supreme Court clarified that while police officers may be considered reliable witnesses for recoveries of physical evidence, such as weapons or narcotics, based on voluntary disclosures by an accused, this reliability does not extend to their testimony regarding witness statements recorded under Section 161 Cr. P.C. |
Renuka Prasad Versus The State |
14 May |
2 Jb |
Download PDF link
|
| 25 |
Whether an unregistered agreement to sell can be admitted as evidence to establish the existence of a contract in a suit seeking specific performance.? |
The Supreme Court held that an unregistered agreement to sell may be admitted as evidence to establish the existence of a contract in a suit seeking specific performance. The Court said that this arrangement is made possible under the proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908, which allows an unregistered document to be received as evidence of a contract in a suit for specific performance or of a collateral transaction. |
Muruganandam Versus Muniyandi (Died) Through Lrs. |
9 may |
2 JB |
Download PDF link
|
| 26 |
Under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., is it necessary to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt? |
The Supreme Court held that to summon an additional accused under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., it is not necessary to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; a person may be summoned if there is prima facie evidence indicating their involvement in the offence. |
Harjinder Singh Versus The State Of Punjab & Anr |
7 may |
2 Jb |
Download PDF link
|
| 27 |
Powers of courts under order 18 rule 17 CPC |
The Supreme Court ruled that under Order XII Rule 6 of the CPC, a court may not only pass a decree in the plaintiff's favour based on the defendant's admissions but may also dismiss a suit where the plaintiff's admissions undermine the claim. |
Saroj Salkan Versus Huma Singh & Ors. |
6 May |
2 JB |
Download PDF link
|
| 28 |
Powers of courts under order 18 rule 17 CPC |
The Supreme Court held that Order XVIII Rule 17 of the CPC empowers the court to recall a witness at any stage solely for the purpose of seeking clarification, but it does not grant any right to the parties to recall witnesses for further examination or cross-examination |
Shubhkaran Singh Versus Abhayraj Singh & Ors. |
6 May |
2 JB |
Download PDF link
|
| 29 |
Whether 3 years practice to appear in judicial exams mandatory? |
In Direct Recruitment Through Exam, Seniority Must Be Based On Marks & Not Past Service |
R. Ranjith Singh & Ors. Versus The State Of Tamil Nadu & Ors. |
4 May |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 30 |
Based on proper and nessary parties in a civil suit |
The Supreme Court r ruled that in a suit for specific performance of an agreement to sell, a subsequent purchaser may not be a 'necessary party' but can be a 'proper party' if their rights are affected by the adjudication of the dispute. |
M/S J N Real Estate Versus Shailendra Pradhan & Ors. |
2 May |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 31 |
Whether if a penetrative act is carried out by even one person, all others sharing a common intention can also be held liable for gang rape? |
The Supreme Court upheld the convictions of the accused individuals found guilty of gang rape, rejecting their argument that they had not personally committed any act of penetration. The Court clarified that under Explanation 1 to Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code, if a penetrative act is carried out by even one person, all others sharing a common intention can also be held liable for gang rape |
Raju @ Umakant Versus The State Of Madhya Pradesh |
2 May |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 32 |
Whether High Court cant reject a plaint in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution? |
The Supreme Court held that a High Court cannot reject a plaint in exercise of its supervisory jurisdiction under Article 227 of the Constitution. Essence of the power under Article 227 being supervisory, it cannot be invoked to usurp the original jurisdiction of the court which it seeks to supervise. Nor can it be invoked to supplant a statutory legal remedy under the Civil Procedure Code, 1908." |
K. Valarmathi Vs Kumaresan |
1 May |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 33 |
Whether calling "impotent" in offensive language Constitutes round for abetment of suicide? |
The Supreme Court quashed an abetment to suicide case under Section 306 of the IPC against the husband's in-laws, ruling that merely calling him "impotent" in offensive language while taking their daughter (the deceased's wife) to her parental home after a marital dispute did not amount to abetment. |
Shenbagavalli And Ors. Versus The Inspector Of Police, Kancheepuram District And Anr. |
1 May |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 34 |
? |
The Supreme Court held that the dismissal of a suit or application for default under Rules 2 or 3 of Order IX of the CPC does not prevent the filing of a fresh suit, as such dismissal does not constitute a judgment or decree, and therefore, the principle of res judicata does not apply. |
