(1) JASWINDER SINGH (DEAD) THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE Vs. NAVJOT SINGH SIDHU AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 19-05-2022 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 323 - Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt - Road Rage Case - The hand can also be a weapon by itself where say a boxer, a wrestler or a cricketer or an extremely physically fit person inflicts the same. This may be understood where a blow may be given either by a physically fit person or to a more aged person. Insofar as the injury caused is concerned, this Court has accepted the plea of a single blow by hand being given on the head of the deceased. Penal
Penal
(2) MOHAMMAD AZAM KHAN Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 19-05-2022 Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 142 - Grant of Interim Bail - The petitioner approached this Court, stating therein that though in 84 FIRs he had already been granted bail, insofar as 3 FIRs are concerned, though the applications for bail were filed, they were either adjourned or heard and no orders were passed - Taking into consideration the delay in implication of the petitioner in FIR No. 70 of 2020 and the nature of the allegations made therein, This Court is of the considered view tha
(3) DELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. SUNIL KHATRI AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 19-05-2022 The challenge in the present appeal is to an order dated 22.12.2014 passed by the High Court of Delhi whereby an application filed in the pending writ petition was allowed, holding that the acquisition proceedings stand lapsed in view of Section 24(2) of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013
(4) THE EMPLOYEES STATE INSURANCE CORPORATION AND OTHERS Vs. M/S KEY DEE COLD STORAGE PVT. LTD. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 19-05-2022 The challenge in this appeal is to the judgment and order dated 1.12.2016 in the RFA No. 82/2006 whereby the Guwahati High Court has allowed the appeal of the respondent and set aside the order dated 28.4.2006 passed in favour of the appellants by the Employees Insurance Court. Under the impugned judgment, it has been held that Village Tarapur, where the factory of the respondent is located, falls outside the municipal limits of Silchar and is therefore not covered under the notification dated 2
(5) C.C., C.E. & S.T. – BANGALORE (ADJUDICATION) ETC. Vs. M/S NORTHERN OPERATING SYSTEMS PRIVATE LIMITED [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 19-05-2022 The assessee was registered with the revenue, as a service provider under the categories of "Manpower Recruitment Agency Service", "Business Auxiliary Service", "Commercial Training and Coaching Service", "TTSS", "Telecommunication and Legal Consultancy Service" etc., under the Finance Act, 1994 (hereafter "the Act"). Following an audit of the records by the revenue's officials, proceedings were initiated against the assessee alleging non-payment of service tax concerning agreements entered into
(6) CANARA BANK Vs. G S JAYARAMA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 19-05-2022 Notice was issued by the Permanent Lok Adalat to the respondent on 10 January 2013, which was allegedly not claimed by the respondent. Hence, on 12 March 2013, the Permanent Lok Adalat held the service to be complete in respect of the respondent and adjourned the case to 6 June 2013 for reporting of settlement. Thereafter, allegedly on 22 August 2013, a counsel filed a memo of appearance on behalf of the respondent and matter was adjourned to allow filing of vakalatnama and objections on behalf
(7) IN RE: EXPEDITIOUS TRIAL OF CASES UNDER SECTION 138 OF N.I ACT 1881[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 19-05-2022 This court by its subsequent order dated 31.03.2021 had required High Courts to file status reports indicating compliance with the directions contained in the judgment and as to whether rules were framed appropriately in line with the judgment. Similarly, the necessary amendments to the Police Manuals etc. had to be carried out. As on date, all High Courts except the Patna High Court have complied with the directions and proposed the amended Rules. In many states, amended rules have even been no
(8) YAMUNA EXPRESSWAY INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY ETC. Vs. SHAKUNTLA EDUCATION AND WELFARE SOCIETY AND OTHERS. ETC. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 19-05-2022 This batch of appeals challenge the judgment and order dated 28th May, 2020, passed by the Allahabad High Court in various writ petitions filed by the allottees of plots of land. The writ petitions were filed challenging the demand of additional amount made by the appellant herein-Yamuna Expressway Industrial Development Authority (hereinafter referred to as "YEIDA") in respect of plots of land leased out to the allottees;
(9) RASHTREEYA SIKSHANA SAMITHI TRUST ETC. Vs. COMMITTEE FOR FIXATION OF FEE STRUCTURE OF PRIVATE PROFESSIONAL COLLEGES AND OTHERS ETC. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 19-05-2022 Orders passed by Fee Fixation Committee for undergraduate medical courses for the academic years 2004-2005, 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 were challenged by the students and private medical colleges in the High Court. The High Court allowed the writ petitions filed by the students and dismissed the writ petitions filed by the management of private medical colleges. Notice was issued by this Court in the Special Leave Petition on 09.07.2010. On 16.08.2010, the judgment of the High Court was stayed subj
(10) MUNNI DEVI ALIAS NATHI DEVI (DEAD) THR LRS. AND OTHERS Vs. RAJENDRA ALIAS LALLU LAL (DEAD) THR LRS. AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-05-2022 Hindu Law - Hindu woman's right to maintenance is a tangible right against the property which flows from the spiritual relationship between the husband and the wife - Such right was recognized and enjoined under the Shastric Hindu Law, long before the passing of the 1937 and the 1946 Acts.
