KEYWORDS:-Maintenance to Muslim wife- DATE:- 23-04-1985- whether the law of Islam is capable of evolution ? AIR 1985 SC 945 : (1985) 3 SCR 844 : (1985) 2 SCC 556 : (1985) 1 […]
Death of plaintiff shall not abate suit if decreed in a defamation suit, legal heirs shall be substituted- SC
MELEPURATH SANKUNNI EZHUTHASSAN Vs. THEKITTIL GEOPALANKUTTY NAIR – The position, however, is different where a suit for defamation has resulted in a decree in favour of the plaintiff because in such a case the cause of action has merged in the decree and the decretal debt forms part of his estate and the appeal from the decree by the defendant becomes a question of benefit or detriment to the estate of the plaintiff-respondent which his legal representatives is entitled to uphold and defend and is, therefore, entitled to be substituted in place of the deceased respondent-plaintiff. [ Supreme Court- 29-11-1985]
NINTH SCHEDULE (Article 31B) 1. The Bihar Land Reforms Act, 1950 (Bihar Act XXX of 1950). 2. The Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 (Bombay Act LXVII of 1948). 3. The […]
Whereas suit was filed for recognition of right of easement and later on amendment sought in the plaint for introducing essential ingredients of easement – The amendment, if allowed at the appellate […]
School violence has been a persistent problem in the United States. For example, on January 29, 1979, a 16-year-old opened fire on Grover Cleveland Elementary School in San Diego, CA. She killed two adults […]
Whether refusal to have sexual intercourse for a long time without sufficient reason itself amounts to mental cruelty? SC Yes
Samar Ghosh vs Jaya Ghosh
Provisions as to disqualification on ground of defection
A retrospective operation is, therefore, not to be given to a statute so as to impair existing right or obligation, otherwise than as regards matter of procedure .unless that effect cannot be avoided without doing violence to the language of the enactment. Before applying a statute retrospectively the Court has to be satisfied that the statute is in fact retrospective. The presumption against retrospective operation is strong in .cases in which the statute, if operated retrospectively, would prejudicially affect vested rights or the illegality of the past transactions, or impair contracts, or impose new duty or attach new disability in respect of past transactions or consideration already passed.
What is a substantial question of law would certainly depend upon facts and circumstances of every case and if a question of law had been settled by the highest court of the country that question however important and difficult it may have been regarded in the past and however large may be its effect on any of the parties, would not be regarded as substantial question of law. In Raghunath Prasad v. Deputy Commissioner of Partabgarh  54 LA. 126 the Judicial Committee observed that a question of law to be considered a “substantial question of law” need not be one of general importance and it could be a substantial question “as between the parties”.
JT 2011 (13) SC 319 : (2011) 13 SCALE 75 (SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) Shiv Shankar Singh Versus State of Bihar and Another (Before : B.S. Chauhan and T.S. Thakur, JJ.) Criminal […]
The penal laws in India are primarily based upon certain fundamental procedural values, which are right to fair trial and presumption of innocence. A person is presumed to be innocent till proven […]
26. There is no power of review with the Criminal Court after judgment has been rendered. The High Court can alter or review its judgment before it is signed. When an order […]
SCHEDULED BANKS UNDER RBI ACT Ajodhia Bank, Fyzabad, Allahabad Bank. American Express Banking Corp. American Express International Banking Corporation. Andhra Bank, Masulipatam. Bank of America, National Association. Bank of Baroda Bank of […]
Conversion of land in Delhi (SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) Union of India and others Versus Dev Raj Gupta and others (Before: P. B. Sawant And K. Ramaswamy, JJ.) Civil Appeal No. 1996 […]
According to Section 433(A) that a prisoner who has been sentenced to death and whose death sentence has been commuted into one of imprisonment for life and persons who have been sentenced to imprisonment for life for an offence for which death is one of the punishments provided by law should undergo actual imprisonment of 14 years in Jail. We are referring to Section 433(A) in this judgment only for a limited purpose of showing that after the introduction of this section, the life convicts falling within the purview of Section 433(A) has to undergo the mandatory minimum 14 years of actual imprisonment. It may be mentioned at this juncture that no one has got a vested right to claim premature release on the ground that he has suffered the minimum actual imprisonment as prescribed under Section 433(A) because a sentence of ‘imprisonment for life’ is incarceration until death, that is, for the remaining period of convicted prison’s actual life
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
(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 […]
We are of the view that aforesaid directions are not consistent with the law laid down by the larger Bench in Mathew (supra). In Mathew (supra), the direction for consulting the opinion of another doctor before proceeding with criminal investigation was confined only in cases of criminal complaint and not in respect of cases before the Consumer Forum. The reason why the larger Bench in Mathew (supra) did not equate the two is obvious in view of the jurisprudential and conceptual difference between cases of negligence in civil and criminal matter. This has been elaborately discussed in Mathew (supra). This distinction has been accepted in the judgment of this Court in Malay Kumar Ganguly (supra) (See paras 133 and 180 at pages 274 and 284 of the report).
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