Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order passed by the High Court in revision application confirming the judgment of the appellate bench whereby decree of the trial court was reversed; and whether the ‘agreement parties was in nature of licensor and licensee of the suit premises or merely for conducting the hotel business of the first defendant by the plaintiff. Headnotes Bombay Rents, Hotel and Lodging House Rates Control Act, 1947 – ss.15A, 28 – Evidence Act, 1972 – ss.91, 92 –
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether civil suits could have been instituted in courts in Patna and Delhi by employees in view of the specific clauses in the appointment letter that courts in Mumbai would have exclusive jurisdiction to decide disputes by and between the contracting parties. s.28 – Agreements in restraint of legal proceedings – Exclusive jurisdiction of courts – Appointment of two employees by the respondent Bank, one in Patna and other in Delhi and exclusive jurisdiction clause in the appointment letter that the courts in Mumbai will have
Issue for Consideration How the compensation payable under the Haryana Compassionate Assistance to the Dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006 has to be dealt with in computing the compensation under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Headnotes† Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – to the Dependents of Deceased Government Employees Rules, 2006 – In the present case, the High Court has deducted only 50% of the compensation under the Rules of 2006 from the amounts awarded in the Claim Petition under the Motor Vehicles Act – The Insurance Company pointed out
Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court enhancing the compensation awarded to the claimants under the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988. Headnotes† Limitation Act, 1963 – ss.5, 6 – Legal Disability – Death of wife in motor husband and two minor children – Tribunal awarded compensation – Thereagainst, after 10 years, children alone preferred appeal before High Court, wherein one child had attained majority five years back – High Court enhanced compensation – Correctness: Held: Appeal filed
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the order passed by the High Court, rejecting the writ petition filed by the appellants u/Article 226 of the Constitution praying for the possession of property given for temporary occupation to police officials in 1940. Headnotes† Constitution Art.226 – Writ jurisdiction – Exercise of, when alternative remedy available – Writ petition by the appellant seeking for possession of their two flats which were permitted to be temporarily occupied by the police department at their request to meet the requirement of housing
Issue for Consideration The present set of appeals have travelled to this 3-Judge Bench as a result of the split verdict delivered through Judgment dated 18.05.2023 in Civil Appeal No. 3957 of 2023 and other connected matters. All the candidates had successfully cleared followed by mains examination, as per the requirements of marks in their respective categories. However, none of these candidates had their certificates issued as per the date specified in the Subsequent Notice (dated 04.08.2022), their names were not included in the list of the candidates
Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court erred in quashing the FIR against the respondent no.1-public servant under Section 13(1)(b) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in a case of Disproportionate Assets, on the ground that the Superintendent of Police (SP) a preliminary enquiry before passing the orders directing registration of FIR. Headnotes† Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – ss.13(1)(b), 13(2), 17 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Corruption matters against the public servants – Preliminary
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the maintainability of an appeal under proviso to s.372 CrPC against order of acquittal in a case instituted upon a private complaint u/s.138 Negotiable Instruments Act, by treating the complainant in such proceeding as a victim within the term u/s.2(wa) CrPC. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – ss.2(wa), 372, 378, 200 – Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – s.138 – Respondents issued cheques to appellant against the loan facility availed from the appellant – Cheques dishonoured with the
Issue for Consideration Whether the Tribunal was justified in directing the insurer to pay the award amount and recover it from the owner and driver of the offending vehicle carrying hazardous goods, in view of the absence of an endorsement in the driving licence of the driver as required Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 r/w r.9 of the Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989. Headnotes† Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – ss.11, 14, 41 – Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989 – r.9 – Motor accident involving an oil tanker killing a bicyclist and a pedestrian – Tribunal
Issue for Consideration Whether the observation of the Revenue Officer, as prima facie accepted by the High Court that the transaction of gift deed dated 07.12.1967 was a Benami transaction is totally erroneous as the amendment (2nd and 3rd Amendment in the West Bengal Land into effect almost two decades after registered gift deed was executed. Headnotes† West Bengal Land Reforms Act, 1955 – 2nd Amendment (came into force on 07.08.1969) and 3rd Amendment (came into force on 12.05.1989) – s.14T(3) r/w ss.14M, 14T (8) & (9) & 14S –
