Tag: Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court Upholds Decree for Specific Performance; Unilateral Cancellation Not Permitted
30Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Decree for Specific Performance; Unilateral Cancellation Not Permitted

The Supreme Court upheld the decree for specific performance, ruling that a suit for specific performance is maintainable without a declaratory relief against a unilateral termination when the agreement is not determinable in nature. The subsequent purchasers were held not to be bona fide purchasers for value without notice under Section 19(b) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. Facts Of The Case: On 28.04.2000, the original vendors executed an unregistered Agreement to Sell (ATS) in favour of the original vendees for agricultural land in Karnataka. The vendees paid a substantial part of the consideration and performed their obligations, including getting the land converted and tenants relocated. In 2003, the original vendors issued a unilateral termination notice citing pending litigation...
Read More
Supreme Court Quashes Service Tax Demand, Says No Suppression If Transactions are Transparent
30Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Quashes Service Tax Demand, Says No Suppression If Transactions are Transparent

The Supreme Court held that transactions involving the outright sale of land, even if accompanied by ancillary facilitation activities, do not constitute taxable services of a ‘Real Estate Agent’ under the Finance Act, 1994. The activity must involve a clear contract of agency. Mere sale of immovable property is excluded from the definition of ‘service’. Facts Of The Case: The respondent, M/s Elegant Developers, entered into three Memorandums of Understanding (MOUs) with M/s Sahara India Commercial Corporation Ltd. (SICCL) for the identification, acquisition, and development of land parcels for real estate projects. Under these agreements, Elegant Developers was responsible for tasks like purchasing contiguous land blocks, obtaining title clearances, securing necessary government approva...
Read More
Right to Privacy Prevails: Supreme Court Rejects Forced DNA Test in Paternity Dispute
29Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Right to Privacy Prevails: Supreme Court Rejects Forced DNA Test in Paternity Dispute

In this Supreme Court judgment, the Supreme Court ruled that a DNA test cannot be ordered as a matter of routine. It emphasized that the conclusive presumption of a child's legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act can only be displaced by proving "non-access." Absent such proof and a direct nexus to the alleged offence, forced testing violates the right to privacy and bodily autonomy. Facts Of The Case: Respondent No. 1, Kamar Nisha, was married to Abdul Latheef in 2001. Latheef, suffering from a skin ailment, was successfully treated by the appellant, Dr. R. Rajendran. Latheef confided in the doctor about his lack of progeny, leading to a request for medical assistance for his wife. Following this, an extramarital relationship developed between the appellant and...
Read More
From Murder to Culpable Homicide: How the Supreme Court Reclassified a Stabbing Case
29Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

From Murder to Culpable Homicide: How the Supreme Court Reclassified a Stabbing Case

The Supreme Court reclassified the offense from murder under Section 302 IPC to culpable homicide not amounting to murder under Section 304 Part I IPC. The Court held that while the appellant had the knowledge his act was likely to cause death, the prosecution failed to prove the requisite intention to kill, which is essential to constitute murder under Section 300 IPC. Facts Of The Case: On June 12, 1998, an altercation occurred between the appellant, Nandkumar, and his brother. Rajesh, the nephew of Louis Williams (the deceased), intervened, during which the appellant allegedly injured Rajesh with a knife. Later that night, the appellant went to the residence of Louis Williams. A further incident ensued, resulting in the appellant inflicting multiple stab wounds on Williams, including ...
Read More
Supreme Court Reiterates: No Forest Land Acquisition Without Proper Notice
28Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court Reiterates: No Forest Land Acquisition Without Proper Notice

