Weekly Overview| Supreme Court Judgments: December 16 – December 20, 2024
1) NIA can investigate accused who commits non-scheduled offence having connection with scheduled offence
The Court held that the National Investigation Agency (NIA) can investigate the accused who commits a non-scheduled offence having a connection with a scheduled offence.
The Court held thus in a Special Leave Petition filed by the accused against the Order of the Punjab and Haryana High Court by which it cancelled the bail granted to him.
Cause Title- Ankush Vipan Kapoor v. National Investigation Agency (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 986)
Date of Judgment- December 16, 2024
Coram- Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh
2) 25 years imprisonment without remission would be “a just dessert”- SC commutes death sentence of convict in 4-year-old boy’s sexual assault & murder case
The Court commuted death sentence of a man who was convicted for sexual assault and murder of a four-year-old child.
The Court was deciding a Criminal Appeal filed by the convict against the Judgment of the Gujarat High Court by which it confirmed his conviction and sentence of death.
Cause Title- Sambhubhai Raisangbhai v. State of Gujarat (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 987)
Date of Judgment- December 17, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Aravind Kumar, and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
3) Post-award interest can be granted by Arbitrator on interest amount awarded
The Court reiterated that the post-award interest can be granted by an Arbitrator on the interest amount awarded.
The Court reiterated thus in a Civil Appeal preferred by North Delhi Municipal Corporation against the Order of the Delhi High Court by which it disposed of the pleas.
Cause Title- North Delhi Municipal Corporation v. M/s. S.A. Builders Ltd. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 988)
Date of Judgment- December 17, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
4) Construction put up in violation of approved building plan by local authorities cannot be encouraged: SC issues directions
The Court issued directions for the demolition of structures after observing that construction put up in violation of or deviation from the building plan approved by the local authority cannot be encouraged.
The Court dismissed Appeals challenging the demolition of unauthorised commercial constructions on a residential plot. It upheld the Allahabad High Court's 2014 judgment and directed the Appellants to vacate the premises within three months. It also ordered the respondent authorities to demolish the structures and initiate criminal and departmental action against the officials involved.
Cause Title- Rajendra Kumar Barjatya & Anr. v. U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 990)
Date of Judgment- December 17, 2024
Coram- Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan
5) Starting fresh round of litigation when objection regarding family settlement was rejected by all Courts is abuse of process of law: SC asks DM to take possession of surplus land
The Court held that once the entire objection regarding family settlement was rejected not only by all the Authorities but also by the Courts,then there was absolutely no occasion for starting a fresh round of litigation which was nothing less than an abuse of the process of law.
The Court was considering a matter pertaining to the Uttar Pradesh Imposition of Ceiling on Land Holdings Act, 1960 in the State of Uttar Pradesh vide which the land over and above a certain limit was to be declared surplus and was then to vest with the State.
Cause Title- State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. v. Suresh Chandra Tewari & Ors. (Neutral Citation:2024 INSC 989)
Date of Judgment- December 17, 2024
Coram- Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah
6) A synopsis cannot run into 128 pages ! Registry should have asked litigant to trim it down
The Court in its Order said that the Registry should have asked the litigant, who is not a trained lawyer, to trim down the synopsis after remarking that it cannot run into 128 pages.
The Court directed, “Let the Registrar (Judicial) take note of this, particularly the cases where litigants are allowed to appear in person.”
Cause Title- D v. State Of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 991)
Date of Judgment- December 17, 2024
Coram- Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah
7) NCDRC can't interfere with pure finding of fact arrived at by District & State Commissions while exercising revisional jurisdiction
The Court restored an Order of the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission granting relief to a consumer and held that the National Commission could not have interfered with pure finding of fact arrived at by the District and State Commissions while exercising revisional jurisdiction.
The Appeal before the Court was filed challenging the Order in a Revision Petition passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, which had allowed the respondent-Insurance Company’s appeal and reduced the amount of payable insurance.
