IV (2011) CLT 301 (SC)
Employees’ Provident Funds — Priority of payment of contributions over other debts — Overriding Preferential Payment — By virtue of non obstante clause contained in Section 529A(1) of Companies Act, statutory priority has been given to workmen’s dues and debts due to secured creditors over all other dues — Effect of amendment made in Companies Act is only to expand scope of dues of workmen and place them at par with debts due to secured creditors — There is no reason to interpret this amendment as giving priority to debts due to secured creditors over dues of PF payable by employer — Impugned judgment and order of Company Judge set aside.
IV (2011) CLT 301 (SC)
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. — Uphaar Cinema Tragedy:
Interpretation of Statutes — If two special enactments contain provisions which give overriding effect to provisions contained therein, then Court is required to consider purpose and policy underlying the two Acts and clear intendment conveyed by language of relevant provisions.
IV (2011) CLT 301 (SC)
Interpretation of Statutes — It is a well recognised rule of interpretation that every part of statute must be interpreted keeping in view context in which it appears and purpose of legislation.
IV (2011) CLT 257 (SC)
Education — Admission Procedure — Undergraduate course — Cut off marks — Computation of — Arbitrary and mala fide — Determination — Procedure for ranking by IIT -JEE has not been uniform throughout the years — There is gradual evolution in process of standardising ranking, leading to improvement and stabilisation of procedure.
IV (2011) CLT 249
Rejection of Plaint — If on meaningful reading of plaint, suit appears to be manifestly vexatious and meritless in not disclosing clear right to sue, Court should nip in the bud by rejecting the plaint under Order 7 Rule 11.
IV (2011) CLT 249 (SC)
Specific Performance of Contract — In a suit, evidence and proof of agreement must be absolutely clear and certain.
IV (2011) CLT 247 (SC)
Arbitration Law — Arbitral Award — Initiation of arbitral proceedings — Having received payment on preparation of final bill, without raising any objection, appellant could initiate arbitral proceedings.
IV (2011) CLT 247 (SC)
Arbitration Law — Arbitral Award — Initiation of arbitral proceedings — Having received payment on preparation of final bill, without raising any objection, appellant could initiate arbitral proceedings.
IV (2011) CLT 245 (SC)
Constitution of India, 1950 — Article 136 — Special Leave to Appeal — Discretion of this Court under Article 136 of Constitution is meant to further ends of justice — This Court has been using its discretion in appropriate cases when it is satisfied that exercise of jurisdiction by High Court or other Tribunals has not been on sound judicial principles.
IV (2011) CLT 245 (SC)
Precedent — Judicial discretion shall always be exercised “according to rules of reason and justice and not according to private opinion.
IV (2011) CLT 242 (SC)
Possession — Suit for declaration of ownership and possession of land, permanent injunction restraining AK from interfering in land in dispute — Compromise during pendency of suit — Suit decreed and mutation sanctioned in favour of appellant and respondent No. 1 — Compromise had become part of decree passed by Court of Sub-Judge, First Class.
IV (2011) CLT 242 (SC)
Public Document — Certified copy of public document is admissible in evidence without being proved by calling witness.
IV (2011) CLT 204 (SC)
Negligence — Compensation — Claim made for compensation in public law is for compensating the claimants for deprivation of life and personal liberty which has nothing to do with a claim in a private law claim in tort in ordinary Civil Court.
IV (2011) CLT 204 (SC)
R.V. Raveendran, J.— Uphaar Cinema Tragedy:
Negligence — Contributory — Death of 59 persons due to asphyxiation by inhaling noxious fumes/smoke — Compensation not proper to award damages against public authorities merely because there has been some inaction in performance of their statutory duties or because action taken by them is ultimately found to be without authority of law — Courts will not award damages unless there is malice or conscious abuse.
IV (2011) CLT 204 (SC)
K.S. Radhakrishnan, J. — Uphaar Cinema Tragedy:
Negligence — Sovereign immunity is not applicable to the cases of violation of fundamental rights.
IV (2011) CLT 190 (SC)
Estoppel — Any matter which might and ought to have been made ground of defence or attack in such former suit shall be deemed to have been a matter directly and substantially in issue in such latter suit — Civil Court cannot try the same issue once again between same parties or between parties under whom they were litigating.
IV (2011) CLT 187 (SC)
Arbitration Law — Award — Objections — Limitation — 30 days from date of service of notice of filing of award and not date of knowledge of filing of award.
IV (2011) CLT 177 (SC)
Arbitration Law — Arbitral Proceedings— It is the law governing the contract which would also be the law applicable to arbitral Tribunal itself.
