Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the courts below, in the attending facts and circumstances, justified in dismissing the application for summoning additional accused. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.319 – Power to proceed against other persons of offence – Summoning of additional accused – FIR by the appellant- brother that his sister was shot by her husband based on the information received by him from his niece, aged nine years that her father shot her mother – Two statements of the victim recorded u/s.161 CrPC,
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether services provided by the respondent no.1 in the form of leasing of residential premises as hostel to students and working professionals falls within the ambit of Entry 13 of the Notification No. 9/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017, no.1 entitled to the exemption on services, renting of residential dwelling for use as a residence under Entry 13 of the Notification. Headnotes† Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 – Entry 13 of the Notification No. 9/2017-Integrated Tax (Rate) dated 28.06.2017 –
766 : 2025 INSC 1416 Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Limited v. The Kangra Central Cooperative Bank Pensioner Welfare Association (Regd.) Issue for Consideration Whether�a�second�Special�Leave�Petition�maintainable�when�the� first�was�dismissed/withdrawn�with� liberty�only� to�seek�review� in� the�High�Court,� and�without� specific�permission� to� return� to� the�
Issue for Consideration In the instant petition, the petitioner sought for the modification of the timeline for scribe registration in the Civil Services Examination conducted by Union Public Service Commission and for permitting the use of laptops equipped with Screen Reader Software along with papers for eligible candidates. Headnotes† Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 – Constitution of India – Arts.14, 19, 21 – Enforcing the rights of persons with disabilities to equal opportunity – Measure of inclusivity – Modification of the timeline
Issue for Consideration Whether the CESTAT fell in error while coming to the conclusion that the conversion of grey fabrics to cotton fabrics did not include an integral process of stentering undertaken with the aid of power of the Exemption Notification was available to Unit No.1. Whether the Order-in-Original rightly considers the entire process of manufacture which is conversion of grey fabrics into cotton fabrics for being cleared by Unit No.1 as one and fastening liability on it. Headnotes† Central
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether goods given to a daughter at the time of her marriage by her father, or to the bridegroom, can be by application of law, returned to the daughter-appellant given that their marriage had ended in divorce. Headnotes† Muslim on Divorce) Act, 1986 – s.3 – Mahr or other properties of Muslim woman to be given to her at the time of divorce – Goods given to a daughter at the time of her marriage by her father, or to the bridegroom, if by application of law, can be returned to the daughter-appellant
Issue for Consideration Whether a mandamus should be issued to the State Government to acquire the subject property in accordance with s.14(1) of the Maharashtra Slum Areas (Improvement, Clearance and Redevelopment) Act, 1971 keeping in mind the order dated 26.02.2015 (2015 order) passed by the Rehabilitation Authority (SRA); whether the appellant is entitled to full Occupation Certificate for the final sale building in the slum scheme upon handing over the portion of land admeasuring 2700 sq. mts. meant for Recreational Ground (RG) identified as the dark green portion; whether the
Issue for Consideration The Revision Petition filed by the Appellant-accused against the order dismissing the discharge application filed by the Appellant in FIR No.50/2020 dated 19.03.2020 lodged with police station Bidhannagar North, was dismissed by the High Court. Whether there for proceeding against the Appellant- accused for the offences alleged in the FIR. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.341, 354C, 506 – The complainant, an alleged tenant of A, one of the co-owners of the property filed a complaint/FIR u/ss.341, 354C, 506 of IPC – It was
Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court was justified in granting bail by overlooking the statutory presumption u/s.113B of the Evidence Act in a case where the death occurred within four months of marriage following dowry demands. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.498A, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 – ss. 3 and 4 – Evidence Act, 1872 – s.113 – Allegation that victim-deceased was subjected to cruelty and harassment by respondent no.1/husband and his family members on the pretext that the dowry given was insufficient – On the day of
Issue for Consideration Whether the registered sale deed dated 28.06.2004 executed in favour of the original applicant constitutes a fraudulent transfer u/s.53 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, and consequently, whether the attachment before judgment ordered in O.S. No.684 of 2004 could validly operate against the property in question. Headnotes† Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order XXXVIII Rules 5-10; Order XXI Rule 58 – Amendment Act 104 of 1976 – Effect of the amended Rule 58 – Transfer of Property Act, 1882