Cause Title- Rajesh Kumar v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 993)
Date of Judgment- December 17, 2024
Coram- Justice Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Justice Sandeep Mehta
8) Calling explanation from Judicial Officer via judicial Order inappropriate; such explanation can be called only on administrative side
The Court observed that the direction of calling for an explanation from a Judicial Officer via Judicial Order is inappropriate and such an explanation can be called for only on the administrative side.
The Court observed thus in a Criminal Appeal preferred by a District and Sessions Judge of Rajasthan Judicial Service, seeking quashing of adverse directions issued against him.
Cause Title- Ayub Khan v. The State of Rajasthan (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 994)
Date of Judgment- December 17, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih
9) Long incarceration & unlikely likelihood of trial being completed in near future are grounds for Constitutional Courts to grant bail
The Court observed that long incarceration and unlikely likelihood of trial being completed in near future are grounds for Constitutional Courts to grant bail on violation of Article 21 of the Constitution.
The Court observed thus in a Criminal Appeal filed by the accused seeking bail during the pendency of trial after dismissal of his Bail Application by the Patna High Court.
Cause Title- Athar Parwez v. Union of India (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 995)
Date of Judgment- December 17, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih
10) In Appeal u/s.173 of Motor Vehicles Act, High Court has to decide all issues after appreciating entire evidence
The Court observed that, in an Appeal under Section 173 of Motor Vehicles Act, the High Court has to decide all the issues after appreciating the entire evidence. The Court was considering an appeal, filed by the claimants, assailing an order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court setting aside the award of the First Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal.
The MACT had, by the said award, allowed the claim of appellants, who are the wife and son of the deceased Chakradhar Dubey and awarded a compensation of Rs 50,41,289 against the respondents jointly and severally.
Cause Title- Geeta Dubey & Ors v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 998)
Date of Judgment- December 18, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
11) SC proposes certain suggestions to promote sustainable conservation of sacred groves & empower communities with their protection
The Court proposed certain suggestions to promote sustainable conservation of sacred groves and empower the communities associated with their protection.
The Court was dealing with an Interlocutory Application concerning the protection of the sacred groves or orans of the Rajasthan.
Cause Title- In Re: T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 997)
Date of Judgment- December 18, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice S.V.N. Bhatti, and Justice Sandeep Mehta
12) Unaccounted deposit of rice within the fold of public demand of State Govt: SC upholds District Collector’s jurisdiction to initiate recovery proceedings
The Court upheld a District Collector’s jurisdiction to initiate recovery proceedings while observing that the unaccounted deposit of rice with the Food Corporation of India is within the fold of public demand of the State Government.
The Court upheld the decision of the Division Bench of the Patna High Court, which held that the amounts sought to be recovered qualified as a ‘public demand’ under the Bihar and Orissa Public Demands Recovery Act, 1914 (the Act). The Bench upheld the validity of recovery proceedings initiated under the Act, against Pawapuri Rice Mills (Appellant). The Appellant had challenged recovery certificates issued for non-delivery of Custom Milled Rice (CMR) as per agreements executed for the procurement year 2011-12.
Cause Title- Pawapuri Rice Mills v. The Bihar State Food And Civil Supplies Corporation Ltd. & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 999)
Date of Judgment- December 18, 2024
Coram- Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice S.V.N. Bhatti
13) Pure coconut oil packaged & sold in small quantities would be classifiable as ‘edible oil’ under Central Excise Tariff Act
The Court observed that pure coconut oil packaged and sold in small quantities will be classifiable as ‘edible oil’ under the Central Excise Tariff Act.
The Court dismissed the Appeal filed by the Revenue, upholding that pure coconut oil sold in small quantities must be classified as ‘edible oil’ under Heading 1513 of Section III, Chapter 15, in the First Schedule of the Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, unless its packaging meets the criteria to qualify as a cosmetic product under Heading 3305 of Section VI, Chapter 33.
