Supreme Court - The Legal Chamber

SC Rules on Church of South India Elections: Moderator’s Election Declared Invalid

4May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

SC Rules on Church of South India Elections: Moderator’s Election Declared Invalid

The Supreme Court ruled that the Special Synod Meeting of the Church of South India (CSI) on 07.03.2022 was validly convened, but amendments to the CSI Constitution increasing clergy retirement age were invalid due to insufficient ratification by diocesan councils. The Moderator’s election was declared invalid, while other office bearers' elections were upheld pending final suit disposal. Facts Of The Case: The dispute arose from the election of office bearers in the Church of South India (CSI), an unregistered religious body. The plaintiffs challenged amendments to the CSI Constitution, particularly the increase in retirement age for clergy from 67 to 70 years, alleging procedural irregularities. They also contested the election of the Moderator, citing criminal antecedents. Four civil ...

SC Quashes NCLAT Approval of JSW’s Bhushan Power Takeover Due to Legal Violations “Orders Liquidation”

2May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

SC Quashes NCLAT Approval of JSW’s Bhushan Power Takeover Due to Legal Violations “Orders Liquidation”

The Supreme Court adjudicated on the validity of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal’s approval of JSW’s resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. It addressed procedural compliance under Sections 29A, 30, and 61, overreach by NCLAT in modifying NCLT’s order, and jurisdictional limits concerning ED’s attachment powers under PMLA. Facts Of The Case: The insolvency resolution process for Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd. (BPSL) commenced on a petition filed by Punjab National Bank, admitted by NCLT on July 26, 2017. Interim Resolution Professionals invited claims, with financial creditors claiming over ₹47,000 crores and operational creditors over ₹600 crores. JSW Steel emerged as the successful resolution applicant after a multi-stage bid evaluation by the Committ...

Supreme Court Reduced 6-Month Sentence in Forgery Contempt Case: Landmark SC Judgment

2May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Reduced 6-Month Sentence in Forgery Contempt Case: Landmark SC Judgment

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the appellants under the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, for fabricating and submitting fake High Court orders to obstruct court proceedings. Rejecting the plea of limitation under Section 20, the Court ruled that contempt proceedings were validly initiated within one year. However, it reduced the sentence from six months to one month, emphasizing that forgery of judicial records undermines the administration of justice. The Court clarified that strict proof is required in contempt cases but found the charges proven beyond doubt. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a property dispute where the District Munsiff Court, Tiruchengode, passed a decree in 2004 in favor of J.K.K. Rangammal Charitable Trust, ordering the eviction of the contemno...

SC Upholds Right to Fair Consideration: Police Constable Denied Promotion Due to Expunged Punishment

2May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

SC Upholds Right to Fair Consideration: Police Constable Denied Promotion Due to Expunged Punishment

The Supreme Court held that the appellant, a Police Constable, was unjustly denied promotion consideration due to a previously set-aside punishment. The Court emphasized the right to be considered for promotion unless disqualified, ruling that the appellant must be evaluated for promotion from 2019 with consequential benefits, as the disqualification was based on an invalidated penalty. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, P. Sakthi, was a Police Constable in Tamil Nadu who joined service on 01.03.2002. In 2019, he became eligible for promotion to the post of Sub Inspector under the 20% departmental quota. However, his application was rejected by the Superintendent of Police on the grounds of a past disciplinary action—a punishment of postponement of increment for one year without cumulativ...

Supreme Court Rules Stamp Vendors as Public Servants Under Anti-Corruption Law : Landmark Judgement

2May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules Stamp Vendors as Public Servants Under Anti-Corruption Law : Landmark Judgement

The Supreme Court held that licensed stamp vendors qualify as "public servants" under Section 2(c)(i) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, as they perform a public duty and are remunerated by the government through discounts. However, the appellant’s conviction was overturned due to insufficient proof of demand and acceptance of illegal gratification. The Court emphasized a purposive interpretation of anti-corruption laws to curb corruption effectively. Facts Of The Case: The case arose from an incident on 9 December 2003, when a complainant visited the Sub-Registrar’s Office in Janakpuri, Delhi, to purchase a stamp paper worth ₹10. The appellant, a licensed stamp vendor, allegedly demanded ₹12 instead. The complainant filed a complaint with the Anti-Corruption Branch (ACB), leadin...

