Issue for Consideration Whether the appellant, a body corporate, while availing services of the Bank to deposit its surplus funds in an interest bearing term deposit, such as a Fixed Deposit Receipt (FDR), could be considered a consumer as defined in Protection Act, 1986; whether the nature of allegations made in the complaint were such that they took the claim outside the purview of proceedings under the 1986 Act. Headnotes† Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – s.2(1)(d) – “consumer” – NCDRC dismissed the
Issue for Consideration The principal issue which falls for consideration is with regard to the assessment of extent of disability for the purpose of computing loss of earning capacity, and more particularly, the soundness of the High Court’s determination of functional disability at 30% as by the Medical Board and affirmed by the MACT. Whether the appellant-claimant is entitled to any further enhancement of compensation over and above the amount awarded by the MACT. Headnotes† Motor Vehicle Accident claim – Enhancement of compensation – Motorcycle of appellant
Issue for Consideration Issue arose as regards the propriety of the exercise of power by the Trial Court u/s.319 Cr.PC and the justifiability of the imprimatur granted thereto by the Court below. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.319 – Exercise of power under a mini trial – Trial Court and High Court refused to allow the Appellant- complainant’s application to summon additional accused filed u/s.319 holding that the evidence of the complainant was inconsistent with the FIR and the documentary record, and that the statements of PW-6
Issue for Consideration Whether the appellant is guilty of the offences u/ss.302 and 498A of IPC and whether the sentence (two years of simple imprisonment along with fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default in payment of the same, with a further three months of simple imprisonment u/s.498A IPC and to him is justified. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302 and 498A – Allegation against appellant that he poured kerosene on his wife, lit a candle and threw it upon her – Victim died due to severe burn injuries – FIR registered u/ss.302 and 498A – The
Issue for Consideration Matter pertained to acts of hooliganism by the Barabanki Bar Members by attacking advocate representing petitioners in toll plaza case. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Article 32 – Conduct of law professionals – Acts of hooliganism – for toll collection duty at the Toll Plaza on Lucknow-Sultanpur Highway, in District Barabanki, Uttar Pradesh – Advocate-complainant allegedly refused to pay requisite toll charges while passing through the toll plaza, and a verbal spat and scuffle ensued between the advocate and the staff
Issue for Consideration (i) Whether there is a valid undertaking by way of a guarantee executed by Defendant No.1 and whether Defendant No.1 can absolve from its liability; (ii) Whether the reasons adopted by the Division Bench of the High Court Court. Headnotes† Contract Act, 1872 – ss.126, 127, 128, 137, 138, 140, 141 – Plaintiff-Goltens Dubai carried out extensive repair works on the vessel Master Panos at request of the owner – Defendant No.1 had entered into a Charter Party Agreement dated 09.03.1998 with
Issue for Consideration Impugned order challenged by the appellant-convict contending that as he was not made aware of absence of the counsel engaged by him to prosecute the appeal before the Division Bench and as the Division Bench proceeded to appoint the amicus without his knowledge, he may be which he had raised in the memorandum of appeal that was filed in the High Court to secure an order of setting aside the conviction u/s.304 Part II, IPC and the sentence of 5 years rigorous imprisonment and to allow the appeal by recording an acquittal. Headnotes† Legal Aid –
Issue for Consideration The present writ petition has been filed by the Mizo Chief Council, through its President, on behalf of the tribal chieftains. The primary grievance of the petitioner is that the respondents seized/acquired the lands of these chieftains The following questions fall for consideration: (i) Whether the writ petition is hit by delay and laches; (ii) Whether any fundamental rights of the Mizo Chiefs were violated. Headnotes† Assam Lushai Hills District (Acquisition of Chief’s Rights) Act, 1954 –
Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to dismissal of police constable without conducting departmental inquiry, holding that it was not reasonably practicable to hold an inquiry. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Art.311(2) second proviso clause (b) – Dismissal, removal or in civil capacities under the Union or a State – Exercise of the power u/Art.311 – Registration of FIR against the appellant- constable posted in the Special Cell for the offence of robbery and thereafter arrested and taken in custody – While he was in custody the order of
Issue for Consideration Whether the Air Force Group Insurance Society (AFGIS) could be treated as “State” or “other authority” within the meaning of Art.12 of the Constitution of India. Headnotes† Constitution of India – Art.12 – The appellants are scales of the workers were sought to be revised in accordance with the Sixth Pay Commission of the Government of India – Writ petitions – High Court held that that the Air Force Group Insurance Society could not be treated as “State” or “other authority” within