Cause Title- Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem v. M/s. Madhan Agro Industries (India) Private Ltd. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1002)
Date of Judgment- December 18, 2024
Coram- Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Sanjay Kumar, and Justice R. Mahadevan
14) Act of reading down provision must be undertaken only if it can keep operation of statute within purpose of Act & constitutionally valid
The Court emphasised that the act of reading down a provision, must be undertaken only if doing so can keep the operation of the statute “within the purpose of the Act and constitutionally valid.”
The Court emphasised thus in Civil Appeals preferred against the Judgment of the Allahabad High Court by which it disposed of a Writ Petition, two Special Appeals, and one Review Petition.
Cause Title- Allahabad University Etc. v. Geetanjali Tiwari (Pandey) & Ors. Etc. Etc. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1003)
Date of Judgment- December 18, 2024
Coram- Justice Dipankar Datta and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
15) Lok Adalat and Mediation are two distinct methods and cannot be equated
The Court observed that Lok Adalat and mediation are two distinct methods and cannot be equated. The Court discussed the scope of refund of Court fees after the settlement of a dispute under Section 89 of the CPC.
It was clarified that while Lok Adalat awards are equated to decrees under Section 21 of the Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987 (LSA Act), mediation settlements are different and governed solely by Section 89 of the CPC.
Cause Title- Sanjeevkumar Harakchand Kankariya v. Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1004)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol
16) Hindu Succession Act can’t apply to Scheduled Tribes: SC upholds Order granting share to female tribals by invoking principles of justice, equity & good conscience
The Court upheld the decision of the Chhattisgarh High Court granting share in the suit property to the daughters of a common ancestor of Sawara tribe, who died prior to the coming into force of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956.
The High Court had invoked the principles of justice, equity & good conscience. The Apex Court also made it clear that the Act details as to whom the legislation would apply and it clearly states that scheduled castes and tribes shall be outside its purview of application.
Cause Title- Tirith Kumar & Ors. v. Daduram & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1005)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar & Justice Sanjay Karol
17) What are essential requisites of a gift under Mohammedan law? Supreme Court discusses
The Court discussed the essential requisites of a 'gift' under the Mohammedan Law.
The Court dismissed an Appeal challenging the decisions of the Karnataka High Court on the validity of an alleged oral gift and the permissibility of partition under Mohammedan Law during the lifetime of the owner.
Cause Title- Mansoor Saheb (Dead) & Ors. v. Salima (D) By Lrs. & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1006)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol
18) Accused must not be subjected to re-investigation simply because it was less than satisfactory
The Court observed that, simply because the investigation was less than satisfactory, the accused should not be subjected to the same once more.
The Court observed thus in a Criminal Appeal filed against the Judgment of the Madras High Court by which it dismissed the Petition for quashing the case under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
Cause Title- P. Manikandan v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1007)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol
19) Each inhumane incident of degrading woman accused of witchcraft is a blot on Constitutional spirit: SC puts accused men on trial
The Court ordered that the men accused of degrading and humiliating an elderly woman in the name of witchcraft be put to trial and also held that such incidents are a blot on the constitutional spirit.
The Court referred to an essay of the English Philosopher John Stuart Mill on Subjection of Women wherein he writes “the legal subordination of one sex to another — is wrong in itself.”
Cause Title- Rajeev Kumar Upadhyay v. Srikant Upadhyay & ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1008)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar & Justice Sanjay Karol
20) There would be no res judicata in changed circumstances
The Court dismissed the Appeals that challenged the upholding of claims of the landlords and reiterated that there would be no res judicata in changed circumstances.
The Court was deciding Civil Appeals preferred against the Judgment of the Bombay High Court.
Cause Title- Chandrabhan Rupchand Dakale (D) by LR Shri Surajmal Chandrabhan Dakale (D) by LR Shri Rajesh. v. The State of Maharashtra & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1009)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Kumar
21) Meticulous consideration for presence or absence of clinching material is beyond Court's scope of power while considering question of discharge u/s 239 CrPC
The Court held that, meticulous consideration for presence or absence of clinching material is beyond the scope of power of the Court while considering the question of discharge under Section 239 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC). The Court held thus in a Criminal Appeal challenging the Judgment of the Orissa High Court in a Criminal Revision Petition.