(11) BBR (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED Vs. S.P. SINGLA CONSTRUCTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-05-2022 Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 - Section 20 - Place of arbitration - Appointment of a new arbitrator who holds the arbitration proceedings at a different location would not change the jurisdictional ‘seat’ already fixed by the earlier or first arbitrator - The place of arbitration in such an event should be treated as a venue where arbitration proceedings are held.
(12) RUSHIBHAI JAGDISHBHAI PATHAK Vs. BHAVNAGAR MUNICIPAL CORPORATION [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-05-2022 The appellants, who were initially appointed to the post of 'Junior Clerk' on an ad hoc basis, were made permanent on the post of 'Data Entry Operator' in the Computer Department of the respondent-Corporation in the pay-scale of Rs. 4,000-6,000/- on different dates.
(13) MAHA P. AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-05-2022 The National Testing Agency invited online applications for NEET-UG 2021-22 from 1 June 2021 to 21 June 2021. The last date for submitting applications was extended to 24 June 2021. A notification was issued on 25 June 2021 granting an opportunity to candidates to make corrections to their applications. The candidates were allowed to rectify defects from 11 September 2021 to 17 September 2021. Two extensions for the submission of documents were given. The Government issued orders permitting the
(14) MADHYA PRADESH HIGH COURT ADVOCATES BAR ASSOCIATION AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-05-2022 Through this writ petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners who are the Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates Bar Association and the District Bar Association, both with their registered offices at Jabalpur, have raised a challenge to the vires of the National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as "the NGT Act"), and pray for the following reliefs
(15) RAJPAL SINGH Vs. SAROJ (DECEASED) THROUGH LRS AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-05-2022 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 29.09.2016 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Second Appeal No. 4594 of 2009 by which the High Court has allowed the said appeal preferred by the original plaintiff and has quashed and set aside the judgment and order passed by the First Appellate Court decreeing the suit for specific performance and restoring the judgment and decree passed by the learned Trial Court dismissing the suit for
(16) BALWAN SINGH (DEAD) BY LRS. ETC. ETC. Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-05-2022 Interlocutory Application No. 33721/2022 in Civil Appeals arising from Diary No. 392/2022 is allowed in terms of prayer (a) and the names of the proforma respondents are ordered to be deleted from the array of parties, at the risk and responsibility of the appellants.
(17) K. SRINIVASAPPA AND OTHERS Vs. M. MALLAMMA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-05-2022 Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order 23 Rule 3 - Compromise decree - No appeal would lie against a compromise decree, the only option available to a party seeking to avoid such a decree would be to challenge the consent decree before the Court that passed the same and to prove that the agreement forming the basis for the decree was invalid - It is therefore imperative that a party seeking to avoid the terms of a consent decree has to establish, before the Court that passed the same, that the agree
(18) A.G. PERARIVALAN Vs. STATE, THROUGH SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CBI/SIT/MMDA, CHENNAI, TAMIL NADU AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-05-2022 Constitution of India, 1950 - Article 161 - It is well-settled that the advice of the State Cabinet is binding on the Governor in matters relating to commutation / remission of sentences under Article 161.
(19) INDIAN OVERSEAS BANK Vs. M/S RCM INFRASTRUCTURE LTD. AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-05-2022 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - Section 14(1)(c) - Section 14(1)(c) of the IBC, which have overriding effect over any other law, any action to foreclose, recover or enforce any security interest created by the Corporate Debtor in respect of its property including any action under the SARFAESI Act is prohibited - Bank could not have continued the proceedings under the SARFAESI Act once the Corporate Insolvency Resolution (CIRP) was initiated and the moratorium was ordered.
(20) NEW OKHLA INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Vs. ANAND SONBHADRA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 17-05-2022 Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 - "Operational Creditor" - Appellant is a Local Authority and the rental and premium in question, claimed by the appellant, constitutes amount due to the appellant under a law - The words 'arising under any law', may not be the same as amounts being made recoverable under a law - Even under the IBC Regulations apart from claims by financial creditors and operational creditors, claims can be made by other creditors - However, there are, undoubtedly, certain ad