Home » Supreme Court Weekly Digest December 5 – 11, 2021

Supreme Court Weekly Digest December 5 – 11, 2021

  • Weekly

Caste Certificate – Validity of – Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee. Rushikesh Bharat Garud v. State of Maharashtra, JT 2021 (12) SC 110 : 2021 (14) SCALE 763 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/1001/

Civil Law – Registration of documents is always subject to adjudication of rights of the parties by the competent civil court. Amudhavali v. P. Rukumani, JT 2021 (12) SC 174 : 2021 (14) SCALE 626 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/802/

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – O.II R.2 – the question of title was directly in issue in the previous proceedings, and merely because it resulted in findings adverse, it could not escape being bound by those findings. Sri Lankappa v. Karnataka Industrial Corporation, JT 2021 (12) SC 152 : 2021 (14) SCALE 701 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/805/

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Order XXI Rules 97 & 101 – Resistance or obstruction to possession of immovable property – Question to be determined – As per Order XXI Rule 101 CPC, all questions including questions relating to right, title or interest in the property arising between the parties to a proceeding on an application under Order XXI rule 97 or rule 99 CPC and relevant to the adjudication of the application shall have to be determined by the Court dealing with the application. For that a separate suit is not required to be filed. Order XXI Rule 97 is with respect to resistance/obstruction to possession of immovable property. Bangalore Development Authority v. N. Nanjappa, 2021 (14) SCALE 594 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/786/

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 427 – Whether the subsequent sentence should run concurrently or consecutively – Principles of Law. Mohd Zahid v. State through NCB, JT 2021 (12) SC 186 : 2021 (14) SCALE 637 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/795/

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 482 – Merely because some of the persons who might have committed the offences are not charge-sheeted, cannot be a ground to quash the proceedings against the accused charge-sheeted after having found prima facie case against him after investigation. Suvarna Cooperative Bank Ltd. v. State of Karnataka, JT 2021 (12) SC 131 : 2021 (14) SCALE 718 https://caselaw.in/p=415

Constitution of India – Revised Guidelines on Merchanting Trade Transactions (MTT Guidelines) – Clause 2(iii) of the 2020 MTT Guidelines was a proportionate measure in ensuring the availability of sufficient domestic stock of PPE products. The measure was validly enacted, in pursuance of legitimate state interest and did not disproportionately impact the fundamental rights of the appellant. Hence, Clause 2(iii) passes muster under Articles 14, 19(1)(g) and 21. Akshay N. Patel v. Reserve Bank of India, 2021 (14) SCALE 562 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/782/

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 – Application for condonation of delay in filing written statement/reply were pending on 4th March, 2020 – Prospective operation of the Judgment – this issue ought to be decided by a larger Bench. Bhasin Infotech And Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. Neema Agarwal, 2021 (14) Scale 656 https://caselaw.in/p=429

Consumer Protection Act, 2019 – Section 51 – Appeal to National Commission – Pre-deposit of 50 percent of amount as ordered by the State Commission under second proviso to Section 51 of the Consumer Protection Act, 2019 is mandatory for entertainment of an appeal by the National Commission. Manohar Infrastructure and Constructions Pvt. Ltd. v. Sanjeev Kumar Sharma, JT 2021 (12) SC 178 : 2021 (14) SCALE 646 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/789/

Electricity Act, 2003 – Captive consumers / captive users, who form a separate class other than the consumers defined under Section 2(15) of the Act, 2003, shall not be subjected to and/or liable to pay additional surcharge leviable under Section 42(4) of the Act, 2003. Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd. v. JSW Steel Ltd., 2021 (14) SCALE 765 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/841/

Evidence Law – Minor discrepancies in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses are not of such a nature which would persuade the Court to disbelieve their testimonies – Witnesses are rustic villagers and some inconsistencies in their depositions are bound to be there. Bhagchandra v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2021 (14) SCALE 749 https://caselaw.in/p=412

Finance Act, 1994 – Service Tax – Credit Card services – Statutory Framework for Service Tax – Who is Liable to Pay Service Tax and File Return – Effect of Service Tax being a Value Added Tax. Commissioner of GST and Central Excise v. Citibank N.A., https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/829/

Insurance Law – Mediclaim Policy – The object of seeking a mediclaim policy is to seek indemnification in respect of a sudden illness or sickness which is not expected or imminent and which may occur overseas. If the insured suffers a sudden sickness or ailment which is not expressly excluded under the policy, a duty is cast on the insurer to indemnify the appellant for the expenses incurred thereunder. Manmohan Nanda v. United India Assurance Co. Ltd., 2021 (14) Scale 599 https://caselaw.in/p=10704

Insurance Law – Unless  the  unilateral  mistake  about  the  terms of  a  contract  is  so  serious  as  to  adversely  undermine  the  entire  bargain,  it  does not  result  in  automatic  avoidance  of  a  contract. Jacob Punnen v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/832/

Labour Law – The initiation of criminal proceedings against an employee or not initiating the proceedings has no bearing to prove misconduct in departmental proceedings. Uttar Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. Gajadhar Nath, JT 2021 (12) SC 158 : 2021 (14) SCALE 675 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/821/

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 – Fixation of market value in a Reference under Section 18(1) of the said Act necessarily involves some guesswork. However, the guesswork is required to be made by adopting one of the well-recognized methods, such as the comparison method or capitalization method. Soman v. Inland Waterways Authority of India, JT 2021 (12) SC 112 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/838/