Cause Title- The State of Orissa v. Pratima Behera (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1010)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol
22) Plea of alibi can be applied only if “elsewhere place” is far away from place of occurrence
The Court reiterated that the plea of alibi can be applied only if the 'elsewhere place' is far away from the place of occurrence.
The Court reiterated thus in a Criminal Appeal filed against the Judgment of the Chhattisgarh High Court by which it confirmed the conviction under Sections 300 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), punishable under Sections 302, 201, and 498A of IPC.
Cause Title- Ashok Verma v. The State of Chhattisgarh (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1011)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
23) Confession statement of co-accused by itself cannot be reason for accused’s implication in crime
The Court observed that the confession statement of the co-accused by itself cannot be the reason for the implication of the accused in the crime.
The Court observed thus in a Criminal Appeal filed against the Judgment of the Madras High Court by which the Application for discharge was dismissed.
Cause Title- Karan Talwar v. The State of Tamil Nadu (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1012)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Rajesh Bindal
24) Absence of specific averment that accused was in-charge of & responsible for conduct of company’s business: SC quashes cheque bounce cases
The Court quashed five criminal cases initiated against the accused under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 after finding no specific averment against him that he was in-charge of and responsible for conduct of the company’s business.
The Court was considering a set of appeals by special leave arising from a common judgment of the Delhi High Court dismissing the Criminal Miscellaneous Cases filed by the appellant under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking quashing of the proceedings and the summoning orders in five complaint cases instituted under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. All the complaints were filed by the same complainant viz., M/s Pinnacle Capital Solution Pvt. Ltd. (respondent No.2).
Cause Title- Ravi Dhingra v. State of Nct of Delhi & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1013)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Karol
25) Wife cannot seek equalisation of status with alimony granted to husband’s ex-wife
The Court held that a wife cannot seek an equalisation of status with the alimony granted to the husband’s ex-wife.
The Court dissolved the marriage between the husband and the wife, exercising its power under Article 142 of the Constitution. The Bench observed that the wife’s entitlement to maintenance has to be decided based on the factors applicable to her and does not depend on what the husband paid to his ex-wife or solely on his income.
Cause Title- R v. S (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1014)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Pankaj Mithal
26) Order of reinstatement inappropriate when officers remained absent from duties: SC asks authorities to accept 16-yr-old VRS application of U.P. doctors
The Court asked the State Government and the Health Department to accept the applications of voluntary retirement filed by the respondents-doctors who joined the service in the State of Uttar Pradesh in the 1980s and 90s. It also observed that the order of reinstatement would be inappropriate considering the conduct of the respondents of remaining absent from duties for a few years.
The Court was considering three appeals where the respondents who are doctors joined the service in the State of Uttar Pradesh. The respondents in the first, second and third appeals joined the service in the year 1994, 1989 and 1991 respectively. The respondents applied for voluntary retirement (VRS) in the years 2006 & 2008.
Cause Title- State Of U.P. & Ors. v. Sandeep Agarwal (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1015)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih
27) Denial of interest for period of delay in supplying paper book copy to insurance company counsel not justified: SC partly allows claimant’s appeal
The Court modified an Order of the Kerala High Court by directing payment of interest to the motor accident claimants for the period of delay in supplying the copy of the paper book to the insurance company. The Court noted that the claimants alone could not be held responsible for such default.
The appeal, before the Apex Court, arose out of the impugned judgment vide which the appeal filed by the appellants-claimants was partly accepted enhancing the compensation payable to them. The grievance raised by the appellants claimants was that the High Court had denied interest to them for the period between June 22, 2016 to July 13, 2023.
Cause Title- T.C. John @ Yohannan (Deceased) Through Lrs v. V.J. Antony and Others (Neutral Citation:2024 INSC 1016)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice J.K. Maheshwari and Justice Rajesh Bindal
28) Evolve mechanism to ensure that accused are produced before Trial Judge on every date & trial is not prolonged: SC directs Bombay HC Registrar, Home Secretary & Law Dept.