Amruddin ansari (dead)through lrs & ors. Versus afajal ali & ors. |
26 April |
2 |
- |
| 35 |
? |
The Supreme Court reiterated that a Magistrate's order taking cognizance of a police report cannot be faulted only because it was not a reasoned order. If the cognizance is taken after recording a finding regarding the existence of a prima facie case based on a reading of the case records, explicit reasons are not required. |
Pramila Devi & Ors. V. Stte of Jharkhand & Anr. |
24 April |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 36 |
? |
The Supreme Court held that once a defendant is set ex parte, they are not entitled to present evidence in their defence; their only available recourse is to cross-examine the plaintiff's witness in an attempt to disprove the plaintiff's case. |
Kanchhu vs. Prakash chand & ors. |
23 April |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 37 |
? |
The Supreme Court recently held that an Appellate Court's failure to frame points of determination under Order 41 Rule 31 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (“CPC”) does not invalidate its judgment, provided there is substantial compliance with the rule and the appellant has not raised any specific issues from the trial court's judgment that require reconsideration. |
Nafees Ahmad & Anr. V. Soinuddin & Ors. |
23 April |
02 |
- |
| 38 |
? |
The Supreme Court observed that the absence of motive will not be fatal to the prosecution's case if there exists strong circumstantial evidence proving the guilt of the accused beyond a cavil of doubt. The Court said that “when the circumstances are very convincing and provide an unbroken chain leading only to the conclusion of guilt of the accused and not to any other hypothesis; the total absence of a motive will be of no consequence.” |
Subhash aggarwal versus the state of nct of delhi |
21 April |
2 |
- |
| 39 |
? |
Satish chander sharma & ors. Versus state of himachal pradesh & ors. The Supreme Court recently observed that the flaws in the investigation would not automatically be fatal to the prosecution's case when other credible evidence exists. The Court further observed that mere defects or irregularities in the investigation do not automatically vitiate the prosecution's case; rather, if sufficient crucial material is found upon careful examination, a conviction may still be sustained. |
R. Baiju versus the state of kerala |
21 April |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 40 |
Article 32 COI |
The Supreme Court ruled that Article 32 of the Constitution, being a remedial provision for the enforcement of fundamental rights, cannot be invoked as a means to challenge the Court's own judgment. The Court noted that allowing writ petitions under Article 32 to challenge final judgments would undermine judicial hierarchy and lead to endless litigation, undermining the principle of res judicata. |
Satish chander sharma & ors. Versus state of himachal pradesh & ors. |
16 April |
3 |
- |
| 41 |
Article 58 of limitation act |
The Supreme Court observed that the limitation period starts from the date when the cause of action first accrued to the plaintiff, and not when he acquired 'full knowledge' about the same. "In dealing with the submission, the appellate Court distinguished between “having knowledge” and “full knowledge” to hold that the suit is not barred by limitation as the limitation would reckon from the date of full knowledge. It is a complete fallacy to make any distinction between “knowledge” and “full knowledge |
Nikhila divyang mehta & anr. Versus hitesh p. Sanghvi & ors. |
16 April |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 42 |
? |
The Supreme Court held that the action of the Tamil Nadu Governor Dr RN Ravi withholding assent for 10 bills, the oldest of them pending since January 2020, and reserving them to the President after they were re-enacted by the State Legislature is "illegal and erroneous" in law and liable to be set aside. |
The State Of Tamil Nadu vs The Governor Of Tamilnadu And Anr |
08 April |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 43 |
? |
Confirming the order of eviction passed under the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 against a son and daughter-in-law, the Supreme Court held in favour of a 75-yr old man whose self-acquired property was encroached upon by the couple. |
Rajeswar Prasad Roy vs The State Of Bihar & Ors |
11 April |
2 |
- |
| 44 |
? |
The Supreme Court held that an accused person, who is creating hindrances in the execution of warrants or is absconding from trial proceedings, is not entitled to the privilege of anticipatory bail. |
Serious Fraud Investigation Office vs Aditya Sarda |
09 April |
2 |
- |
| 45 |
Section 28 ICA |
The Supreme Court held that exclusive jurisdiction clauses in employment contracts, which confers exclusive jurisdiction on the courts of a particular location to decides disputes relating to the contract, are not barred by Section 28 of the Contract Act. Section 28 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, declares void any agreement that restricts a party from enforcing their rights under a contract through legal proceedings, or limits the time within which they can do so, except in cases of arbitration agreements. |
