Tag: Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court Verdict on Ownership and Illegal Possession:Why the Supreme Court Dismissed the Appeal in the Land Dispute Case
24May By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Verdict on Ownership and Illegal Possession:Why the Supreme Court Dismissed the Appeal in the Land Dispute Case

The Supreme Court upheld the eviction order under the Andhra Pradesh Land Grabbing (Prohibition) Act, 1982, ruling that the appellant unlawfully occupied land in Survey No. 9 despite holding a deed for Survey No. 10. The Court emphasized that land grabbing requires illegal possession with intent, distinct from mere trespass, and affirmed the Special Court’s jurisdiction to adjudicate such disputes summarily. The appellant’s claim of adverse possession failed due to lack of hostile animus and proof of long-standing occupation. The judgment reinforced the strict interpretation of land grabbing under the Act, aligning with precedent in Konda Lakshmana Bapuji v. Govt. of A.P. (2002). Facts Of The Case: The case involved a dispute over 252 square yards of land in Survey No. 9 of Saroornagar V...
Read More
“Supreme Court Rules on Food Adulteration Cases : Strict Punishment in Food Adulteration Cases
20May By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

“Supreme Court Rules on Food Adulteration Cases : Strict Punishment in Food Adulteration Cases

The Supreme Court ruled that Section 20AA of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act (PoFA), 1954, bars probation for offenders convicted under the Act between 1976 and 2006, upholding strict sentencing to deter food adulteration. It also held that the Food Safety and Standards Act (FSSA), 2006’s repeal clause preserves penalties under PoFA, denying retrospective benefit of reduced sentences. However, citing discrepancies in evidence, the Court partially allowed the appeals by converting imprisonment into fines, balancing strict legal interpretation with equitable relief. The judgment reaffirms legislative intent to prioritize public health over reformative leniency in food safety violations. Facts Of The Case: The case involved two criminal appeals before the Supreme Court of India, ari...
Read More
Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Chhattisgarh Murder Case : “Eyewitness Failures Lead to Acquittal”
19May By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Chhattisgarh Murder Case : “Eyewitness Failures Lead to Acquittal”

The Supreme Court acquitted the accused in a double murder case, ruling that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The judgment emphasized that eyewitnesses must identify accused in court and link them to specific roles, noting material omissions and contradictions in testimonies. It reinforced Section 162 CrPC standards for reliable evidence, overturning concurrent convictions due to fatal investigative lapses. Facts Of The Case: The case involved a violent incident on March 24, 2001, in Masturi, Chhattisgarh, where nine accused armed with swords, lathis, and poleaxes allegedly attacked a medical shop, killing Manrakhan Singh and Narayan Singh and injuring five others, including family members of the deceased. The prosecution claimed the attack stemmed from a pr...
Read More
Supreme Court Reforms Senior Advocate Selection: Orders Fresh Rules for Senior Advocate Designation
16May By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Reforms Senior Advocate Selection: Orders Fresh Rules for Senior Advocate Designation

The Supreme Court critically examined the procedure for designation of Senior Advocates under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961, highlighting issues with interviews, point-based evaluation, and secret ballot voting. It emphasized transparency, objectivity, and uniformity in the designation process and referred the matter to the Chief Justice for reconsideration. Facts Of The Case: The case revolves around the process of designating Senior Advocates under Section 16 of the Advocates Act, 1961, as interpreted and modified by the Supreme Court in Indira Jaising v. Supreme Court of India (2017) and subsequent judgments. The issue arose when concerns were raised about the effectiveness and fairness of the guidelines laid down in *Indira Jaising-1* and *Indira Jaising-2*, particularly afte...
Read More
Supreme Court Clarifies Motor Vehicle Act: Insurer Must Pay Compensation Even for Uninsured Trailer
5May By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Clarifies Motor Vehicle Act: Insurer Must Pay Compensation Even for Uninsured Trailer

The Supreme Court ruled that when a tractor (insured) causes an accident involving an attached trailer (uninsured), the insurer is liable for third-party compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. The Court held that the trailer, being part of the tractor's operation, need not be separately insured, emphasizing the Act's welfare-centric interpretation. The insurer's liability was capped at the policy limit, with recovery rights against the vehicle owner for excess amounts. The judgment harmonized precedents on composite vehicle insurance and statutory compensation. Facts Of The Case: On February 29, 2012, Nagarajappa (deceased) was working as a coolie on a tractor-trailer transporting soil when the vehicle overturned due to the driver’s negligence, resulting in his fatal injuries. ...
Read More
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...
Read More
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...
Read More