The Court directed the Registrar General of the Bombay High Court, Secretary, Home, State of Maharashtra and Secretary, Law and Justice, to sit together and evolve a mechanism to ensure that the accused are produced before the Trial Judge either physically or virtually on every date and the trial is not permitted to be prolonged on the ground of non-production of accused persons.
The Court was considering a bail matter pertaining to a case under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 where the accused was incarcerated for a period of approximately 5 years without even framing of charges.
Cause Title- Siddhant @ Sidharth Balu Taktode v. The State of Maharashtra And Another (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1017)
Date of Judgment- December 18, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai & Justice K.V. Viswanathan
29) Amendment to prospectus when admission process is underway created unfortunate situation: SC directs forfeiture of security fee for resigning from MD seat
The Court directed the forfeiture of the security fee paid by a candidate resigning from a ‘prestigious seat’ in M.D. (Endocrinology) from the Christian Medical College (CMC), a “highly reputed institution.” It modified the order of the Division Bench of the Madras High Court which had dismissed the Appeal filed by the Candidate (Appellant) challenging the invocation of a clause in the bond signed by him wherein he was asked to pay a penalty of Rs.30 Lacs by the college, or else, his documents would not be released.
The Bench noted, “The amendment to the prospectus when the process of admission was underway has created an unfortunate situation like the present one.” The Appeal arose from the Appellant’s resignation from an M.D. (Endocrinology) seat allocated to him in the academic year 2022-2023. The Appellant was aggrieved by the imposition of a penalty of Rs. 30 lakhs by the CMC upon his resignation and the withholding of his documents.
Cause Title- S. Gunasekaran v. The Under Secretary To Govt. & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1018)
Date of Judgment- December 17, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
30) Ulterior motive of pressurizing man to consent to divorce according to wife’s terms: SC quashes cruelty case against parents-in-law u/s. 498A IPC
The Court quashed a cruelty case registered at the instance of a woman against her parents-in-law while also observing that the proceedings were initiated with an ulterior motive of pressurizing the man to consent to the divorce according to the terms of the complainant-wife and the proceedings were used as a weapon by her in the personal discord between the couple.
The Court was considering an Appeal challenging the final judgment vide which the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court dismissed the application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for quashing and setting aside the FIR filed against the husband of the complainant and the present appellants (Parents-in-law of the complainant).
Cause Title- X v. State of Maharashtra & Another (Neutral Citaiton: 2024 INSC 1019)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai & Justice K.V. Viswanathan
31) Close proximity must be such as to create a clear nexus between act of instigation & suicide: SC quashes abetment to suicide case
The Court while quashing an abetment to suicide case, held that the close proximity must be such as to create a clear nexus between the act of instigation and suicide.
The Court was deciding a Criminal Appeal filed by the accused persons involving husband and in-laws of the deceased woman, challenging the Judgment of the Bombay High Court by which their Writ Petition was dismissed.
Cause Title- Prakash and Others v. The State of Maharashtra and Another (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1020)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
32) Limitation for trying to regain title & recover possession of suit property by way of seeking setting aside of sale deed would be 3 yrs, not 12 yrs
The Court held that the period of limitation for trying to regain title and recover the possession of the suit property by seeking to get the sale deed set aside would be three years, not twelve years.
The Court dismissed an Appeal challenging the Order of the Karnataka High Court that affirmed the legal heirs of the original plaintiff (Respondents) as the absolute owners of the suit properties. The Bench clarified that ordinarily when a suit is filed for cancellation of Sale Deed and recovery of possession, the same would suggest that the title has already been lost.
Cause Title- Mallavva & Anr. v. Kalsammanavara Kalamma (Since Dead) By Legal Heirs & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1021)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan
33) Mere rise in price subsequent to date of contract or inadequacy of price not to be treated as hardship entailing refusal of specific performance of contract
The Court clarified that mere rise in price subsequent to the date of the contract or inadequacy of price is not to be treated as a hardship entailing refusal of specific performance of the contract. The hardship involved should be one not foreseen by the party and should be collateral to the contract.
