Tag: Legal Fiction

Supreme Court: FR 56(a) Means You’re in Service Till Month-End, Entitled to All Benefits
2Mar By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court: FR 56(a) Means You’re in Service Till Month-End, Entitled to All Benefits

The Supreme Court held that employees retiring on March 31st due to FR 56(a) are deemed "in service" on that date, entitling them to pay revisions effective from that day. Relying on Rule 5(2) of CCS (Pension) Rules and a three-Judge Bench precedent, the Court clarified that such retirement dates are working days for salary purposes, not mere formalities. Facts Of The Case: The appellants were employees of the Assam Power Generation Corporation Ltd. who both attained the age of superannuation (60 years) during the month of March 2016. By virtue of Fundamental Rule 56(a), which provides that every government servant shall retire on the afternoon of the last day of the month in which they attain the age of sixty years, their date of retirement was extended to March 31, 2016. Subsequently, ...
Read More
Supreme Court Explains Why: Can’t File Contempt in Supreme Court for Violating High Court Order
29Dec By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Explains Why: Can’t File Contempt in Supreme Court for Violating High Court Order

This Supreme Court judgment clarifies that the doctrine of merger is not of universal application. It holds that where the Supreme Court permits withdrawal of an intra-court appeal, the parties revert to the status under the original High Court Single Judge order. Consequently, contempt for its violation lies before the High Court, not the Supreme Court. Facts Of The Case: The petitioner, M/s Khurana Brothers, initially challenged an order of a Single Judge of the Uttarakhand High Court by filing an intra-court appeal before a Division Bench. While the Division Bench dismissed this appeal, it made certain observations that, according to the petitioner, worsened its legal position compared to the Single Judge's order. The petitioner then sought and was granted leave to appeal to t...
Read More
Supreme Court Upholds Tribunal’s Power to Modify Military Conviction
27Dec By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Tribunal’s Power to Modify Military Conviction

The Supreme Court affirmed the Armed Forces Tribunal’s power under Section 15(6) of the AFT Act, 2007, to substitute a conviction. It held that where evidence establishes an act prejudicial to military discipline under Section 63 of the Army Act, 1950, the Tribunal can legally replace a more severe charge with this lesser offence and modify the sentence accordingly. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, Colonel S.K. Jain, was the Commandant of the Northern Command Vehicle Depot in Udhampur. In September 2008, a contractor alleged that the appellant demanded a bribe for passing motorcycles during inspection. A trap was laid, and during a search of his office on September 27, 2008, a Board of Officers recovered an envelope containing ₹10,000 and, significantly, a quantity of old ammunition (7....
Read More
Supreme Court Rules: Ink and Chemicals Used in Printing are Taxable in Works Contracts
29Nov By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules: Ink and Chemicals Used in Printing are Taxable in Works Contracts

This Supreme Court judgment clarifies the levy of tax on goods involved in a works contract under Article 366(29-A)(b) of the Constitution. The Court held that tax is leviable on the transfer of property in goods, even if consumed, provided the transfer occurs upon their incorporation into the works. The taxable event is the deemed sale at the moment of incorporation, not the subsequent consumption or tangible presence in the final product. Facts Of The Case: The appellant, M/s. Aristo Printers Pvt. Ltd., was engaged in the business of printing lottery tickets on paper supplied by its clients, while it procured the ink and processing materials, including chemicals, itself. The Assessing Authority levied trade tax on the value of these materials under Section 3F of the Uttar Pradesh T...
Read More
SARFAESI Act’s Section 11: Supreme Court Affirms Mandatory Arbitration for Financial Institutions
11Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

SARFAESI Act’s Section 11: Supreme Court Affirms Mandatory Arbitration for Financial Institutions

The Supreme Court, in Bank of India vs. M/s Sri Nangli Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd., ruled that Section 11 of the SARFAESI Act is mandatory, requiring inter-se disputes between banks and financial institutions concerning secured assets to be resolved through arbitration. No explicit arbitration agreement is needed; the provision legally mandates it, thereby divesting DRT of jurisdiction in such matters. Facts Of The Case: In the case of Bank of India vs. M/s Sri Nangli Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd. & Ors., the core dispute involved the priority of charge over secured assets (stocks of paddy and rice) belonging to a common borrower, M/s Sri Nangli Rice Mills Pvt. Ltd., between two public sector banks: Bank of India (appellant) and Punjab National Bank (respondent). Both banks had extended credit facil...
Read More