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – In order to curtail the pendency before the High Courts and for speedy disposal of the appeals concerning payment of compensation to the victims of road accident, it would be just and proper to consider constituting ‘Motor Vehicle Appellate Tribunals’ by amending Section 173 of the Act so that the appeals challenging 8 the award of a Tribunal could be filed before the Appellate Tribunal so constituted. Rasmita Biswal v. Divisional Manager, National Insurance Company Ltd., JT 2021 (12)  SC 147 : 2021 (14) SCALE 670 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/824/

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act, 1985 – Non-­production of contraband in the court – If seizure is otherwise proved and the samples taken from and out of contraband material were kept intact; the report of forensic expert shows potency, nature and quality of contraband material, essential ingredients constituting offence are made out and the non-­production of contraband in the Court is not fatal. Kallu Khan v. State of Rajasthan, https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/865/

Negotiable Instruments Act 1881 – Legal aspect relating to the presumption arising in law when a cheque is issued. K.S. Ranganatha v. Vittal Shetty, JT 2021 (12) SC 165 : 2021 (14) SCALE 685 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/817/

Penal Code 1860 – Section 34 – Common Intention – Acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention – Ambit of the words “in furtherance of the common intention of all”.  Gulab v. State of Uttar Pradesh, JT 2021 (12) SC 134 : 2021 (14) SCALE 721 https://caselaw.in/p=410

Penal Code, 1860 – S. 302 – Arms Act, 1959 – S. 27 & 30 – Bail Application. Laxman Prasad Pandey v. State of Uttar Pradesh, https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/868/

Penal Code, 1860 – Section 120B – Criminal Conspiracy – A few bits here and a few bits there on which prosecution relies, cannot be held to be adequate for connecting the accused with the commission of crime of criminal conspiracy. Even the alleged confessional statements of the co-accused, in absence of other acceptable corroborative evidence, is not safe to convict the accused. Parveen @ Sonu v. State of Haryana, 2021 (14) SCALE 630 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/799/

Penal Code, 1860 – Section 304­B – the mother–­in–­law of the deceased had been ascribed any specific role in making the demand and inflicting cruelty – a sweeping statement has been made that the husband and in-­laws of the deceased had inflicted cruelty or it has been stated that the husband and his mother had done so, without specifying their roles – same would be insufficient to hold the mother–­in–­law guilty. Kuljit Singh v. State of Punjab, 2021 (14) SCALE 681 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/811/

Pleadings – Writ Petition – the parties have to disclose the details of all legal proceedings and litigations either past or present concerning any part of the subject-matter of dispute which is within their knowledge. In case, according to the parties to the dispute, no legal proceedings or court litigations was or is pending, they have to mandatorily state so in their pleadings in order to resolve the dispute between the parties in accordance with law. K. Jayaram v. Bangalore Development Authority, 2021 (14) SCALE 663 https://caselaw.in/p=416

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Allegations against the accused are very serious including hatching a criminal conspiracy in allotment of plots in the discretionary quota arbitrarily and to their own family members / relatives. There are specific allegations with respect to huge loss caused to the public exchequer, as according to the prosecution the plots were allotted at throw away prices. All these aspects are required to be considered at the stage of trial and not while considering the application u/s. 482 Cr.P.C. State of Odisha v. Pratima Mohanty, https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/862/

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Ss. 13 (2) r/w. 13(1)(e) – Penal Code, 1860 – Ss. 120B & 109 – Criminal Conspiracy – The material to implicate someone as a conspirator acting in concert with a public servant, alleged to have committed misconduct, under the PCA, or amassed assets disproportionate to a public servant’s known sources of income, has to be on firm ground. State by S.P. through the SPE CBI v. Uttamchand Bohra, JT 2021 (12) SC  117 : 2021 (14) SCALE 734 https://caselaw.in/p=414

Seniority – three to four years would be a reasonable period to challenge a seniority list and also that any challenge beyond the aforesaid period would require satisfactory explanation. Ajay Kumar Shukla v. Arvind Rai, https://caselaw.in/p=418

Service Law – the employees who were appointed on ad­hoc basis and qualified typing test at the later stage, in absence of the scheme of rules in determining seniority, at least could not have a right to march over such of the employees who were appointed on substantive basis after going through the process of selection for holding regular selection and their right of seniority in no manner be relegated qua such of the ad­hoc employees who qualified typing test at a later stage and regularized subsequently from the date of initial appointment. Shyam Sunder Oberoi v. District and Session Judge Tis Hazari Court, 2021 (14) SCALE 696 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/814/

Service Law – the tribunal entirely misdirected itself in making an inquiry whether vacancies had arisen in June 2017, with promotion of some Medical Officers. As the department explained, those promotions could not automatically result in vacancies, having regard to the fact that an excess number of Medical Officers were on the rolls. Furthermore, the tribunal should not have inquired into the matter, once it was reported that all vacancies that could be reported, had been reported- as is evident from the reply filed by the department, as well as the tabular chart in it. Director of Indian System of Medicine v. Susmi C.T., 2021 (14) SCALE 709 https://pdf.caselaw.in/sc/2021/12/808/

Succession Act, 1925 – S. 63 – Evidence Act, 1872 – S. 68 – Legal principles with regard to the proof of a will. Murthy v. C. Saradambal, https://caselaw.in/p=388

Click to rate this post!
[Total: 0 Average: 0]