(621) MAHENDRA NATH SORAL AND ANOTHER Vs. RAVINDRA NATH SORAL AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-05-2024 Partition Suit - The dispute involves partition of properties left by Late ‘R’ with the main contention over roof rights of a property in Kota and another in Jaipur - The primary issue is the valuation of roof rights for further construction and the equal distribution of property among co-sharers - The appellants argue that the valuation report failed to assess the value of roof rights, which would affect the overall property valuation and entitlement of co-sharers - The respondents maintain tha India Law Library Docid # 1604135
(622) DR. RANBEER BOSE AND ANOTHER Vs. ANITA DAS AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-05-2024 West Bengal Municipal(Building) Rules, 2007 - Rule 50 - Open spaces for building in areas other than municipalities in hill areas – The appellants challenge the High Court of Calcutta's order regarding a contempt petition related to their residential property construction and its compliance with Rule 50 of Rules, 2007 - The appellants argue that the writ petition was a private matter and should not have been entertained by the High Court - They also claim that municipal authorities are unfairly India Law Library Docid # 1604136
(623) SMITA SHRIVASTAVA Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS ETC. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-05-2024 Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Raj Avam Gram Swaraj Adhiniyam, 1993 - Sections 70(2) and 95(1) – Madhya Pradesh Panchayat Samvida Shala Shikshak(Employment and Conditions of Contract) Rules, 2005 – Rule 7A - Appointment – Denial of - Appellant was denied appointment as Samvida Shala Shikshak Grade-III despite passing the selection exam and the High Court's ruling in her favor - The main issue was the State Government's refusal to appoint the appellant based on amended rules, which were applied retrosp India Law Library Docid # 1604137
(624) KANIHYA @ KANHI (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. Vs. SUKHI RAM AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-05-2024 Pre-emption Suit - The case revolves around a dispute over land in Haryana, where a pre-emption suit was filed and decreed, requiring a deposit of Rs. 9,214 minus 1/5th already deposited. The appellants deposited Rs. 7,600 instead of Rs. 7,614 due to a calculation error. The main issue was whether the appellants should suffer for a minor deficit due to a bona fide error and if the court can extend the time for deposit in such cases. The appellants argued that the error was not intentional and ev India Law Library Docid # 1604138
(625) CHANDER BHAN (D) THROUGH LR SHER SINGH Vs. MUKHTIAR SINGH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-05-2024 Transfer of Property Act, 1882- Sections 41 and 52 – Sale deed executed during the pendency of a suit for permanent injunction is invalid under the principle of lis pendens - The court held that the doctrine of lis pendens applies to maintain status quo and prevent multiple proceedings by parties in different forums - The court further clarified that even if Section 52 of the Transfer of Property Act is not applicable in its strict sense, the principles of lis pendens, which are based on justice India Law Library Docid # 1604139
(626) ALAUDDIN AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 03-05-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 read with 149 – Murder – Acquittal - The court found that the prosecution failed to provide reliable evidence linking the appellants to the crime, and the testimony of eyewitnesses was inconsistent and contradictory - The court also noted that the theory of "last seen together" was not sufficient to establish guilt, as the deceased was seen in the company of other individuals after being seen with the accused - The court set aside the convictions of the appel India Law Library Docid # 1604140
(627) SUPREME COURT BAR ASSOCIATION Vs. B.D. KAUSHIK [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-05-2024 Supreme Court Bar Association election process — The case involves the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA) and B.D. Kaushik, with various applications and interventions related to SCBA's internal regulations and election processes — The main issues include eligibility conditions for SCBA office bearers, membership fee revisions, tenure of the Executive Committee, and reservation for women in the Executive Committee — The court directed the SCBA to invite suggestions for reforms, mandated reserv India Law Library Docid # 2417230
(628) R.K. MUNSHI Vs. UNION TERRITORY OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-05-2024 Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (House Rent Allowance and City Compensation Allowance) Rules, 1992 - Rule 6(h) – House Rent Allowance (HRA) - The appellant, a retired Inspector(Telecom) in Jammu and Kashmir Police, was charged with unauthorized House Rent Allowance (HRA) drawals and asked to repay Rs.3,96,814/-.- The main issue was whether the appellant was entitled to HRA while sharing government accommodation allotted to his retired father - The appellant argued that the quarter was allotted India Law Library Docid # 1604127
(629) SHANKAR AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-05-2024 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 319 and 482 - Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 302 – Issuing of the summons - The appeals concern a summoning order under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for the appellants to face trial for an offence under Section 302 IPC, based on a High Court decision dated 04.04.2023 - The main issue is the sufficiency of material against the appellants prompting the summoning order under Section 319 Cr.P.C - The appellants argue that they were incorrectly named in the FIR India Law Library Docid # 1604128
(630) CHAITRA NAGAMMANAVAR Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-05-2024 Karnataka State Universities Act, 2000 - Karnataka State Civil Services (Unfilled Vacancies Reserved For Persons Belonging to the SC’s and ST’s) (Special Recruitment) Rules, 2001 - Rule 6 – Appointment - The case revolves around a service dispute regarding the appointment to a Scheduled Tribes (ST) reserved post at Bangalore University - The appellant was appointed based on merit, while respondent no. 7 was within the preferential age bracket - The main issue is whether the 2001 Rules apply to t India Law Library Docid # 1604129
