Weekly Overview | Supreme Court Judgments: Oct 17 - Oct 21, 2022
|1) Impact of reduction of convicts pending an appeal due to death of co-convicts is different from such reduction due to acquittal: The Court observed that the effect and impact of reduction of the number of convicts pending an appeal owing to the death of co-convicts is bound to be different from the effect and impact of reduction of the number of accused or convicts on account of acquittal.
The Bench was dealing with a case where 10 accused persons were convicted under Section 302/149 IPC by the Trial Court. During the pendency of the appeal before the High Court, seven of them died and consequently, the Appeal was dismissed as abated.
Cause Title – Gurmail Singh & Anr. v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Date of Judgment – October 17th, 2022
Coram – Justice C.T. Ravikumar & Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia
2) Cannot ignore the principle of merit- SC cancels admissions of PG medical students who were enrolled after cut-off date: The Court heard an appeal against the judgment of the Calcutta High Court which directed the West Bengal University of Health Sciences to admit the Respondent-candidates, even after the cut-off date.
The Bench observed, "even when the complaints are made to this Court that large number of seats are lying vacant seeking extension of time to fill those unfilled undergraduate/postgraduate seats of medical courses, this Court always declined such requests and directed that schedule must be strictly adhered to."
Cause Title – Board of Governors in Supersession of Medical Council of India v. Priyambada Sharma
Date of Judgment – October 17th, 2022
Coram – Justice Ajay Rastogi & Justice CT Ravikumar
3) Material discrepancies corrode credibility of prosecution's case while insignificant discrepancies do not: SC in murder case- While adjudicating a murder case, the Court observed that material discrepancies corrode the credibility of the prosecution's case while insignificant discrepancies do not do so.
The Bench observed, ""The material discrepancies corrode the credibility of the prosecution's case while insignificant discrepancies do not do so. Keeping in view the aforesaid principle this Court would hold that in the present case, there are material discrepancies in the testimonies of the witnesses and the same is fatal to the case of the prosecution. The prosecution has thus failed to prove the guilt of the accused-appellants beyond reasonable doubt."
Cause Title – Md. Jabbar Ali & Ors. v. The State of Assam
Date of Judgment – October 17th, 2022
Coram – Justice Ajay Rastogi & Justice BV Nagarathna
4) There can be no estoppel against the legislature in exercise of its legislative functions: SC reiterates- The Court reiterated that there can be no estoppel against the Legislature in the exercise of its legislative functions.
The Bench was dealing with the question that whether despite a subsequent statute specifically providing for rescinding the benefits granted under an earlier statute, the Union Government can be compelled to stand by the representation made by it through the earlier notification.
Cause Title – M/s. Hero Motocorp Ltd. v. Union of India & Ors. with Another
Date of Judgment – October 17, 2022
Coram – Justice BR Gavai & Justice BV Nagarathna
5) Motor accident claim- Compensation a fulcrum to bring equality between wrongdoer & victim when equality disturbed by wrongdoer: While dealing with a case involving motor accident claim, the Court observed that the compensation under Motor Vehicles Act 1988 acts as a fulcrum to bring equality between the wrongdoer and the victim, whenever the equality gets disturbed by the wrongdoer's harm to the victim.
The Bench observed, ""While determining compensation under the Act, section 168 of the Act makes it imperative to grant compensation that appears to be just. The Act being a social welfare legislation operates through economic conception in the form of compensation, which renders way to corrective justice. Compensation acts as a fulcrum to bring equality between the wrongdoer and the victim, whenever the equality gets disturbed by the wrongdoer's harm to the victim."
Cause Title – Manusha Sreekumar & Ors. v. The United India Insurance Co. Ltd.
Date of Judgment – October 17, 2022
Coram – Justice Surya Kant & Justice Aniruddha Bose
6) Motor accident claim: Courts need to consider future aspects while awarding loss of dependency- The Court observed in a motor accident claim case, "...we are of the opinion that the amount awarded by the High Court can be said to be on lower side. While awarding the loss of dependency, the High Court has not awarded/considered the future prospects at all."
The Bench observed that while awarding the loss of dependency, the High Court has not awarded/considered the future prospects at all.
In this case, the Appellants - Original Claimants had assailed the order of the High Court which had reduced the amount of compensation from Rs. 20,64,000/- as awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal to Rs.11,34,136/- alongwith interest @ 6% p.a. Aggrieved the Appellants approached the Supreme Court.
Cause Title – Sarup Singh @ Ram Sarup vs. HDFC Ergo General InsuranceCompany Ltd. and Ors.
Date of Judgment – October 17, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice CT Ravikumar
7) Assessee advancing general public utility cannot engage in any trade, commerce, or business to avail tax exemption: The Court observed that an assessee advancing general public utility (GPU) cannot engage in any trade, commerce or business in order to avail tax exemptions that are available to organizations carrying on charitable work.
