Tag: Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court : No More Delays! High Court Must Decide Property Dispute in 6 Months
10Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court : No More Delays! High Court Must Decide Property Dispute in 6 Months

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court's second remand order for de-novo disposal, finding it erroneous given the possibility of deciding the appeal based on the interpretation of existing documents (sale deed, conveyance deed, and settlement deed). The Court directed the High Court to decide the appeal on its merits expeditiously within six months. Facts Of The Case: This appeal challenges a judgment from the High Court of Kerala, which set aside a trial court's dismissal of a suit and remanded the matter for de-novo disposal. The dispute concerns 9 cents of land in Poomthura Village, Ernakulam. The appellant's father executed a sale deed in 1955 for "Verumpattom Rights" over land in Survey No. 1236. Later, in 1964, he executed a conveyance deed for "Jenmam ...
Read More
Supreme Court : Sale Deeds Executed After Property Power of Attorney Revoked Are Invalid
10Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court : Sale Deeds Executed After Property Power of Attorney Revoked Are Invalid

The Supreme Court clarified that an unregistered agreement to sell or power of attorney does not confer title or interest in immovable property. The Court emphasized that property transfer requires a registered deed of conveyance. It also ruled that a plaint cannot be rejected entirely under Order VII Rule 11 CPC if even one distinct cause of action is triable. Facts Of The Case: Vinod Infra Developers Ltd. (appellant) claimed ownership of agricultural land and obtained a loan of Rs. 7.5 crores from Mahaveer Lunia (Respondent No. 1) in May 2014. The appellant's Board of Directors authorized their Managing Director and Respondent No. 1 to sell the property. Subsequently, an unregistered power of attorney and agreement to sell were executed in favor of Respondent No. 1 on May 24, 2014.In A...
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
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
Cheque Bounce Case: Supreme Court Reinstates Case Against Director in ₹6 Crore Cheque Dishonour Case
7Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Cheque Bounce Case: Supreme Court Reinstates Case Against Director in ₹6 Crore Cheque Dishonour Case

The Supreme Court clarified that for vicarious liability under Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, complaints need not reproduce statutory language verbatim. Substantive allegations demonstrating a director's responsibility for company affairs suffice. The Court emphasized substance over form, ruling that technical pleading deficiencies don't invalidate proceedings if the complaint, read holistically, establishes the director's operational role. The judgment reinstated criminal proceedings against the director, overturning the High Court's quashing order. Facts Of The Case: The case involved a complaint filed by HDFC Bank against M/s R Square Shri Sai Baba Abhikaran Pvt. Ltd. and its directors, including Mrs. Ranjana Sharma (Respondent No. 2), for dishonor of a cheque worth ₹6...
Read More
CBI vs. Accused: Supreme Court Rules on Discharge in Cotton MSP Scam Case
7Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

CBI vs. Accused: Supreme Court Rules on Discharge in Cotton MSP Scam Case

The Supreme Court held that the trial court and High Court erred in discharging the accused under Section 239 CrPC by relying on defence-produced documents (CCI’s exoneration letter) at the pre-trial stage. Reiterating Debendra Nath Padhi, it ruled that only prosecution material under Section 173 CrPC can be considered for discharge, not extraneous evidence. The Court emphasized that discharge requires examining whether the chargesheet discloses a prima facie case, without evaluating defence merits. The matter was remanded for fresh consideration under Section 239 CrPC, barring reliance on non-prosecution documents. Facts Of The Case: The case involves a criminal conspiracy where Rayapati Subba Rao (A-1), a Cotton Purchase Officer (CPO) of Cotton Corporation of India (CCI), Guntur, alleg...
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 Big Consumer Protection Verdict: Tenure, Transparency, and Tribunal Reforms
6Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Big Consumer Protection Verdict: Tenure, Transparency, and Tribunal Reforms

This Supreme Court judgment addresses the appointment process and tenure of members in State and District Consumer Commissions. It mandates judicial majority in selection committees and a five-year tenure, overturning previous rules. The Court also clarifies that written examinations are not required for judicial members, but are necessary for non-judicial members for both appointment and reappointment. Facts Of The Case: The genesis of this case lies in challenges to the Consumer Protection (Qualification for appointment, method of recruitment, procedure of appointment, term of office, resignation and removal of the President and members of the State Commission and District Commission) Rules, 2020. Initially, the Bombay High Court struck down certain rules concerning eligibility criteri...
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 Digital Portal & Patrol Teams to Curb Illegal Occupations on National Highways
5Jun By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Orders Digital Portal & Patrol Teams to Curb Illegal Occupations on National Highways

The Supreme Court issued directives under Article 32 to strengthen implementation of the Control of National Highways Act, 2002, emphasizing statutory obligations to prevent highway encroachments. It mandated grievance redressal mechanisms (portal/toll-free number), regular inspections, and surveillance teams while underscoring the Highway Administration's duty to enforce Section 26 (removal of unauthorized occupation). The judgment established procedural safeguards for encroachment removal and ordered Standard Operating Procedures for transparency, affirming judicial oversight through continuing mandamus to ensure compliance with road safety norms. Facts Of The Case: The writ petition was filed by Gyan Prakash under Article 32 of the Constitution, highlighting alarming road fatalities (...
Read More