Issue for Consideration Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the decree holder (respondent) would be entitled to interest upon interest in terms of s.31(7)(b), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 or the interest awarded by the arbitral tribunal in of the memorandum of understanding (MoU) entered into between the parties i.e. between the appellant and the respondent fulfil the requirement of s.31(7)(a) and (b) of the said Act. Headnotes† Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – s.31(7)(a), (b) – High Court set aside the
Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to settlement of the land dispute between the parties through mediation. Headnotes† Mediation – Role of mediator – On facts, land dispute between the parties – Mediator appointed by this Court – Mediator left his argumentative and travelled to Hamirpur, interacted with rival members of the family and, inspected the land and other properties in the village to mediate the dispute between the parties – Settlement/ agreement between the parties owing to outstanding efforts of the mediator – Disposal of the
Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to filing of frivolous complaint against two advocates before the Bar Council which took cognizance of the complaint and referred the complaint to the Disciplinary Committee for inquiry. Headnotes† Advocates Act, 1961 – s.35 – Punishment – Complaint by one against an advocate alleging professional misconduct u/s.35, for his role in identifying the plaintiff in the consent terms of a civil suit – Judge-Advocate of the Bar Council took cognizance of the complaint and referred the complaint to the Disciplinary
Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court ought to have applied the doctrine of “pay and recover” requiring the Insurance Company to satisfy the amount of compensation to the claimant and subsequently allow the Insurance Company to recover the amount in Motor Vehicle Accident Claim – Victim-deceased died in a vehicular accident – Truck was driven by respondent no.1 – The said truck met with an accident with a tractor-trolley – Victim was a conductor in the truck – Claim petition – Tribunal
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the validity of the Notification No. S.O.377, dated 09.03.2007, issued by the Government of Rajasthan in exercise of its powers conferred by s.8(3) of the Rajasthan Value Added Tax Act, 2003 granting exemption from payment of Value Added Tax on cement sheets and bricks, manufactured in the State of Rajasthan, having contents of fly ash 25% or more by weight subject to specific conditions, is violative of Art. 304(a) of the Constitution of India being discriminatory vis-à-vis goods imported from outside the State of Rajasthan;
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the maintainability of the second SLP challenging the same order where the first SLP was withdrawn without leave to re-approach. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Art.136 – Maintainability of the second Special Leave Petition, when liberty – Appellant defaulted in his obligation to repay loan to the respondent-Bank – Respondent classified the loan account as ‘Non-Performing Asset’ and initiated measures u/s.13(4) of the SARFAESI Act – Appellant filed writ petition, which was disposed of by the
Issue for Consideration In the instant case, whether the motive projected and the crime has been proved and whether the circumstances lead to the culpability of the accused. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – s.302 – Evidence Act, 1872 – s.27 – Allegation that a police police man-victim – The victim-deceased made persistent demands for repayment of the loan – This led to A2, the wife of A1, calling the victim to her home on the pretext of repaying the debt – At night, victim was made immobile by throwing chili powder on his face and hacked to
Issue for Consideration When victim herself has stepped into witness box, whether her examination can be done in piecemeal. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.309 – Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – s.346 – Examination of instant case, trial court recorded the statement of the victim and thereafter adjourned the matter for further examination by a period of four months – Whether such prevailing practice can be approved: Held: Section 309 of the Cr.P.C. (now Section 346 of the BNSS, 2023) contains a mandatory
Issue for Consideration The High Court, vide the impugned judgment, held that the issue as regards the right to redemption u/s.13(8) of the SARFAESI Act was no longer res integra in view of the 2014 Supreme Court decision in Mathew Varghese. Placing reliance on the said decision, the writ petition filed by respondent Nos.1 to 4 (original borrowers) whereby the Sale Certificate issued by respondent No.5-Bank in favour of appellants (Auction Purchasers) dated 22.03.2021 was quashed and respondent No.5 was directed to permit respondent Nos. 1 to 4 to redeem the
Issue for Consideration Whether the process of placing the Genset within a steel container and fitting the steel container with components such as radiator, ventilation fan, air filter unit, oil tank, pipes, pumps, valve and silencer would amount to Central Excise Act, 1944. Headnotes† Central Excise Act, 1944 – s.2(f) – Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 – Appellant is engaged in the business of providing containerised gas generating sets known as the Power Packs on a lease basis – In order to carry out the said