Issue for Consideration (i) Whether after the enactment of the Amendment Act, 2015, the court within whose local jurisdiction the drawee bank is situated, has the jurisdiction to try a complaint u/s.138; (ii) whether after the enactment of the Amendment Act, 2015, a complaint u/s.138 of be transferred to the court within whose local jurisdiction the drawee bank is situated, if the recording of evidence u/s.145 has already commenced in the said court. Headnotes† Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – s.446 – Supreme Court Rules, 2013 – Or. XXXIX
Issue for Consideration Whether the High Court possessed the jurisdiction to review or recall its earlier order passed u/s.11(6) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, and whether the exercise of such power whether a valid and subsisting arbitration agreement existed between the parties within the meaning of s.7 of the A&C Act, and whether clause 25 of the contract satisfies the statutory requirements of a binding arbitration clause; whether the joint application filed by both parties, seeking
Issue for Consideration Issue pertains to the claim of the Respondent no.1 for appointment on compassionate ground. Headnotes† Service Law – Compassionate appointments – Humanitarian purpose – Consideration for a lower post in lieu the qualifications of the higher post – Respondent no.1’s father, a peon, died in harness – Respondent no.1 was sanctioned appointment on compassionate ground to a Class-III post, Assistant Grade-III subject to clearing the Computer Proficiency Certification Test (CPCT)
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether, as done by the High Court in the impugned order, parity with the co-accused persons can be the sole reason for granting bail. Headnotes† Bail – Grant of – Parity as a ground for granting bail – Disputes between the threatened the victim, and one of the co-accused instigated the other co-accused, who shot the victim – Bail application by the respondent – Rejected by the trial court, however, granted by the High Court only on the ground of parity with one of the co-accused –
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the termination of the Development Agreement and Supplementary Agreements by respondent no. 1 Society prior to the initiation of the and effective in law; whether the Development Agreement and the Supplementary Agreements constitute “assets” or “property” of the corporate debtor so as to attract the protection of moratorium u/s.14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code; whether the High Court justified
Issue for Consideration The instant appeal assails the conviction of the accused-appellants u/ss.120B, 302/149 of the Penal Code, 1860, whether sustainable in facts as well as in law. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.120B, 302/149 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – s.351 – Victim-deceased was allegedly assaulted by three individuals after an altercation over payment of sweets – Victim succumbed to the injuries – Fardbeyan (Exh.1) was recorded – Later, PW-3 gave a written report (Exh.5) stating that
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the intervention of this Court is warranted as regards the proposed translocation of hundreds of deer from the A.N. Jha Deer Park in Hauz Khas, New Delhi, to different wildlife sanctuaries/Tiger reserves Rajasthan as well as within New Delhi sought to be undertaken ostensibly on the pretext of overcrowding alleged to be in contravention of the established norms; and whether any corrective or consequential directions, required. Headnotes† Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 – Protection
Issue for Consideration Accused-appellant facing trial for offence of murder was earlier granted bail subject to stringent conditions. Accused-appellant condition that requires him to remain confined to the city of Kolkata after his release on bail. Whereas, brother of victim seeks cancellation of bail granted to the accused. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – s.302 r/w. s.120-B – Arms Act, 1959 – s.25/27 – Code of
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether Ord. XXI r.90(3) CPC would have an overriding effect barring the judgment debtors from seeking invalidation of the sale when they could have but never raised the ground, that the entire property need not have been sold to satisfy the decree, at before the last sale proclamation. Headnotes† Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Ord. XXI r.90 – Application to set aside sale on ground of irregularity or fraud – Ord. XXI r.90(3), if would have an overriding effect barring the judgment debtors from seeking invalidation of
Issue for Consideration Whether an application u/s.7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, verified on 26.07.2023 but supported by an affidavit deposed to on 17.07.2023 would be liable to be rejected at the threshold on that ground. Headnotes† Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India (Insolvency Resolution Process for Corporate Persons) Regulations, 2016 – r.28 – National Company Law Tribunal rejected the application filed by the respondent-bank u/s.7 of the IBC against the appellant- company on 18.06.2024 as the defects