Tag: Civil Appeal

Supreme Court’s Mandate: New Public Notice for Nagaland Village Recognition
10Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court’s Mandate: New Public Notice for Nagaland Village Recognition

The Supreme Court, exercising judicial review over executive decisions, set aside the High Court's directive for village recognition in Nagaland. The Court emphasized adherence to customary laws and specific Office Memorandums requiring "No Objection Certificates" from ancestral villages. It remanded the matter for comprehensive consideration of objections, including those from the appellant, affirming that inter-district boundary disputes are irrelevant to village recognition. Facts Of The Case: This Supreme Court judgment stems from a dispute concerning the recognition of Kakiho Village in Nagaland. The core of the matter involved the application of existing government Office Memorandums (O.M.'s) dated March 22, 1996, and October 1, 2005, which outline criteria for village recognition...
Read More
Big Win for Disabled Workers: Supreme Court Strikes Down Discriminatory GO on Seniority and Promotion
10Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Big Win for Disabled Workers: Supreme Court Strikes Down Discriminatory GO on Seniority and Promotion

The Supreme Court overturned the Kerala High Court's judgments, restoring previous orders that granted benefits of seniority, probation, and promotion to appellants with benchmark disabilities. The Court found the State Government's subsequent order, which sought to deny these benefits to those regularly appointed on supernumerary posts, to be discriminatory and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The Court affirmed that once regular appointments were made, associated benefits could not be withdrawn. Facts Of The Case: The appellants are individuals with benchmark physical disabilities exceeding 40% who were temporarily engaged in various public institutions in Kerala under Rule 9(a)(i) of the Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1958, for periods not exceeding 179 days. ...
Read More
No Arrears for RBI Pension Opt-Ins: Supreme Court Reinforces Policy Decisions on Pension Benefits
10Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

No Arrears for RBI Pension Opt-Ins: Supreme Court Reinforces Policy Decisions on Pension Benefits

The Supreme Court of India upheld the Reserve Bank of India's (RBI) decision to fix a cut-off date (July 1, 2020) for pensionary benefits for employees switching from the Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) scheme, rejecting the claim for retrospective arrears from the date of retirement. The Court emphasized that financial implications and administrative exigencies are valid considerations for policy decisions and that employees cannot selectively accept beneficial terms while rejecting unfavorable ones. Facts Of The Case: M.T. Mani, Respondent No. 1, joined the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) in 1981 and was a member of the Contributory Provident Fund (CPF) Scheme. He retired as a Manager on November 30, 2014, having received four prior opportunities between 1990 and 2000 to switch to the Pe...
Read More
Section 26 NGT Act Strictly Applied: Supreme Court Clarifies Penal Liability in Environmental Violations
7Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Section 26 NGT Act Strictly Applied: Supreme Court Clarifies Penal Liability in Environmental Violations

The Supreme Court ruled that penalties under Section 26 of the NGT Act, 2010 cannot be imposed without proving willful disobedience by the accused. It held that the Mayor, not being a party to the original proceedings and lacking executive authority over waste management, could not be penalized for violations. However, the Municipal Corporation's fine for environmental damage was upheld. The Court emphasized that strict construction of penal provisions is necessary and accepted the Mayor's unconditional apology for remarks against the NGT, setting aside his punishment while clarifying the limits of liability under environmental laws Facts Of The Case: Rayons-Enlighting Humanity, Invertis University, and residents of Village Razau Paraspur, Bareilly, filed applications with the Na...
Read More
Legal Heir or Tenant? : Supreme Court Decides on Protracted Property Battle in Kerala
7Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Legal Heir or Tenant? : Supreme Court Decides on Protracted Property Battle in Kerala

The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal challenging the impleadment of a party in execution proceedings, holding that the application for deletion was barred by res judicata as objections were not raised earlier. It ruled that a decree for specific performance implicitly includes possession unless contested by a third party. The Court rejected claims of tenancy rights under the Kerala Rent Control Act due to lack of evidence and upheld the lower courts' findings, emphasizing that frivolous pleas cannot delay execution. Costs of ₹25,000 were imposed for protracting litigation. The Executing Court was directed to ensure possession is handed over within two months Facts Of The Case: The case originated from a 1996 agreement to sell between the original plaintiff (Prakasan) and defendant (Jame...
Read More
Justice Delayed, Not Denied: Supreme Court Orders Immediate Release of Compensation Certificates
6Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Justice Delayed, Not Denied: Supreme Court Orders Immediate Release of Compensation Certificates