(631) MADHUSUDAN AND OTHERS Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 02-05-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 149, 302, 307 and 323 — Appeal against conviction related to a violent incident resulting in death and injuries —The appellants challenged the conviction based on inconsistencies in eyewitness accounts and the prosecution's failure to establish a common intention among the accused — The State argued for upholding the conviction, emphasizing eyewitness accounts and the trial court's findings — The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, leading to the acquittal of the India Law Library Docid # 1604205
(632) COMMISSIONER OF TRADE AND TAXES Vs. FEMC PRATIBHA JOINT VENTURE [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-05-2024 Delhi Value Added Tax Act, 2004 — Section 38(3) — The respondent, a joint venture, claimed refunds of excess tax credit for the 4th quarter of 2015-16 and the 1st quarter of 2017-18 — The refunds were not paid until 2022, leading to a writ petition —Whether the timeline for refund under Section 38(3) of the Delhi Value Added Tax Act must be mandatorily followed while recovering dues by adjusting them against the refund amount — The department argued that the timeline in Section 38(3) is only for India Law Library Docid # 2417231
(633) HANNA Vs. THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-05-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) — Sections 302 and 323, read with 149, 147 and 148 — Murder —The main issue was whether the appellants were guilty of the charges, considering the conflicting testimonies and alleged threats to witnesses —The appellants argued that key witnesses, including PW-1, were coerced by the police to give false testimonies — They highlighted inconsistencies and contradictions in the evidence presented by the prosecution —The State argued that PW-1's testimony should be considered c India Law Library Docid # 2417232
(634) UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Vs. DR. ASKET SINGH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-05-2024 Requisitioning and Acquisition of Immovable Property Act, 1952 — The respondents owned land acquired by the Ministry of Defence under the Act, 1952 — The acquisition notice was issued in 1964, but compensation was offered only in 1976, and the arbitration award was declared in 1998 —The main issue was the delay in offering compensation and whether solatium and interest should be awarded due to this delay —The High Court awarded solatium and interest due to the inordinate delay in compensation — India Law Library Docid # 2417233
(635) SHARIF AHMED AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-05-2024 Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) - Section 173(2) - The appeals concern the nature of chargesheets filed by the state/police in some jurisdictions, particularly when they lack sufficient details of facts constituting the offense or relevant evidence - The main issue is whether chargesheets are being filed without adequate details or evidence, often merely reproducing the complainant's details from the FIR, and whether this meets the legal requirements - The judgment discusses the legal posit India Law Library Docid # 1604124
(636) RAM BALAK SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-05-2024 Bihar Consolidation of Upholdings and Prevention of Fragmentation Act, 1956 – Section 37 - Bar of jurisdiction of Civil Courts - The dispute involves 0.32 decimal of land in Bihar, originally settled by ex-landlord ‘R’ to ‘M’, and then allegedly inherited by the plaintiff-appellant through adoption - The main issue is the possession and confirmation of the plaintiff's possession over the land, which was challenged by the State authorities claiming the land as state-owned pond land (jalkar) - The India Law Library Docid # 1604125
(637) DEEPENDRA YADAV AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 01-05-2024 Education Law - The case involves a service rule amendment by the State of Madhya Pradesh, impacting job aspirants - The amendment was later recalled, but not before affecting an ongoing recruitment process - The main issue was the application of the amended rule to the recruitment process, leading to legal challenges and the question of whether meritorious reservation category candidates should be treated as unreserved at the preliminary examination stage - The petitioners challenged the validi India Law Library Docid # 1604126
(638) MUNISH KUMAR GUPTA Vs. M/S MITTAL TRADING COMPANY [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 30-04-2024 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Section 138 — Penal Code, 1860 — Section 420 — The respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 alleging that the appellant issued a cheque dated 22.07.2010 to discharge a financial liability — The respondent later sought to amend the complaint to change the cheque date to 22.07.2012 —Whether the amendment to change the cheque date from 22.07.2010 to 22.07.2012 should be permitted —The appellant argued that the amendment should not be allowed as the original India Law Library Docid # 2417234
(639) AJAY ISHWAR GHUTE AND OTHERS Vs. MEHER K. PATEL AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 30-04-2024 Land Dispute - The case involves a dispute over land ownership and the construction of a compound wall, which was permitted by the High Court under police protection without considering the rights of affected third parties - The main issue is whether the High Court was justified in allowing the construction of the compound wall under police protection, and whether necessary parties were impleaded - The petitioners argued that the High Court's order was illegal due to non-joinder of necessary par India Law Library Docid # 1604117
(640) COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE BELAPUR Vs. JINDAL DRUGS LTD. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 30-04-2024 Central Excise Act, 1944 - Section 35L(1)(b) – qualification as 'manufacture' under the Act - The primary issue is whether the labeling activity constitutes 'manufacture' as per Note 3 to Chapter 18 of the Central Excise Tariff Act, thereby making respondent eligible for cenvat credit and rebate on exported goods - The revenue (petitioner) argued that the additional labeling done by Respondent did not amount to manufacture and hence, they were not entitled to the cenvat credit and rebate claims India Law Library Docid # 1604118