Rakesh Kumar Verma vs HDFC Bank Ltd, HDFC Bank vs Deepti Bhatia |
08 April |
2 |
- |
| 46 |
? |
K. Gopi v. The sub-registrar & ors. Supreme Court Flags Misuse Of Rape Laws After Break-Ups, Quashes Case Against Ex-Judge Over Alleged Marriage Promise |
Biswajyoti chatterjee versus state of west bengal & anr. |
08 April |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 47 |
? |
The Supreme Court observed that the Registration Act, 1908 does not authorize the Registering Authority to deny registration of a transfer document on the ground that the vendor's title documents are not produced or that their title is unproven. Therefore, the Court struck down as unconstitutional Rule 55A(i) of the Tamil Nadu Registration Rules as inconsistent with the provisions of the Registration Act, 1908. |
K. Gopi v. The sub-registrar & ors. |
07 April |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 48 |
The issue before the Supreme Court was with respect to trial court's direction under Order XX Rule 12(1)(c) of the CPC to an inquiry into mesne profits from the date of suit till delivery of vacant peaceful possession of the suit property by the tenant to the landlord. |
The suit is under Rent Act; the termination of tenancy takes place on the date on which decree of is passed. And therefore, mesne profit has to be calculated from the date of the decree |
Amritpal Jagmohan Sethi v. Haribhau Pundlik Ingole |
07 April |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 49 |
Section 197 CrPC |
Prior Sanction Mandatory To Prosecute Police Officers For Acts In Excess Of Duty If Reasonably Connected To Official Functions |
G.C. Manjunath & Ors. V. Seetaram |
10 April |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 50 |
Section 34(3) Arbitration act |
Application Filed On Next Working Day After 90 Day Period Is Within Limitation |
M/s r. K. Transport company versus m/s bharat aluminum company ltd. (balco) |
04 April |
2 |
- |
| 51 |
Disclose their criminal antecedents. |
The Supreme Court has directed that the petitioners seeking regular bail or anticipatory bail must mandatorily disclose their criminal antecedents. The synopsis of the petitions must specify if the petitioners have clean antecedents. Their involvement in any criminal case must be disclosed, with specific details about the stage of the proceedings. If false disclosures are made, then the petition will be dismissed, the Court warned. |
Munnesh v State of UP |
04 April |
2 |
- |
| 52 |
Limitation period |
The limitation period begins from the date of registration of the sale deed, which constitutes constructive notice, the Supreme Court overturned the High Court's decision upholding a decree in a partition suit filed 45 years after the sale deed was registered. |
Smt. Uma Devi and Ors. V. Sri. Anand Kumar and Ors. |
03 April |
2 |
- |
| 53 |
IS Quasi-Judicial Bodies Bound By Principles Of Res Judicata |
SC stated that it has been settled that the principle of res judicata applies to and binds quasi-judicial authorities. This Court in Ujjam Bai vs. State of U.P. has taken the view that principles of res judicata equally apply to quasi-judicial bodies |
M/s faime makers pvt. Ltd. Versus district deputy registrar, co-operative societies (3), mumbai & ors. |
02 April |
2 |
- |
| 54 |
Section 319 CRpc |
Additional Accused Can Be Summoned Based On Witness's Statement Without Cross-Examination |
Satbir singh versus rajesh kumar and others |
01 April |
2 |
- |
| 55 |
Can Assistant Professors In Engineering Colleges Be Re-designated As Associate Professors Without PhD? |
The Supreme Court held that Assistant Professors in Engineering institutes(appointed after March 15, 2000), who did not have Ph.D. qualification at the time of appointment or failed to acquire Ph.D. within seven years of their appointment, cannot claim re-designation as Associate Professors in terms of the 2010 notification issued by the All-India Council for Technical Education (AICTE). |
The secretary all india shri shivaji memorial society (aissms) and ors. V. The state of maharashtra and ors|slp |
01 April |
2 |
- |
| 56 |
Whether the High Court of Bombay was correct in concluding that the Maharashtra Local Authorities (Official Languages) Act, 2022 does not prohibit the use of Urdu as an additional language on the signboard of a Municipal Council building in Maharashtra. |
The Division Bench (two judges) of the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the High Court holding that there was no prohibition on the use of Urdu under the 2022 Act. The judgment of the Court was authored by Justice Dhulia. |
VARSHATAI vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA |
15 April |
2 |
- |
| 57 |
(i) Whether the Indian Courts are jurisdictionally empowered to modify an arbitral award. (ii) Whether the power to set aside an award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act 1996 being a larger power, will include the power to modify an arbitral award and if so, to what extent. |