IV (2011) CLT 177 (SC)
Distinction — ‘Proper Law’ of the contract and ‘Curial Law’ — Discussed.
IV (2011) CLT 156 (SC)
Contempt of Courts — Exercise of contempt jurisdiction — Courts are primarily concerned with enquiring whether contemnor is guilty of intentional and wilful violation of orders of Court, even to constitute civil contempt — Disobedience of Court orders by positive or active contribution or non-obedience by passive and dormant conduct leads to same result — Disobedience of orders of Court strikes at the very root of rule of law on which judicial system rests.
IV (2011) CLT 156 (SC)
Contempt of Courts — Inordinate delay of years in complying with orders of Court or directed stipulations within stipulated time — Viewed by this Court seriously and held to be Contempt of Court, as it undermines dignity of Court.
IV (2011) CLT 156 (SC)
Rule of Law — Foundation of democratic society — Judiciary is the guardian of rule of law.
IV (2011) CLT 150 (SC)
Arbitration Law — Award — Challenge against — Court does not sit in appeal over the award of Arbitral Tribunal by re-assessing or re-appreciating evidence — Award can only be challenged under grounds mentioned in Section 34(2) of Act — Finding of majority is that appellant did transaction in the name of second respondent and is liable along with second respondent — In absence of any ground under Section 34(2) of Act, it is not possible to re-examine facts to find out whether different decision can be arrived at.
IV (2010) CLT 247
ADVERSE POSSESSION — Ownership and Adverse Possession — Mutually Inconsistent — If they are in possession as owner no question of prescribing title by adverse possession arises.
IV (2010) CLT 325 (SC)
ALIENATION OF PROPERTY AFTER ATTACHMENT TO BE VOID — There is no question of determination or withdrawal of attachment, nor any question of ‘eclipse of attachment’ during the period when statutory stay under Debts Relief Act, nor any ‘revival’ of attachment thereafter.
IV (2010) CLT 325 (SC)
When Debts Relief Act indicated that attachment will continue during the period when execution proceedings were stayed, Executing Court could not make an order that attachment will continue only for six months.
IV (2010) CLT 366
AMENDMENT OF PLAINT — Claim of joint Copyright in respect of musical work along with defendant No. 1 used during course of sound recording — Claim barred by limitation and hit by Order 2 Rule 2, CPC on account of its not having been claimed in present suit — Proposed amendment, if allowed, would take away a vested right which has accrued to defendants on account of this relief having become barred by limitation.
IV (2010) CLT 366
Generally be allowed unless it would be unjust and result in prejudice to Opposite Party which cannot be compensated by cost or deprive him of a right which accrued to him with lapse of time.
IV (2010) CLT 220 (SC)
APPEAL — Right of appeal is a creation of Statute and it cannot be created by acquiescence of parties or by order of Court.
IV (2010) CLT 62
ARBITRATION LAW — Agreement — Petitioner cannot now pick out arbitration clause and seek to enforce it by suggesting that modification that it sought was to an altogether different clause of agreement.
IV (2010) CLT 9 (SC)
Arbitral Award — Mere fact that Arbitrator is of a rank lower than officer who rejected claim of subscriber would not invalidate arbitration or imputing bias to Arbitrator.
IV (2010) CLT 543 (SC)
Arbitration Agreement — Once existence of arbitration agreement itself is questioned by any party to proceeding initiated under Section 11 of Act, same will have to be decided by Chief Justice/designate as the case may be.
IV (2010) CLT 236 (SC)
Recovery of loan amount — Where letter of guarantee issued by guarantor, guarantees repayment of only principal sum and not payment of any interest, he could not be made liable for interest.
IV (2010) CLT 322
CINEMATOGRAPH — Certification of Films — ‘Public exhibition’ of cinematograph film — Once a film is made or produced in DVD or VCD or any other format and is made available or distributed to public or offered for sale to public, it will amount to publication of such film within meaning of Section 52A(2)(a) of Act.
IV (2010) CLT 322
Certification of Films — Two provisions, viz., Section 52A(2) of Copy Right Act and Section 5A of Cinematograph Act, although of different statutes, reinforce each other since they collectively deal with same ‘mischief’, viz., rampant piracy of certified films and circulation among public of films not certified fit for, unrestricted or restricted, public viewing.
IV (2010) CLT 248 (SC)
CIVIL PROCEDURE CODE — Examination of parties — Object of Order 10 Rule 2 is not to elicit admissions — Nor does it provide for or contemplate admissions.