Issue for Consideration Challenge to the judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court setting aside the order of the Single Judge by way of which the Single Judge had dismissed the writ petition of respondent wherein he had challenged the rejection of his candidature by the screening post of constable (driver) in the police force on the ground that he had criminal antecedents. Headnotes† Service Law – Recruitment in Police Force – M.P. Police Regulations – Rejection of candidature by screening committee for appointment to the post of constable (driver)
Issue for Consideration Dispute pertains to inter-se seniority of the Assistant Engineers (Electrical)-directly recruited and internally selected candidates, and what is to be taken as the date of the appointment of the direct recruits. Headnotes† Tamil Nadu Electricity Board Regn 10(9), 87, 97 – Seniority – Inter-se seniority of the Assistant Engineers (Electrical)-directly recruited and internally selected candidates – Date of the appointment of direct recruits – Seniority of direct recruit to be counted from the first date of their
Issue for Consideration Whether the arbitral award deserves to be set aside on the ground of lack of jurisdiction due to improper constitution of the arbitral tribunal or patent illegality. Headnotes† Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – ss.16, 34, 37, 4 Tribunal – Interpretation of arbitration clause – Waiver – The Appellant-MCGM had floated a tender and invited proposals – The stipulated duration for completion of the work under the Agreement was 72 months and the contract was designed to be implemented in stages
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in acquitting the accused despite the alleged dying declarations, motive and testimony of witnesses relied upon by the prosecution to establish the prosecution case. Headnotes† Evidence Act, 1872 – s.32 – Shanty in which the old couple were residing gutted in a fire, killing the old man immediately and his wife died two days later in a hospital – Prosecution case that the younger son and daughter-in-law of the couple, due to previous land disputes, torched the hut with the intention to
Issue for Consideration Whether the clarificatory letter dated 14.10.2004 can have any overriding or superseding effect over the Office Memorandum dated 08.09.1993, which expressly lays down the criteria for exclusion from the benefit of reservation for Other Backward Classes the creamy layer namely, the socially advanced persons of sections among the Socially and Educationally Backward Classes; whether there can be hostile discrimination between employees of the Government and those working in Public or Private Sector Undertakings, when both occupy posts of the
Issue for Consideration Whether the conviction of the appellant-P based solely on circumstantial evidence as convicted by the trial court and upheld by the High Court could be sustained in law. Whether the incriminating evidence are proved by cogent and admissible evidence, forming an unbroken towards the guilt of the appellant. Headnotes† Penal Code, 1860 – ss.302/34, 201 – Bhartatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – ss.103(1)/3(5) – Circumstantial evidence – Recoveries – Appellant-P along with one L, committed murder of wife of L –
Issue for Consideration Whether the absence of a uniform policy governing compensation in cases of death or injury following administration of COVID-19 vaccination results in violation of right to life protected under the Constitution; if yes, can this Court direct the respondents to frame a – Art.21 – Right to Life – Directions by Supreme Court – For formulation of no-fault compensation framework to address serious adverse events following immunisation arising in the context of COVID-19 vaccination: Held: Constitution does not view the right to life solely
Issue for Consideration Bereft of proof of the conspiracy theory and finding absence of the demand of bribe, the conviction of both the accused (A1 and A2) was overturned by the High Court. Headnotes† Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – s.7 – Penal Code, 1860 – s.120B Tax Officer-A2 made a demand of Rs.5 lakhs purportedly on behalf of appellant, Assessing Officer-A1 – PW1 approached CBI – PW1 is alleged to have informed A2 that he had in his possession only Rs.2 lakhs – Trap was laid – PW1 then went to the office room of A1, where
Issue for Consideration Issue arose whether the reduction of share capital u/s.66 of the Companies Act, 2013, and the consequent forced exit of minority shareholders, was arbitrary and unfair. Headnotes† Companies Act, 2013 – s.66 – Reduction of share capital – company, held a fraction of 1.09% of shares – Respondent no.1 decided to reduce its share capital u/s.66, by cancelling 28,457,840 equity shares held by the minority shareholders and paying them an exit price of Rs.163.25 per share which was subsequently raised to Rs.196.80 per share
Issue for Consideration Whether Sugarcane Growers Cooperative Societies, Bajpur and Gadarpur, situated in Udham Singh Nagar, District of Uttarakhand could be treated as Multi-State Cooperative Societies by operation of s.103 of Multi-State despite their prior reorganisation and confinement of their area of operations to a single State, under the statutory framework governing State reorganisation. Headnotes† Uttar Pradesh Reorganisation Act, 2000 – ss.87, 93 – Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 –