The Court made such an observation while considering an appeal against the judgment of the Tripura High Court allowing the appeal filed by the respondents (Original Defendants) and quashing the judgment of the Trial Court granting Specific Performance of Agreement of Sale instituted by the appellant (Original Plaintiff).
Cause Title- Parswanath Saha v.Bandhana Modak (Das) and Anr (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1022)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan
34) Civil Courts have jurisdiction to adjudicate upon title to land where land distribution is decided via partition
The Court reiterated that, where the distribution of land has been decided by way of partition, Civil Courts have the jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the title to the land.
The Court reiterated thus in a Civil Appeal filed against the Judgment of the Gauhati High Court by which the Second Appeal was allowed, the First Appellate Court’s Judgment was set aside, and the Trial Court’s Judgment was restored.
Cause Title- Abdul Rejak Laskar v. Mafizur Rahman & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1023)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan
35) Section 141 NI Act won’t apply to proprietorship concerns as they don’t have separate corporate identity
The observed that Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) will not apply to proprietorship concerns as they are owned by individuals and do not have a separate corporate identity.
The Court observed thus in a Criminal Appeal preferred against the Judgment of the Calcutta High Court by which it allowed the Criminal Revision Application and quashed the Trial Court’s Judgment of conviction.
Cause Title- Bijoy Kumar Moni v. Paresh Manna & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1024)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan
36) Courts should not be hesitant in rejecting plaint where it is glaring from it that suit is hopelessly barred by limitation
The Court observed that Courts should not be hesitant in granting relief under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the CPC in cases where it is glaring from the plaint averments that the suit is hopelessly barred by limitation.
The Court set aside the findings of the Bombay High Court which dismissed the application by the Appellants challenging the Order of the Civil Court which had rejected the Appellants’ application under Order VII Rule 11(d) of the CPC for rejection of a plaint being barred by limitation.
Cause Title- Shri Mukund Bhavan Trust & Ors. v. Shrimant Chhatrapati Udayan Raje Pratapsinh Maharaj Bhonsle & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1025)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan
37) Consent Decree will not operate as conveyance when no right is transferred; same does not require any payment of stamp duty
The Court ruled that the consent decree will not operate as conveyance when no right is transferred and the same does not require any payment of stamp duty. The Court clarified that since the appellant only asserted the pre-existing right and no new right was created through the consent decree, the document pertaining to mutation of the subject land was not liable for stamp duty.
The Appeal before the Court was filed challenging a Madhya Pradesh High Court Order dismissing the Miscellaneous Petition filed by the appellant herein. By the said order, the High Court upheld the order of the Collector of Stamps determining stamp duty at Rs.6,67,500 payable by the appellant qua land acquired by him by way of consent decree, as affirmed by the Board of Revenue.
Cause Title- Mukesh v. The State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1026)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan
38) Contracts loaded with terms being unfair & unreasonable that they baffle Court are opposed to public policy & must be adjudged void
The Court observed that the Contracts loaded with terms which are so unfair and unreasonable, that they truly baffle the Court, are opposed to public policy and must be adjudged void.
The Court observed thus in a Civil Appeal preferred by NOIDA Toll Bridge Company Ltd. (NTBCL), challenging the Judgment of the Allahabad High Court in which the issue was related to the collection and levying of toll.
Cause Title- NOIDA Toll Bridge Company Ltd. v. Federation of NOIDA Residents Welfare Association and Others (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1027)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice Surya Kant and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan
39) No requirement u/s 5(8) IBC that there can be a debt only when there is a default
The Court observed that there is no requirement under Section 5(8) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) that there can be a debt only when there is a default.
The Court was deciding a batch of Civil Appeals preferred by the China Development Bank and others against the Judgment of the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT).