IV (2010) CLT 248 (SC)
Examination of parties — Power to identify matters in controversy by examination of parties at pre-trial stage under Order 10 Rule 2, CPC is completely different from power exercised by Court under Section 165, Evidence Act to put any question it pleases in any form, to witness or party in order to discover or obtain proper proof of relevant facts, or power under Order 18 Rule 4, CPC to recall and examine any witness.
IV (2010) CLT 16 (SC)
COMPETITION ACT — Appeal — Directions passed by Commission for investigation in exercise of its powers under Section 26(1) of Act forming prima facie opinion would not be appealable in terms of Section 53A(1) of Act, except those expressly stated in Section 53A(1)(a).
IV (2010) CLT 275
COMPROMISE — Where parties enter into an agreement or arrangement by which requirement of having to prove Will is sought to be done away with, and such agreement is not consented to by all, Court should not, as a matter of public policy endorse application for compromise.
IV (2010) CLT 183 (SC)
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW — Court does not interfere under Article 136 of Constitution with interlocutory orders.
IV (2010) CLT 76 (SC)
Deprivation of Property — Art. 300A of Constitution rests on the doctrine of eminent domain and guarantees constitutional right against deprivation of property must be by authority of law.
IV (2010) CLT 308 (SC)
Right to Equality — Plea of negative equality cannot be raised under Art. 14.
IV (2010) CLT 525 (SC)
CONTEMPT OF COURT — Courts have to strictly construe provisions of Section 3(b) of Contempt of Courts Act in order to find person guilty of having committed contempt of Court.
IV (2010) CLT 142 (SC)
CONTRACT — Duress or Coercion — To frustrate a contract on ground of duress or coercion, there has to be definite pleadings which have to be substantiated normally by leading cogent and proper evidence.
IV (2010) CLT 322
COPYRIGHT — Penalty for contravention of Section 52A — ‘Public Exhibition’ — Effect of amendment in Copy Right Act impacting on Cinematograph Act — ‘Public exhibition’ both for purposes of Section 52A, Copy Right Act and Section 5A of Act is no longer restricted to exhibition in cinema hall.
IV (2010) CLT 517 (SC)
CUSTODY OF CHILD — Mutual settlement between parties cannot come in the way of well established principles.
175 (2010) DLT 212
‘DAMAGES’ — Is compensation for wrong suffered by claimant and loss incurred by him but this is subject to rule that claimant must take reasonable steps to avoid their avoidable accumulation.
175 (2010) DLT 322
‘Public Exhibition’ — Mere display of cover containing DVD not public exhibition — It will amount to offering for sale a DVD and VCD to public either for consideration or otherwise.
IV (2010) CLT 186 (SC)
DELAY AND LACHES — Writ petition filed after 16 years of date of award, without any explanation for delay — Court should be loathe to encourage stale litigation as the same might hinder projects of public importance.
IV (2010) CLT 407 (SC)
ELECTION LAW — Corrupt Practice — One of the important ingredients in proving offence of corrupt practice under Section 123(4) is that it has to be established that returned candidate believed statement that was published, to be an untrue statement.
IV (2010) CLT 344
EXECUTION — Petitioner cannot take advantage of his two names and stall execution proceedings.
IV (2010) CLT 1 (SC)
EQUITY — Where a party’s claim is not founded on valid grounds, party cannot claim equity.
IV (2010) CLT 219
EVIDENCE — Attestation of document as required by law — It shall not be used as evidence until at least one attesting witness called for purpose of proving its execution if there be an attesting witness alive, subject to process of Court and capable of giving evidence.
IV (2010) CLT 82
Recall of Witness — If not supporting petitioner/plaintiff, and very burden lies upon him, he need not be allowed to suffer any loss because of lapse on part of Advocate as some important aspects were failed to take note of at relevant time — Rules are meant for justice — Discretion exercised in interest of justice, subject to costs of Rs. 5,000 — Recall of witness cannot be utilized to re-open issues and/or to fill up gaps/lacunas.
IV (2010) CLT 537 (SC)
HINDU LAW — Till disruption of joint family status takes place, neither coparcener nor other heirs entitled to share in joint family property can claim with certainty exact share in that property.
IV (2010) CLT 276 (SC)
INTER-COUNTRY ADOPTIONS — CARA to constitute expert committee to facilitate references on the line constituted in present case to ensure that inter-country adoption are allowed only after full and proper satisfaction of all agencies.
IV (2010) CLT 16 (SC)
INTERPRETATION OF STATUTES — It is not necessary for Court to implant, or to exclude the words, or over emphasize language of provision where it is plain and simple.
IV (2010) CLT 438 (SC)
LAND ACQUISITION — “Local Authority” and “Person Interested” — Definition of expressions are inclusive and not exhaustive.
