Locus Standi - The Legal Chamber

When a Compromise Decree Fails: Supreme Court on Burden of Proof in Execution

31Jan

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

When a Compromise Decree Fails: Supreme Court on Burden of Proof in Execution

The Supreme Court held that the burden of proof in execution proceedings lies squarely on the decree-holder to establish a willful violation of the decree's terms. Mere assertions without independent evidence are insufficient. The Court found no cogent proof that the judgment-debtor had breached the 1933 compromise decree, and thus declined to execute it. Facts Of The Case: The case originates from a long-standing dispute between two factions of the Kuruba community in Andhra Pradesh over the custody of idols and the performance of rituals for their common deity, Lord Sangalappa Swamy. The initial litigation dates back to 1927. The matter culminated in a compromise decree on November 1, 1933, which stipulated that the idols would be rotated every six months between the villages of ...

Landmark Ruling: Supreme Court Backs Creditors & JSW, Shuts Door on Promoter Interference

22Nov

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Landmark Ruling: Supreme Court Backs Creditors & JSW, Shuts Door on Promoter Interference

This Supreme Court judgment reinforces the finality and binding nature of an approved resolution plan under the IBC. It held that claims not part of the Request for Resolution Plan (RfRP) or the final plan are extinguished, preventing "hydra-headed" post-approval claims. The commercial wisdom of the Committee of Creditors (CoC) in approving the plan is paramount and not open to judicial review on merits. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) of Bhushan Power and Steel Limited (BPSL), initiated in 2017. JSW Steel Limited was selected as the Successful Resolution Applicant (SRA), and its resolution plan was approved by the Committee of Creditors (CoC) and later by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) in September 2019. However,...

Supreme Court Landmark Ruling: Legal Heir Can Continue Criminal Appeal if Original Victim Dies

25Sep

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Landmark Ruling: Legal Heir Can Continue Criminal Appeal if Original Victim Dies

This Supreme Court judgment clarifies that the legal right of a victim to prefer an appeal under Section 372 CrPC includes the right to prosecute it. The Supreme Court held that upon the death of the original victim-appellant, their legal heir is entitled to be substituted to continue the appeal, ensuring the victim's statutory right is not extinguished. Facts Of The Case: On December 9, 1992, an attack occurred stemming from previous enmity. The accused persons, armed with guns, sharp weapons, and bricks, assaulted informant Tara Chand (PW-1), his brother Virendra Singh, and his son Khem Singh (PW-3). As a result, Virendra Singh died, while Tara Chand and Khem Singh sustained injuries. The specific roles attributed were that accused Ashok fired at Virendra Singh, accused Pramod fi...

Supreme Court Rules: “Right to Prefer an Appeal” Includes “Right to Prosecute it” for Victims

28Aug

By The Legal ChamberNo Comments

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Rules: “Right to Prefer an Appeal” Includes “Right to Prosecute it” for Victims

The Supreme Court held that the right to prefer an appeal under the proviso to Section 372 CrPC includes the right to prosecute it. Consequently, upon the death of the original appellant-victim, their legal heir is entitled to be substituted to continue the appeal. The definition of ‘victim’ under Section 2(wa) CrPC is broad and inclusive, enabling such substitution to ensure the right of access to justice is not defeated. Facts Of The Case: On December 9, 1992, an attack occurred in which Virendra Singh was killed, and informant Tara Chand (PW-1) and his son Khem Singh (PW-3) were injured. The Sessions Court convicted accused Ashok, Pramod, and Anil @ Neelu, sentencing them to life imprisonment, but acquitted six other accused. The convicted accused appealed to the High Court, which, vi...