KEYWORDS:- Rejection of Plaint AIR 2004 SC 1801 : (2004) 1 SCR 1004 : (2004) 3 SCC 137 : JT 2004 (2) Suppl. SC 515 : (2004) 2 SCALE 82 (SUPREME COURT […]
KEYWORDS:-The principle of fair trial- Retrial- DATE:-12-04-2004 “A somewhat an unusual mode in contract to the lapse committed by non-examining victims and injured witnesses adopted by the investigating agency and the prosecutor […]
KEYWORDS: The record of the case- Framing of charge- DATE:- 29-11-2004 AIR 2005 SC 359 : (2004) 6 Suppl. SCR 460 : (2005) 1 SCC 568 : JT 2004 (10) SC 303 : […]
KEYWORDS:- MOTOR VEHICLE CLAIM- DATE:-05-01-2004- If a vehicle at the time of accident was driven by a person having a learner’s licence, the insurance companies would be liable to satisfy the decree. […]
KEYWORDS-Restraining Legal Proceeding- 19-04-2004- Undoubtedly when the parties have agreed on a particular forum, the Courts will enforce sauch agreement. This is not because of a lack or ouster of its own […]
Keywords:- Compensation Concept that King can do no wrong has been abandoned in England itself and the State is now held responsible for tortuous act of its servants. Ghaziabad Development Authority Versus Balbir Singh […]
27-01-2004 Appellant suffered mental agony in taking delivery of a defective car after having paid for a brand new car and in taking the car again and again to the dealer for […]
The Judicial Committee of the Privy Council – In their Decision on Facts the Committee did not expressly address the issue of whether Dr Schulze Allen’s infraction was a criminal conviction. But they must have decided that it was. For otherwise they would have had no power to direct the removal of his name from the register under section 16(1)(a) of the Act.
Whether a statute authorizing a blood draw from an unconscious motorist provides an exception to the Fourth Amendment warrant requirement.
In case of inordinate delay in lodging FIR, Court may reject the case if delay is not satisfactorily explained-SC
CRIMINAL – Sections 365 and 352 of the Indian Penal Code – Normally, the Court may reject the case of the prosecution in case of inordinate delay in lodging the first information report because of the possibility of concoction of evidence by the prosecution. However, if the delay is satisfactorily explained, the Court will decide the matter on merits without giving much importance to such delay. The Court is duty bound to determine whether the explanation afforded is plausible enough given the facts and circumstances of the case. The delay may be condoned if the complainant appears to be reliable and without any motive for implicating the accused falsely – SUPREME COURT OF INDIA [ March 29, 2019 ]
[Canada] S.C. 2004, c. 2 Assented to 2004-03-29 An Act respecting assisted human reproduction and related research Her Majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate and House of Commons […]
All `murder’ is `culpable homicide’ but not vice-versa. Speaking generally, `culpable homicide’ sans ‘special characteristics of murder is culpable homicide not amounting to murder’. For the purpose of fixing punishment, proportionate to the gravity of the generic offence, the IPC practically recognizes three degrees of culpable homicide. The first is, what may be called, `culpable homicide of the first degree’. This is the gravest form of culpable homicide, which is defined in Section 300 as `murder’.
Witness Protection Scheme,2018 :The New Paradigm Why this Scheme? “Witnesses are eyes and ears of the Court” In a society governed by a Rule of Law, it is imperative to ensure that investigation, […]
Supreme Court recommend the Union of India to seriously consider bringing an amendment in the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 to incorporate irretrievable breakdown of marriage as a ground for the grant of […]
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
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 […]
It is one of the fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is presumed to be innocent till he is proved to be guilty. It is equally well settled that suspicion […]
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 […]
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).
A decree obtained by fraud cannot be used as res judicata and the same can be challenged by a separate Suit-SC
RAM CHANDRA SINGH VS
SAVITRI DEVI AND OTHERS – 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.