Issue for Consideration a. What courses of action are available to the Governor in exercise of his powers under Article 200 of the Constitution. b. Whether the Governor can reserve a Bill for the consideration of the President when it is presented to him for assent after being reconsidered first proviso to Article 200, more particularly, when he had not reserved it for the consideration of the President in the first instance. c. Whether there is an express constitutionally prescribed time limit within which the Governor is required to act in the exercise of his powers under
Issue for Consideration Appellant established physical relationship with the complainant on promise of marriage. Complainant obtained divorce from her husband on the assurance of the appellant that he will marry her. Later, on refusal of the appellant to marry her, complainant lodged FIR The Sessions Court discharged the appellant. High Court set aside the order of discharge. The issue for consideration was whether there was sufficient material on record for the Sessions Court to have discharged the appellant for offences under ss.376 and 506 IPC. Headnotes† Penal Code,
Issue for Consideration Whether SEBI can pass multiple final orders on the same cause of action; applicability of principles of res judicata/constructive res judicata; whether the Appellate Tribunal was justified in setting aside the 2018 disgorgement order passed by SEBI holding that it principle of res judicata in view of its earlier 2014 order. Headnotes† Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 – ss.11, 11B – Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – s.11 – Principles of res judicata/constructive res judicata – Applicability of – SEBI
Issue for Consideration In view of the unequivocal admission made by the defendant in his written statement, whether the High Court was right in decreeing the suit for recovery of possession applying Or.XII r.6 of the CPC thereby, affirming the decree of eviction passed by the trial court. – Or.XII, r.6 – Judgment on admissions – West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 – s.2(g) – Suit for recovery of possession – Admission of certain facts by the defendant in his written statement – In view thereof, the plaintiff filed application
Issue for Consideration The present dispute hinges on the phrase “voyage should commence & complete before monsoon sets in”, a special condition contained in the contract for insurance between the parties, and raises questions regarding its validity, interpretation the special condition in the policy schedule for voyage insurance stands breached justifying the de facto repudiation of the appellant’s claim by the respondent. Headnotes† Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – s.67 – Insurance Contract – The appellant company insured
Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to the correctness of order by the Division Bench of the High Court with regard to upholding the order of the sub-registrar, refusing registration of a sale deed. Headnotes† Registration Act, 1908 – s.69 – Registration (Tamil Nadu r.55A – Vires of r. 55A – Refusal of the Sub-registrar to register the sale deed on the ground that the title of the vendor and the appellant not established – Correctness – Sub-Registrar refused to register sale deed executed in favour of the appellant – On
Issue for Consideration Whether the allegations against the appellant, as they stand, constitute an offence, u/ss.376(2)(f), 417 and 506 IPC; and whether the case of the appellant is fit for discharge u/s.227 CrPC, 1973. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.376(2)(f), 417 and 506 – 1973 – s.227 – The case of respondent no.2/complainant was that during the pendency of the litigation arising out of a marital discord with her ex-husband, she came in contact with the appellant – Appellant, who was also separated from his wife, had assured the complainant
Issue for Consideration Whether recovery of the amount extended to stenographer Grade-I and Personal Assistant, while they were in service, justified after their retirement and without affording any opportunity of hearing. Headnotes† Service law – Grant of financial benefit – Recovery of excess drawn arrears after superannuation of the employees, if permissible – Appellants- stenographer Grade-I granted certain financial benefit on grant of promotion/appointment retrospectively upon upgradation – Appellants superannuated
Issue for Consideration Whether the limitation to file an appeal under Section 60(5) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code starts from the date of pronouncement of the order or from the date when the order is communicated to the parties. Headnotes† Insolvency – Section 60(5) – Period of limitation to run from the date of pronouncement of the order by the Adjudicating Authority – Interpretation of procedural rules cannot be used to defeat the substantive objective of legislation – Strict construction of time limits in the
Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to the sustainability of the order passed by the High Court rejecting the petition of the appellants seeking quashing of complaint against them. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.482 – Quashing of complaint – to bank account of the firm run by his brother-accused no.5 and certain sum given in cash to appellants-accused, for the car dealership business – However, the complainant not made partner despite assurance and huge investment made by him – Complainant and his companions went to the