Cause Title- China Development Bank v. Doha Bank Q.P.S.C. & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1029)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal
40) Courts shouldn’t shut out cases on mere technicalities, can’t let party suffer due to fault committed by their counsel
The Court reiterated that the Courts should not shut out cases on mere technicalities but rather afford an opportunity to both sides and thrash out the matter on merits. Further, it cannot let the party suffer due to negligence or fault committed by their counsel.
The Court was considering an Appeal challenging the final judgement of the Allahabad High Court dismissing the Writ Petition and upholding the order of the District Judge. The High Court had effectively dismissed the restoration application, confirming the ex parte decree passed in favor of the Respondent.
Cause Title- Dwarika Prasad (D) Thr.Lrs. v. Prithvi Raj Singh (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1030)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna B. Varale
41) Heinous offence of murder by pouring kerosene & setting deceased on fire: SC sets aside Patna HC’s 'cryptic order' granting anticipatory bail to 3 accused
The Court set aside a Patna High Court granting anticipatory bail to three accused persons after noting that the High Court failed to consider the serious allegations against them in the chargesheet. It noted that the allegation against all the accused persons is of such a heinous offence of murder by pouring kerosene oil and setting the deceased on fire.
The Court was considering an Appeal by the complainant against the grant of anticipatory bail to the respondents-accused by the Patna High Court.
Cause Title- Shambhu Debnath v. The State of Bihar & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1032)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna B. Varale
42) Employment status & corresponding rights should be determined by the nature of work performed, rather than label assigned to worker
The Court reiterated that employment status and corresponding rights should be determined by the nature of work performed, rather than the label assigned to the worker, underscoring the judiciary's role in rectifying misclassification of employees.
The Court, while deciding appeals filed by part-time workers engaged by the Central Water Commission (CWC), quashed their termination orders and directed the authorities to grant regularisation. The Appellants, who had served for several years in positions such as Safaiwalis and Khallasi, were initially denied relief by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) and the Delhi High Court. The Court held that the denial of regularisation was unjustified, given the long and uninterrupted nature of their service.
Cause Title- Jaggo v. Union of India & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1034)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna B. Varale
43) Matrimonial disputes & grave allegations shouldn’t be impediment to child’s right to have affection of both parents
The Court observed that matrimonial disputes and grave allegations between parents should not be an impediment to a child’s right to have care, company, and affection of both the parents.
The appeal before the Court arose from a Special Leave Petition challenging the validity of the judgment passed by the Madras High Court’s Madurai Bench dismissing the appellant–mother’s miscellaneous appeal and upholding the interim visitation rights granted to the respondent father.
Cause Title- A v. B (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1036)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna B. Varale
44) Rash & negligent driving caused death: SC rejects convict’s plea to convert 6 months imprisonment into fine
In a hit-and-run case, the Court discarded the submission of the accused regarding conversion of sentence of 6 months imposed under section 304A IPC into fine after noting that the rash and negligent driving of the accused caused death of a man & injuries to his son.
The Court was considering an appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment of the Karnataka High Court whereby the High Court dismissed the Revision Petition and upheld the sentence of 6 months imposed under Section 304A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Imposition of fine of Rs 1000 for the offence punishable under Section 279 of IPC was also upheld.
Cause Title- James v. The State of Karnataka (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1038)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Prasanna B. Varale
45) Economic offences involving financial well-being of States have implications beyond mere dispute between private disputants: SC dismisses plea to quash corruption case
The Court refused to quash a corruption case while reiterating that economic offences involving the financial and economic well-being of the State have implications which lie beyond the domain of a mere dispute between the private disputants.
The Court dismissed an Appeal filed by the Appellants challenging the Bombay High Court's refusal to quash the FIR and the consequent charge sheet filed under Sections 409, 420, and 120B of the IPC and Sections 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (PC Act), 1988.
Cause Title- Anil Bhavarlal Jain & Anr. v. The State Of Maharashtra & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1039)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna B. Varale
46) Autonomy of KPSC confined to conduct of selection process; determination of number of vacancies & requisition for employees is State Govt’s prerogative
The Court clarified that the autonomy of KPSC is confined to the conduct of the selection process, while the determination of the number of vacancies and the requisition for employees remains the prerogative of the State Government.