The Supreme Court disposed of contempt petitions, affirming wilful disobedience of prior orders dated November 21, 2014, May 17, 2022, and December 10, 2024, regarding the issuance of DRCs/TDRs. The Court rejected attempts to re-examine previously decided issues or impose new conditions, emphasizing its limited contempt jurisdiction. DRCs/TDRs are to be released to complainants upon filing an undertaking, with the State retaining a first charge on any future compensation from civil appeals Facts Of The Case: This case involves contempt petitions filed due to alleged wilful disobedience of court orders dated November 21, 2014, May 17, 2022, and March 19, 2024. The Supreme Court, in a judgment dated December 10, 2024, found the contemnors guilty of wilful non-compliance despite purported c...
Read More
Supreme Court Split Verdict: When Can Schools Be Held Accountable Under Article 226?
6Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Split Verdict: When Can Schools Be Held Accountable Under Article 226?

The Supreme Court examined whether Air Force Schools qualify as a "State" under Article 12 or an "authority" amenable to writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution. The majority held that despite partial government control and funding, the schools lacked pervasive state dominance, relegating disputes to private contract law. However, the dissenting opinion emphasized their public function, deep administrative control by the Indian Air Force, and indirect public funding, making them subject to writ jurisdiction. The split verdict clarifies the distinction between regulatory control and pervasive state authority in educational institutions Facts Of The Case: The case involved two civil appeals before the Supreme Court concerning the Air Force School, Bamrauli, Allahabad. In Ci...
Read More
Supreme Court Orders Reconsideration of Retired Lt. Col’s Promotion Grading After 20-Year Battle
5Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Orders Reconsideration of Retired Lt. Col’s Promotion Grading After 20-Year Battle

The Supreme Court partially allowed the civil appeal, upholding the Armed Forces Tribunal's decision but directing reconsideration of the appellant's 'Z' grading in the 2001 promotion board. The Court affirmed the Chief of Army Staff's discretionary authority under Defence Services Regulations to modify Selection Board recommendations, while emphasizing fair reconsideration of the appellant's case within three months. The judgment clarified that promotions in the Territorial Army remain subject to the Army's hierarchical decision-making process, balancing institutional autonomy with individual rights to equitable evaluation. Facts Of The Case: The case involved Lt. Col. NK Ghai (Retd.), who challenged his non-promotion to Colonel rank despite 22 years of service in the Territorial Army. ...
Read More
Ex-MLA’s Plea Rejected: Supreme Court Rules Against Fraud Claims in Rs. 2426 Crore Irrigation Scheme
5Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Ex-MLA’s Plea Rejected: Supreme Court Rules Against Fraud Claims in Rs. 2426 Crore Irrigation Scheme

The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave Petition challenging the High Court's rejection of a PIL alleging fraudulent revision of costs in the Palamuru-Ranga Reddy Lift Irrigation Scheme. The Court held that factual adjudication cannot be pursued under Article 226 and upheld the High Court's discretion in refusing a CBI probe, citing prior findings by the Central Vigilance Commission and constructive res judicata. The ruling reaffirmed judicial restraint in interfering with discretionary orders absent jurisdictional errors. Facts Of The Case: The petitioner, Nagam Janardhan Reddy, a former MLA and Minister in Andhra Pradesh, filed a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) before the High Court of Telangana and Andhra Pradesh, alleging fraudulent revision of cost estimates for the Palamuru-...
Read More
Supreme Court: Joint Family Property Disputes Need Evidence, Not Quick Rejection
2Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court: Joint Family Property Disputes Need Evidence, Not Quick Rejection

The Supreme Court ruled that Order VII Rule 11 CPC cannot be invoked to reject a partition suit based on the Benami Act when plaint averments describe properties as joint family assets. Whether properties are benami or fall under exceptions (Section 2(9)(A)) requires evidence. Section 4’s bar applies only to proven benami transactions, not disputed claims requiring trial. Facts Of The Case: The dispute involved a family partition suit (Regular Suit No. 630A/2018) filed by Vidya Devi Gupta (mother) and Sudeep Gupta (younger son) against Sandeep Gupta (elder son), his wife Shaifali Gupta, and their children, along with subsequent property purchasers Deepak Lalchandani and Surya Prakash Mishra. The plaintiffs claimed that multiple properties acquired in individual family members’ names – in...
Read More