The Supreme Court, by a 4:1 majority, held that courts possess a limited power under Section 34 and 37 of the 1996 Act to modify an arbitral award. The majority also affirmed the courts' power to modify post-award interest where justified. Chief Justice Khanna authored the majority judgment, while Justice Viswanathan wrote a dissenting opinion, holding that courts cannot modify an arbitral award. |
GAYATRI BALASAMY vs M/S ISG NOVASOFT TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED |
30 April |
5 |
- |
| 58 |
When can a second FIR be registered? |
While a second FIR for the same offence is impermissible, a second FIR for a different offence is permissible. The Court narrated the following circumstances when the registration of a second FIR is permissible: "1. When the second FIR is counter-complaint or presents a rival version of a set of facts, in reference to which an earlier FIR already stands registered. 2. When the ambit of the two FIRs is different even though they may arise from the same set of circumstances. 3. When investigation and/or other avenues reveal the earlier FIR or set of facts to be part of a larger conspiracy. 4. When investigation and/or persons related to the incident bring to the light hitherto unknown facts or circumstances. 5. Where the incident is separate; offences are similar or different." |
STATE OF RAJASTHAN VERSUS SURENDRA SINGH RATHORE |
February 19, 2025 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 59 |
Legal mortgage would defeat equitable mortgage |
A mortgage created by the deposit of an unregistered agreement to sell will be subservient to a mortgage which was created by the deposit of title deeds. This is because an agreement of sale does not by itself create any interest in or charge on any property as per Section 54 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. |
The Cosmos Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. Central Bank of India & Ors. |
February 04, 2025 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 60 |
Whether permanent alimony or maintenance can be awarded to a spouse even after a marriage has been declared void under Section 11 of HMA. |
Permanent alimony and interim maintenance under the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 can be granted even when the marriage has been declared void. "A spouse whose marriage has been declared void under Section 11 of the 1955 Act is entitled to seek permanent alimony or maintenance from the other spouse by invoking Section 25 of the 1955 Act. Whether such a relief of permanent alimony can be granted or not always depends on the facts of each case and the conduct of the parties. The grant of relief under Section 25 is always discretionary |
SUKHDEV SINGH v SUKHBIR KAUR |
February 12, 2025 |
3 |
Download PDF link
|
| 61 |
Whether a woman is entitled to claim maintenance u/s. 125 CrPC from her second husband while her first marriage is allegedly legally subsisting. |
A woman is entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. from her second husband, even if her first marriage was not legally dissolved. The Court clarified that a formal decree of dissolution is not mandatory. If the woman and her first husband mutually agreed to separate, the absence of a legal divorce does not prevent her from seeking maintenance from her second husband. |
SMT. N. USHA RANI AND ANR. VERSUS MOODUDULA SRINIVAS |
January 30, 2025 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 62 |
Allowing Scribe in exams |
The Court has held that the facility of scribe and other necessary facilities should be extended to all disabilities, even those which are not benchmark disabilities, thereby upholding the right of inclusive education of persons with disability to participate in examinations with necessary accommodations. |
GULSHAN KUMAR Vs INSTITUTE OF BANKING PERSONNEL SELECTION |
February 03, 2025 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 63 |
Can appeal be dismissed solely due to delay? |
The right to appeal against a conviction is a statutory right granted to the accused under Section 374 of the Cr.P.C., and a properly explained delay in filing the appeal cannot be a valid ground for its dismissal. |
MAHESH SINGH BANZARA VERSUS STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH |
January 02, 2025 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 64 |
Will a husband, who secures a decree for restitution of conjugal rights, stand absolved of paying maintenance to his wife by virtue of Section 125(4) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, if his wife refuses to abide by the said decree and return to the matrimonial home? |
A wife, even if she refuses to live with her husband despite a decree of restitution of conjugal rights against her, is entitled to claim maintenance under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. A wife's refusal to comply with the decree of conjugal rights passed under Section 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, on just cause would not disentitle her to claim maintenance from her husband under Section 125 of the Cr.P.C. |
Rina Kumari @ Rina Devi @ Reena Versus Dinesh Kumar Mahto @ Dinesh Kumar Mahato |
