KEYWORDS:-POSSESSION DATE:-12-02-1968 AIR 1968 SC 1165 : (1968) 3 SCR 163 (SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) Nair Service Society Ltd. Appellant Versus K. C. Alexander and others Respondent (Before : M. Hidayatullah, S. M. Sikri And K. S. Hegde, JJ.) Civil Appeal No 1632 of 1966, Decided on : 12-02-1968. Evidence Act, 1872—Section 110—Presumption of title—Possession… Read More Nair Service Society Ltd.Versus K. C. Alexander and others[ALL SC 1968 FEBRUARY]
KEYWORDS:-DEFAMATION – COMMON LAW PRINCIPLES-Libellous communication- DATE:-13-11-1968 AIR 1970 SC 1876 : (1969) 2 SCR 692 : (1970) CriLJ SC 1651 (SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) M. C. Verghese Appellant Versus T. J. Ponnan and another Respondent (Before : J. C. Shah, V. Ramaswami And A. N. Grover, JJ.) Criminal Appeal No. 46 of 1967, Decided… Read More M. C. Verghese Versus T. J. Ponnan and another[ALL SC 1968 NOVEMBER]
(2010) 96 AIC 241 : (2011) AIR(SC)Civil 53 : (2010) 6 ALLMR(SC) 949 : (2011) 2 AllWC 1592 : (2010) 83 ALR 709 : (2010) 3 ARC 632 : (2011) 2 ICC 684 : (2011) 1 RCR(Rent) 190 : (2011) 2 RecentApexJudgments(RAJ) 98 : (2011) 1 RentLR 315 : (2010) 11 SCALE 302 : (2010)… Read More It is settled legal position that court is to respond only to issue agitated before it and in case at the time of hearing issue was not taken the court cannot deal with it-SC
ACT NO. 38 OF 1974. [1st September, 1974.] An Act to provide, in the interests of national economic development, for the compulsory deposit of additional emoluments and for the framing of a scheme in relation thereto, and for Matters connected therewith or incidental thereto. BE it enacted by Parliament in the Twenty-fifth Year of the… Read More THE COMPULSORY DEPOSIT SCHEME (INCOME-TAX PAYERS) ACT, 1974
The apex court’s five-judge Constitution bench was unanimous in striking down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code dealing with the offence of adultery, holding it as manifestly arbitrary, archaic and violative of the rights to equality and equal opportunity to women… Read More Joseph Shine Vs. Union of India [ALL SC 2018 SEPTEMBER]
there is a custom of pre-emption co-extensive with Mahomedan Law… Read More MUNNI LAL Vs. BISHWANATH PRASAD AND OTHERS [All SC 1967 SEPTEMBER]
The judiciary in India also possesses inherent power, specially u/s 151 CPC, to recall its judgment or order if it is obtained by fraud” on Court, In the case of fraud on a party to the suit or proceedings, the Court may direct the affected party to file a separate suit for setting aside the decree obtained by fraud. Inherent powers are powers, which are resident in all Courts, especially of superior jurisdiction. These powers spring not from legislation but from the nature and the constitution of the tribunals or Courts themselves so as to enable them to maintain their dignity, secure obedience to its process and rules, protect its officers from indignity and wrong and to punish unseemly behavior. This power is necessary for the orderly administration of the Court’s business.… Read More A decree obtained by fraud cannot be used as a res judicata and the same can be challenged by a separate Suit-SC
The expression ‘tenant’ includes ‘a tenant continuing in possession after the termination of the tenancy in his favour’. It thus includes, by express provision, a quondam tenant whose nexus with the property is continuance in possession. The fact that a decree or any other process extinguishes the tenancy under the general law of real property does not terminate the status of a tenant under the Act having regard to the carefully drawn inclusive clause. Even here, we may mention by way of contrast that Subudhi’s case (supra) related to a statute where the definition in Section 2(5) of that Act expressly included “any person against whom a suit for ejectment is pending in a court of competent jurisdiction” and more pertinent to the point specially excluded “a person against whom a decree or order for eviction has been made by such a court.… Read More MANI SUBRAT JAIN Vs. RAJA RAM VOHRA [ALL SC 1979 NOVEMBER]
Bharat Ratna and Padma awards are not “titles” within Article 18 of the Constitution of India. These awards can be given to the citizens for exceptional and distinguished services rendered in art, literature, science and other fields. These awards are national in character and only those who have achieved distinction at national level can be considered for these awards. The question to be considered, however, is whether the purpose of instituting these awards is being achieved and these are being conferred on the deserving persons. The history and experience shows that, in the beginning, these awards were given to a limited number of persons but in the recent years there have been floodgates of awards for the persons who are well known, lesser known and even unknown. The Padma awards have been conferred on businessmen and industrialists who have multiplied their own wealth and have hardly helped the growth of national interest. Persons with little or no contribution in any field can be seen masquerading as Padma awardees. The existing procedure for selection of candidates is wholly vague and is open to abuse at the whims and fancies of the persons in authority. Conferment of Padma awards without any firm guidelines and fool-proof method of selection is bound to breed nepotism, favoritism, patronage and even corruption.… Read More BALAJI RAGHAVAN AND S.P. ANAND Vs. UNION OF INDIA [ ALL SC 1995 DECEMBER]
September 6, 2018:-SECTION 377of IPC-Homosexuality-It is declared that insofar as Section 377 criminalises consensual sexual acts of adults (i.e. persons above the age of 18 years who are competent to consent) in private, is violative of Articles 14, 15, 19, and 21 of the Constitution. It is, however, clarified that such consent must be free consent,… Read More Navtej Singh Johar & Ors. Vs. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Law and Justice [ALL SC 2018 September]
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.10972 OF 2013 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.15436 of 2009) Suresh Kumar Koushal & Anr vs Naz Foundation & Ors Decided on: 11 December 2013 Bench: G.S. Singhvi, Sudhansu Jyoti Mukhopadhaya JUDGMENT G.S. SINGHVI, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. These appeals are directed against order… Read More Suresh Kumar Koushal & Anr vs Naz Foundation & Ors [ALL SC 2013 DECEMBER]
In order to ensure smooth, consistent, uniform and unvarying functioning of the National Commission, the State Commissions and the District Forums, we deem it appropriate to direct the National Commission to frame comprehensive rules regarding appearances of the agents, representatives, registered organizations and/or non-advocates appearing before the National Commission, the State Commissions and the District Forums governing their qualifications, conduct and ethical behaviour of agents/non-advocates/representatives, registered organizations and/or agents appearing before the consumer forums.… Read More C. Venkatachalam Versus Ajitkumar C. Shah and Others [ALL SC 2011 AUGUST]
When right of private defence is not available ?
… Read More Lakshmi Tiwari and another Versus The State of Bihar [ALL SC 1972 JANUARY]
An irrevocable letter of credit has a definite implication. It is a mechanism of great importance in international trade. Any interference with that mechanism is bound to have serious repercussions on the international trade of this country. Except under very exceptional circumstances, the Courts should not interfere with that mechanism. There is this to be… Read More Scope of an irrevocable letter of credit explained by Supreme Court
Inaction in every case does not lead to an inference of implied consent or acquiescence … Read More What is Acquiescence and Waiver ?