1210 : 2025 INSC 1133 Kaveri Plastics v. Mahdoom Bawa Bahrudeen Noorul (Criminal Appeal No(s). 4142-4143 of 2025) 19 September 2025 [B.R. Gavai, CJI and N.V. Anjaria,* J.] Issue for Consideration When the amount mentioned and demanded in the notice sent under Proviso (b) to s.138 of the of law; whether a defence that such was a typographical error could be a ground which could be countenanced in law. Headnotes† Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – Proviso (b) to s.138 – The High Court quashed the criminal complaint filed by the respondent herein u/ss.138, 141 and
Issue for Consideration Should Eminent Players be in the General Body; if so, to what extent; what should be the Eligibility criteria to be designated an Eminent Player; whether ‘Office bearers’ should be limited to President, Treasurer, Secretary; whether the number of to ensure regional representation; whether public servants should be included under disqualification events; whether ‘indirect interest’ should be retained in the definition of ‘conflict of interest’; should the All India Football Federation (AIFF) Constitution apply
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in allowing the application u/s.389 CrPC by the respondent no.1 seeking suspension of sentence. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.389 – Suspension the appeal; release of appellant on bail – Victim-owner of a hotel and his family members constantly received extortion calls from the members of the organized crime syndicate headed by respondent-accused, and as the victim failed to meet the demand for extortion money, he was shot dead by
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the courts below convicting and sentencing the appellant u/ss.302, 364 and 201 IPC for kidnapping and murder of the informant’s son. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302, 364 and 201 – FIR by the father that a day before the incident, the appellant and his friends forcibly took his son in their auto and kidnapped him and the next day, he was found dead with multiple injuries – Animosity between the parties on account of the previous report lodged by the mother of the
Issue for Consideration The core controversy in the instant set of appeals concerns the purported legal dissonance between two Statutes, both of which inter alia provide for land acquisition by the State authorities. On the one hand is the Balipara/Tirap/Sadiya Frontier Tract Jhum Regulations); on the other are the settled land laws prevailing in the rest of the country, i.e. either the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 (1894 Act) or its successor-statue, the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 (2013 Act).
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the directions issued by the High Court that the interim custody of the minor son aged five years be handed over to the father from the custody of the maternal grandfather warrants interference. Headnotes† Custody – Child custody – – Strained marital relationship of the parents – Mother left India for UK with both the children-minor daughter and son, allegedly without the father’s knowledge or consent – Father initiated proceedings in UK High Court seeking return of the children – UK Court
Issue for Consideration The issue pertains to assail the correctness of the Judgment and Order passed by the Full Bench of High Court wherein the writ petition preferred by the proprietors/landowners, (Respondents herein), challenging the amendments carried out in the Punjab Act, 1961, as inserted by the Haryana Act No. 9 of 1992 was partly allowed. Headnotes† Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 – sub-clause (6) to s.2(g) – East Punjab Holdings (Consolidation And Prevention of Fragmentation) Act, 1948 – Constitution
Issue for Consideration Whether the suit land was sold to 5th defendant by 1st defendant- Karta for legal necessity i.e. the marriage of his daughter ‘K’. Headnotes† Hindu Law – Sale of the suit land (belonging to the HUF) by 1st defendant-Karta to 5th defendant, if i.e. the marriage of daughter ‘K’ – Suit filed by plaintiff- coparcener (one of the sons of 1st defendant) assailing the sale transaction, was dismissed by Trial Court holding that the suit land was sold to meet the expenses of the marriage of ‘K’, that is,
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in ordering a re-trial; if not, then what would be the appropriate order that may be passed in this appeal. Headnotes† Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – ss.8(c) r/w 20(b)(ii)(C) – to cannabis plant and cannabis – Search and seizure operation leading to recovery of contraband-Ganja weighing 39 kgs from the hut of the appellant-accused no. 1 and accused no.2 – On disclosure by two accused, complicity of accused no.3 came to light and on accused no.3’s
2175 : 2025 INSC 1116 In Re: The Waqf Amendment Act, 2025 (1) (Writ Petition (Civil) No. 276 of 2025) 15 September 2025 [B.R. Gavai,* CJI and Augustine George Masih, J.] Issue for Consideration The present writ petitions challenged the validity of several Sections of the Waqf (Amendment) Act, sought to challenge the constitutionality of almost all the Sections of the impugned Act, apparently the main challenge was to the amendments carried out in ss.3(r), 3C, 3D, 3E, 9, 14, 23, 36, 104, 107, 108, 108A of the Unified Waqf Management, Empowerment, Efficiency and Development Act,