January 10, 2025 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 65 |
Principles To Evaluate Circumstantial Evidence In Criminal Cases |
The Supreme Court enunciated the principles that courts must adhere to while appreciating and evaluating evidence in cases based on circumstantial evidence: (i)The testimony of each prosecution and defence witness must be meticulously discussed and analysed. Each witness's evidence should be assessed in its entirety to ensure no material aspect is overlooked. (ii)Circumstantial evidence is evidence that relies on an inference to connect it to a conclusion of fact. Thus, the reasonable inferences that can be drawn from the testimony of each witness must be explicitly delineated. (iii). Each of the links of incriminating circumstantial evidence should be meticulously examined so as to find out if each one of the circumstances is proved individually and whether collectively taken, they forge an unbroken chain consistent only with the hypothesis of the guilt of the accused and totally inconsistent with his innocence. (iv). The judgment must comprehensively elucidate the rationale for accepting or rejecting specific pieces of evidence, demonstrating how the conclusion was logically derived from the evidence. It should explicitly articulate how each piece of evidence contributes to the overall narrative of guilt. (v)The judgment must reflect that the finding of guilt, if any, has been reached after a proper and careful evaluation of circumstances in order to determine whether they are compatible with any other reasonable hypothesis. |
Abdul Nassar v. State of Kerala |
January 07, 2025 |
3 |
Download PDF link
|
| 66 |
Doctrine of merger |
The doctrine speaks that once the superior court disposes of a case, whether by setting aside, modifying, or confirming the lower court's decree, the superior court's order becomes the final, binding, and operative decree, merging the lower court's decision into it. There cannot be more than one decree or operative order governing the same subject matter at a given point in time. |
BALBIR SINGH & ANR ETC VERSUS BALDEV SINGH (D) THROUGH HIS LRS & ORS. ETC |
January 17, 2025 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 67 |
Facet Article 14 of the Indian Constitution |
Irregular promotions granted in the past cannot serve as a basis for continuing illegality. Article 14 of the Constitution prohibits negative discrimination. |
JYOSTNAMAYEE MISHRA VERSUS THE STATE OF ODISHA |
January 20, 2025 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 68 |
Directions regarding issuance of e-notice under CrPC/ BNSS |
Police should not serve notice for appearance to the accused/suspect as per Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Section 35 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita) through WhatsApp or other electronic modes. The Court made it amply clear that the service of notice through WhatsApp or other electronic modes cannot be considered or recognised as an alternative or substitute to the mode of service recognised and prescribed under the CrPC, 1973/BNSS, 2023. |
Satender Kumar Antil v CBI |
January 21, 2025 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 69 |
Whether providing for domicile/residence-based reservation in admission to 'PG Medical Courses' within the State Quota is constitutionally invalid and is impermissible? |
Domicile-based reservations in PG Medical seats is impermissible as it is unconstitutional for being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. State quota seats are to be filled up on the basis of merit in the NEET exam. |
Tanvi Behl v. Shrey Goel |
January 29, 2025 |
3 |
Download PDF link
|
| 70 |
Is a transferee Pendente Lite Entitled To Get Impleaded In Suit ? |
A pendente lite transferee has no automatic right to be impleaded in a suit. Only in exceptional cases, where the transferee's rights are adversely affected or jeopardized, a leave would be granted to the pendente lite transferee to appeal against the decree. Several other principles have been laid down. |
H. ANJANAPPA & ORS. VERSUS A. PRABHAKAR |
January 29, 2025 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 71 |
How is BNSS different in terms of ordering investigation under S. 156 CrPC? |
Three new safeguards in BNSS Section 175(3) (absent in Cr.P.C. 156(3)): 1) mandatory application to the Superintendent of Police (with copy and affidavit); 2) Magistrate's power of inquiry; and 3) consideration of the police's refusal to register the FIR. These codify existing safeguards against misuse of magisterial powers. |
OM PRAKASH AMBADKAR VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA |
January 16, 2025 |
2 |
Download PDF link
|
| 72 |
Can a writ petition be filed to render a HC judgment illegal? |
The Supreme Court held that a High Court judgment cannot be declared illegal under Article 32 of the Constitution. The Court added that if petitioners are aggrieved by the impugned judgment for not being heard, they can either pray for its recall or challenge the same through a special leave petition. |
VIMAL BABU DHUMADIYA vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA |
January 17, 2025 |
3 |
Download PDF link
|