This Supreme Court judgement reinforces that for land to vest as a "private forest" under the Maharashtra Private Forests Acquisition Act, 1975, a valid notice under Section 35(3) of the Indian Forest Act must be properly served on the owner, initiating a live statutory process. Mere issuance or a stale, dormant notice from decades past is insufficient to trigger acquisition. The Supreme Court underscored strict compliance with this mandatory procedure and the binding nature of its precedent under Article 141 of the Constitution. Facts Of The Case: The appellants are landowners in Maharashtra whose properties were claimed by the State to have been declared "private forests" and automatically vested in the government on 30 August 1975 under the Maharashtra Private Forests Acqu...
Read More
From Highways to Hospitals: Supreme Court’s Nationwide Plan to Tackle Stray Animals
28Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

From Highways to Hospitals: Supreme Court’s Nationwide Plan to Tackle Stray Animals

The Supreme Court reaffirmed the application of the Animal Birth Control Rules, 2023, and issued mandatory directives to all States and Union Territories. This includes securing institutional premises from stray dogs, removing such animals from highways, and ensuring the availability of anti-rabies treatment, thereby enforcing the state's obligation to protect the right to life under Article 21. Facts Of The Case: This suo motu proceeding originated from media reports highlighting the severe public safety threat posed by stray animals, particularly dogs, in urban areas. The Supreme Court consolidated several related petitions and appeals addressing this issue. The core factual matrix involved alarming and recurrent incidents of dog-bite attacks, especially within institutional premises s...
Read More
From Legal Dead End to Fresh Hope: Supreme Court’s Blueprint for Stalled Housing Projects
28Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

From Legal Dead End to Fresh Hope: Supreme Court’s Blueprint for Stalled Housing Projects

The Supreme Court constituted a one-judge committee under a retired High Court Judge to investigate and resolve the complex issues surrounding the stalled housing project. The committee will verify genuine allottees, devise a mechanism for partial lease restoration with GNIDA, determine proportional dues, and formulate a comprehensive plan for the project's completion. Facts Of The Case: In 2005, Golf Course Sahkari Awas Samiti (GCSAS) was allotted land in Greater Noida for a group housing project. The Samiti engaged a private developer, M/s Shiv Kala Developers, to build a luxury complex named "Shiv Kala Charms." Prospective homebuyers, including the petitioners, booked flats and availed bank loans, which were disbursed directly to the Samiti. However, the Samiti and develop...
Read More
Supreme Court: Arbitrator Cannot Rewrite Contracts, Upholds IRCTC’s Catering Policy
28Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court: Arbitrator Cannot Rewrite Contracts, Upholds IRCTC’s Catering Policy

The Supreme Court held that an arbitral award which contravenes binding government policy circulars—incorporated into the parties' contracts—is patently illegal and in conflict with the public policy of India under Section 34(2A) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. An arbitrator cannot rewrite contractual terms that reflect such policy. Facts Of The Case: The case arose from contracts for catering services on premium Indian Railways trains (Rajdhani, Shatabdi, Duronto). The Railway Board initially increased meal tariffs in 2013 but simultaneously introduced a cheaper "combo meal" to replace the second regular meal on long journeys. This combo meal was swiftly discontinued days later, and caterers were directed to serve a second regular meal instead, but were to be reimbu...
Read More
Supreme Court: Registration Authorities Can’t Demand Mutation Proof Before Registering a Sale
28Jan By The Legal ChamberNo Comments
Supreme Court

Supreme Court: Registration Authorities Can’t Demand Mutation Proof Before Registering a Sale

The Supreme Court struck down sub-rules (xvii) and (xviii) of Rule 19 of the Bihar Registration Rules, 2019, holding them ultra vires the Registration Act, 1908. The Court ruled that the rule-making power under Section 69 does not authorize registering authorities to demand proof of mutation or title as a precondition for document registration, deeming such a requirement arbitrary and beyond the scope of the Act. Facts Of The Case: The case originated from challenges to the 2019 amendments to the Bihar Registration Rules, 1989, specifically the introduction of sub-rules (xvii) and (xviii) to Rule 19. These new rules empowered registering authorities to refuse registration of a sale or gift deed if the document did not mention, and the seller did not produce proof of, a "jamabandi a...
Read More