The Court directed the Kerala Public Service Commission (KPSC) to expand the rank list for Junior Health Inspector Grade-II posts in the Municipal Common Service in order to include additional vacancies identified by the State Government. It set aside the Kerala High Court’s Judgment, which upheld the KPSC’s decision to deny the Government’s recommendations for filling unfilled vacancies.
Cause Title- Ajith G. Das & Ors. v. The State Of Kerala & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1037)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna B. Varale
47) Irretrievable break down of marriage is sufficient ground for dissolution of marriage; forcing couple to live together prolongs their misery
The Court held that an irretrievable break down of marriage is sufficient ground for dissolution of marriage as forcing couple to live together serves no purpose.
The Court was dealing with a Civil Appeal filed by the wife against the Order of the Madras High Court, Madurai Bench by which the husband’s Appeal was allowed and a Decree of Divorce was granted on the ground of cruelty.
Cause Title- ABC v. XYZ (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1033)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna B. Varale
48) Section 53A TP Act relaxes strict provisions in favor of transferees; must be strictly construed
The Court observed that Section 53-A of the Transfer Of Property Act, which protects transferees in case of part performance, is an exception to the provisions which require a contract to be in writing and registered. The effect of this section is to relax the strict provisions of the Transfer of Property Act and the Registration Act in favor of transferees in order to allow the defence of part performance to be established and therefore must be strictly construed, the Court added.
The Court was considering a petition arising from the order passed by the Karnataka High Court in a Regular Second Appeal by which the appeal filed by the petitioners (original defendants) came to be dismissed thereby affirming the judgment of the First Appellate Court and also the decree of the Trial Court.
Cause Title- Giriyappa & Anr. v. Kamalamma & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1043)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan
49) Capping rate of interest charged by banks unwarranted: SC sets aside NCDRC’s Judgment declaring interest rates beyond 30% on credit card default as unfair trade practice
The Court set aside the NCDRC’s Judgment which held that the charging of interest at rates beyond 30% by the banks/non-banking financial institutions, from credit card holders, upon delay or default in payment, constitutes an unfair trade practice.
The Court allowed Appeals filed by various banks, including the Hongkong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (HSBC/Appellant), challenging the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission’s (NCDRC) Order wherein it was held that charging interest with monthly rests was also an unfair trade practice. The Bench held that an endeavour to cap the rate of interest charged by banks was unwarranted.
Cause Title- Hongkong And Shanghai Banking Corp. Ltd. v. Awaz & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1044)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
50) Any lapse or delay in compliance of S. 52A NDPS Act neither vitiates trial nor entitles accused to be released on bail
The Court held that, any lapse or delay in compliance of Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) would neither vitiate the trial nor would entitle the accused to be released on bail.
The Court held thus in a Criminal Appeal preferred by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) against the Order of the Delhi High Court by which it granted bail to the accused.
Cause Title- Narcotics Control Bureau v. Kashif (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1045)
Date of Judgment- December 20, 2024
Coram- Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
51) Blatant result of medical negligence in post-op care: SC restores compensation for family of cataract patient who suffered complete loss of vision
The Court restored a compensation of Rs. 3.5 Lakh awarded by a State Consumer Commission to the family of a cataract patient who suffered complete loss of vision in his right eye due to alleged medical negligence by an eye surgeon. The Court said that it was blatant result of medical negligence by the Doctor (Respondent) in post-operative care wherein corrective steps could have been taken, if the most reasonable and basic skills which were expected from the Doctor, were applied.
The Bench set aside the impugned Order of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) which held that the infection was likely caused by the Patient’s (Appellant) handling of his own bandages and not due to any negligence by the Respondent.
Cause Title- Bherulal Bhimaji Oswal(D) By Lrs. v. Madhusudan N. Kumbhare (Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 1035)
Date of Judgment- December 19, 2024
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Prasanna B. Varale