Supreme Court Upholds Forfeiture of Advance Money in Property Dispute : No Refund for Defaulting Buyer

2May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Forfeiture of Advance Money in Property Dispute : No Refund for Defaulting Buyer

The Supreme Court upheld the forfeiture of advance money in a specific performance suit, clarifying the legal distinction between "earnest money" and "advance money." It held that time was of the essence in the sale contract, and the purchaser’s default justified forfeiture. The Court further ruled that earnest money, if provided as security for performance and not merely part-payment, may be lawfully forfeited. Moreover, it held that an alternative relief for refund under Section 22 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963, must be specifically claimed; in its absence, such relief cannot be granted. Facts Of The Case: The case involves a dispute over the specific performance of an Agreement to Sell (ATS) dated 25.07.2007, executed between K.R. Suresh (plaintiff) and R. Poornima and her family m...

Supreme Court Clarifies Power of Arbitral Tribunals to Join Non-Signatories: Key Ruling on Arbitration and Corporate Group Doctrine

2May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Clarifies Power of Arbitral Tribunals to Join Non-Signatories: Key Ruling on Arbitration and Corporate Group Doctrine

The Supreme Court held that an arbitral tribunal has the authority to implead non-signatories to an arbitration agreement under the Group of Companies doctrine. It affirmed that such power is not confined to referral courts under Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, upholding the tribunal's jurisdiction. Facts Of The Case: The case arises from a dispute involving Shapoorji Pallonji and Company Private Limited (SPCPL), which entered into a Works Contract dated 21.11.2016 with ASF Insignia SEZ Pvt. Ltd. (AISPL), part of the ASF Group. The contract was later novated to Black Canyon SEZ Pvt. Ltd. (BCSPL), another ASF Group entity, through a Novation Agreement dated 17.04.2018. A Settlement Agreement was executed in 2020 due to performance issues. BCSPL initiated arbitrat...

SC Clarifies Gang Rape Laws: Acquits Accused Under SC/ST Act

1May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

SC Clarifies Gang Rape Laws: Acquits Accused Under SC/ST Act

The Supreme Court upheld the appellant’s conviction under Sections 366 (kidnapping), 342 (wrongful confinement), and 376(2)(g) IPC (gang rape), ruling that even if only one accused commits rape, all participants acting in common intention are equally liable. However, it acquitted the appellant under Section 3(2)(v) of the SC/ST Act, citing lack of evidence that the crime was committed on the ground of caste identity. The Court reiterated that corroboration is not mandatory if the victim’s testimony is credible and condemned the outdated "two-finger test" in sexual assault cases. The sentence under Section 376(2)(g) was reduced from life imprisonment to 10 years to align with the co-accused’s punishment. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from an incident on the night of 23-24 June 20...

Civil Dispute, Not Crime: SC Quashes FIR Against Businessman Calls It a Contract Issue

1May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Civil Dispute, Not Crime: SC Quashes FIR Against Businessman Calls It a Contract Issue

The Supreme Court quashed an FIR alleging cheating (Section 420 IPC) and criminal breach of trust (Section 406 IPC), holding that unpaid export transactions constituted a civil dispute, not a criminal offense. The Court emphasized that mere breach of contract, without dishonest intent at inception, cannot attract criminal liability. It ruled that the exporter (M/s. Oswal Overseas), not the accused, was the entrusted party, and the complainant failed to establish fraudulent inducement or entrustment under Sections 405/415 IPC. The judgment reaffirmed that criminal proceedings cannot remedy purely contractual disputes. Facts Of The Case: The case involved a business dispute between Ashok Kumar Jain (appellant), director of a Sri Lankan export-import firm, and a Gujarat-based textile trader...

Railway Guards’ Seniority Dispute: Supreme Court Upholds Seniority Rules for Surplus Railway Employees

1May

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Railway Guards’ Seniority Dispute: Supreme Court Upholds Seniority Rules for Surplus Railway Employees

The Supreme Court upheld the Railway Board's policy under Paragraph 313A of the Indian Railway Establishment Manual, 1989, ruling that surplus employees absorbed in a new division lose past service benefits for seniority and are treated as fresh entrants. Those who voluntarily opted for transfer were also placed at the bottom of the recruitment grade, affirming the Tribunal and High Court's decisions. The Court rejected arguments challenging the retrospective application of the circular, clarifying that redeployed staff cannot claim seniority based on prior service. Facts Of The Case: The case involved railway employees (guards and senior guards) from Bhavnagar Division of Western Railway who were affected by operational changes due to the conversion of meter gauge to broad g...