IV (2010) CLT 54 (SC)
Market value — Acquisition of adjoining lands — Determination of value in form of various awards with respect to acquisition of adjoining lands — These awards are important piece of evidence for arriving at market value of acquired land.
IV (2010) CLT 438 (SC)
“Person Interested” — DDA falls within definition of expressions “local authority, under Section 3(aa) and “person interested” under Section 3(b) of Land Acquisition Act — Failure of Land Acquisition Collector to issue notice to DDA and give an opportunity to it to adduce evidence for purpose of determining amount of compensation payable to landowners was fatal to award passed by him .
IV (2010) CLT 293 (SC)
LEASE DEED — Execution of tripartite deed — Stamp duty and registration charges — Registration of tripartite deed was mandatory as per provisions of Section 17(1)(d) of Registration Act r/w Section 107 of Transfer of Property Act.
IV (2010) CLT 205 (SC)
LEGAL MAXIM — “Cum duo inter se pugnantia reperiuntur in testamento ultimum ratum est” — In a Will if there are two provisions latter shall prevail over the earlier.
IV (2010) CLT 16 (SC)
Expressum facit cessare tacitum — Meaning of — Express mention of one thing implies exclusion of other.
IV (2010) CLT 133
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES — Suit against Dead Person — Substitution of legal representative and amendment of plaint — Application not maintainable — Suit against dead person was not maintainable and it was not open for Trial Court to permit substitution of his legal representatives.
IV (2010) CLT 1 (SC)
LEGALITY OF ORDER — If an order is bad in its inception, it does not get sanctified at a later stage — It would be beyond competence of any authority to validate such an order.
IV (2010) CLT 487 (SC)
LETTERS PATENT APPEAL — Arising out of an order passed by a Single Judge hearing a civil second appeal the Division Bench of the High Court would not re-appreciate the evidence to record a finding of fact.
IV (2010) CLT 308 (SC)
LICENCE — Mere licence does not create any estate or interest in property with which it is concerned — Normally a licence confers legality to an act, which would otherwise be unlawful.
IV (2010) CLT 224
MOHAMMEDAN LAW — Succession — All properties in the name of female belongs to her exclusively — There in no concept of jointness of nucleus or that property is purchased from joint nucleus of head of joint family.
IV (2010) CLT 230
PASSPORT — Divorce decree — Customary divorce is permissible in certain communities — Fresh passport cannot be refused on ground that divorce deed was not registered or authenticated by Court.
IV (2010) CLT 379
‘PENALTY’ — Meaning of expression — ‘Penalty’ is an elastic term but means sum of money which is promised to be paid but manifestly intended to be in excess of amount which would fully compensate other party for loss sustained in consequence of breach.
IV (2010) CLT 1 (SC)
PLEADINGS — Party has to plead the case and produce/adduce sufficient evidence to substantiate his submissions made in petition — In case pleadings are not complete, Court is under no obligation to entertain the pleas.
IV (2010) CLT 479 (SC)
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE — When there is a special law providing for Special Forums then recourse cannot be taken to general law.
IV (2010) CLT 192 (SC)
PRECEDENT — Coordinate Bench cannot comment upon discretion exercised or judgment rendered by another coordinate Bench of same Court — Rule of precedent is binding for the reason that there is a desire to secure uniformity and certainty in law.
IV (2010) CLT 468 (SC)
If a decree is found to be nullity, same could be challenged and interfered with at any subsequent stage, at execution stage or collateral proceeding — If particular Court lacks inherent jurisdiction in passing a decree or making an order, a decree or order by such Court would be without jurisdiction and same is non est and void ab initio.
IV (2010) CLT 192 (SC)
If a statute provides for approval of higher Authority, order cannot be given effect to unless it is approved and same remains inconsequential and unenforceable.
IV (2010) CLT 72 (SC)
No one can approbate and reprobate and anyone who has accepted with full knowledge or notice of facts, benefits under transaction which he might have rejected or contested, cannot question transaction or take upon inconsistent position qua same.
IV (2010) CLT 4
What is not provided by a statute which is complete code of itself, cannot be read in judgment of Supreme Court.
IV (2010) CLT 243 (SC)
‘PRICE’ — Remuneration of professional is in form of a ‘fee’ and it cannot be said that professional earns a ‘price’.
IV (2010) CLT 351 (SC)
PRINCIPLE OF LAW — Person who does not come to Court with clean hands not entitled to any relief before any Courts or judicial Forums.
IV (2010) CLT 492 (SC)
PRINCIPLE OF MARSHALLING — Said doctrine cannot be permitted to become a device for destructing sanctity of contract.
IV (2010) CLT 142 (SC)
PROMISSORY ESTOPPEL — Enforcement — Doctrine of promissory estoppel is not really based on principle of estoppel but is a doctrine evolved by equity in order to prevent injustice.
IV (2010) CLT 532 (SC)
PROPERTY — Registration should be made compulsory to reduce property litigation.
IV (2010) CLT 76
REJECTION OF PLAINT — Want of territorial jurisdiction is not a ground for rejection of plaint as delineated in Order 7 Rule 11, CPC.
IV (2010) CLT 372 (SC)
REVIEW — Criminal Proceedings — No review is permissible except on the ground of error apparent on the face of record.
IV (2010) CLT 423 (SC)
RES JUDICATA — Declaratory Decree would not operate as res judicata.
IV (2010) CLT 103
RIGHT TO INFORMATION — Freedom of an individual to have access to information cannot be projected to such an extent as to invade right of others — Though Section 6(2) of Act enables every individual to seek information without disclosing the purpose, information that can be furnished to him is subject to restrictions placed under Section 8 of Act — No exception can be taken to impugned orders.
IV (2010) CLT 147
Immunity to information pertaining to organizations set up by State Government — There is no immunity if information are sought for on allegations of corruption and human rights violation and which information can never be excluded from public purview.
IV (2010) CLT 305
Schools or institutions privately funded and which are not owned or controlled by Government cannot come within purview of ‘public authority’ — Public Information Officer cannot compel them to furnish information under Act.
IV (2010) CLT 269 (SC)
RULE OF LAW — In a system governed by rule of law, there is nothing like absolute or unbridled power exercisable at whims and fancies of repository of such power — There is nothing like power without any limits or constraints — First and foremost safeguard against arbitrary exercise of power is orders can be made only after due and proper application of mind.
IV (2010) CLT 1
SECOND APPEAL — Court in second appeal cannot re-appreciate evidence for upsetting findings recorded by Court below unless it is perverse or not based on evidence on record.
IV (2010) CLT 58 (SC)
SPECIFIC PERFORMANCE OF CONTRACT — If legal requirements for seeking specific performance of contract are made out, specific performance could be enforced even in absence of specific term for specific performance in contract.
IV (2010) CLT 283 (SC)
When plea of specific performance was not included in original suit, it could not be included after a period of 12 years.
IV (2010) CLT 454 (SC)
SPECIFIC RELIEF ACT, 1963 — Section 16(c) — Readiness and willingness to perform essential terms of contract — Absence of averment — Amendment of plaint to incorporate prayer for specific performance of agreement for re-conveyance would not advance case of plaintiff or appellants who succeeded him.
IV (2010) CLT 314
STAMP DUTY — In sufficient stamp duty on agreement deed — Does not affect validity of transaction embodied therein.
IV (2010) CLT 345
SUCCESSION — Will breaks natural line of succession to estate of deceased — Courts are required to examine the evidence adduced to support factum of its execution with great care and caution.
IV (2010) CLT 454 (SC)
TRANSFER OF PROPERTY — Mortgage by Conditional Sale — Condition embodied in document that purports to effect the sale — Absence of condition.
IV (2010) CLT 454 (SC)
TRANSFER OF PROPERTY ACT, 1882 — Section 58(e) — English Mortgage — Conditions not satisfied — First requirement that mortgagor must bind himself to re-pay mortgage money on certain date not fulfilled.
IV (2010) CLT 479 (SC)
WAKF — Dispute regarding — Wakf Property — Jurisdiction — Only Wakf Tribunal has jurisdiction in the matter and not Civil Court — Under Section 83(9) of Wakf Act, party who wishes to raise any dispute or matter relating to Wakf or Wakf property should first approach Tribunal before approaching High Court.
IV (2010) CLT 94
WILL — Active participation of propounder may not be a ground to disbelieve Will but one of the suspicious circumstances, where burden is heavier upon propounder to remove such suspicion
IV (2010) CLT 35
It should be proved that Testator signed in presence of Attesting Witness and Attesting Witness signed before Testator.
IV (2010) CLT 213
WRIT JURISDICTION — In spite of availability of alternative remedy, High Court may still exercise its writ jurisdiction where writ petitioner seeks enforcement of any of Fundamental Rights and where there is failure of principles of natural justice
IV (2010) CLT 492 (SC)
There is no bar for Division Bench which has jurisdiction to hear the appeal, to hear writ petition, when same is connected with main issue.
IV (2010) CLT 243
WRITTEN STATEMENT — No provision in Civil Procedure Code to enable Court to permit substitution of one written statement for another.