The Bench delivered the 149-page judgment on a batch of appeals that were related to the interpretation of a provision to Section 2(15) of the Income Tax Act.
Cause Title – Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Exemptions) v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority
Date of Judgment – October 19, 2022
Coram – CJI UU Lalit, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, & Justice PS Narasimha
8) Applications and appeals under arbitration act, except International Arbitration shall be heard by designated Commercial Courts: The Court held that all applications or appeals arising out of arbitration under the provisions of Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, other than international commercial arbitration, shall be heard by designated Commercial Courts.
The Court was hearing an appeal challenging the decision of Calcutta High Court dismissing the petitions filed against a notification by the State of Odisha in establishing the Court of the Civil Judge (Senior Division) as Commercial Courts.
Cause Title – Jaycee Housing Pvt. Ltd. & Ors. v. Registrar (General), Orissa High Court, Cuttack & Ors. with connected matters
Date of Judgment – October 19, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice Krishna Murari
9) Educational institutions not entitled to approval U/s. 10(23c) of IT Act if objective is profit oriented: The Court observed that educational institutions are not entitled to approval under Section 10(23C) of the Income Tax Act where the objective is profit-oriented.
The Bench held, ""Where the objective of the institution appears to be profit-oriented, such institutions would not be entitled to approval under Section 10(23C) of the IT Act. At the same time, where surplus accrues in a given year or set of years per se, it is not a bar, provided such surplus is generated in the course of providing education or educational activities."
Cause Title – M/s. New Noble Educational Society v. The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax 1 & Anr.
Date of Judgment – October 19, 2022
Coram – CJI UU Lalit, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat & Justice PS Narasimha
10) State did not challenge Reference Court's order: SC holds landowners entitled to compensation determined by Reference Court- The Court observed that once the order passed by the Reference Court determining the compensation attained finality so far as the State is concerned, the landowners shall be entitled to at least such compensation as determined by the Reference Court.
The Bench was dealing with an appeal filed by the landowners seeking enhanced compensation.
Cause Title – Radhey Sham v. The State of Haryana and Others
Date of Judgment – October 17, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice CT Ravikumar
11) Must directly & substantially affect rights of parties- SC explains test to determine substantial question of law: The Court explained the test to determine substantial question of law.
The Court observed that for determining whether a case involves substantial question of law, the test is not merely the importance of the question, but its importance to the case itself necessitating the decision of the question. The appropriate test for determining whether the question of law raised in the case is substantial would be to see whether it directly and substantially affects the rights of the parties.
Cause Title – BSES Rajdhani Power Ltd. v. Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission
Date of Judgment – October 18, 2022
Coram – Justice S. Abdul Nazeer & Justice Krishna Murari
12) Striking off defence of tenant on non-payment of GST- SC sets aside order after tenant deposits balance amount: The Court set aside the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court striking off the defence of a tenant on non-payment of the balance amount of GST.
The Bench was dealing with a case where as per the Lease Agreement, the tenant was liable to pay the rent @ Rs.58,650/- per month and also the maintenance charges and GST. The tenant, though paid the rent and the other maintenance charges, however, did not deposit/pay the GST.
Therefore, the original plaintiff–landlord filed an application before the Trial Court under Section 13(6) of the M.P. Accommodation Control Act, 1961 and prayed to strike off the defence of the appellant-tenant.
Cause Title – M/s. Fashion World v. Banshidhar Multi Builders Pvt. Ltd.
Date of Judgment – October 17, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice CT Ravikumar
13) Constitution (97th Amendment) Act, 2011 is not applicable to local cooperative societies, applies to multi-state societies & societies within UTs: The Court clarified that the Constitution (97th Amendment) Act, 2011, inserting Part IXB, would not be applicable to the local co-operative societies, but will be applicable to the multi-state co-operative societies and the societies within the Union territories.
The constitutional validity of the 97th Constitution Amendment was challenged before the Gujarat High Court.
A Division Bench of the High Court, declared the Constitution (97th Amendment) Act, 2011 inserting Part IXB containing Articles 243ZH to 243ZT as ultra vires the Constitution of India for not taking recourse to Article 368(2) of the Constitution which provides for ratification by the majority of the State Legislatures.
Cause Title – The Bengal Secretariat Cooperative Land Mortgage Bank and Housing Society Ltd. v. Aloke Kumar & Anr.
Date of Judgment – October 18, 2022
Coram – CJI UU Lalit, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat & Justice JB Pardiwala
14) Repudiation of claim due to lack of financial coverage: SC remands matter to state commission for reconsideration- The Court observed, "In our opinion, that was the course which ought to have been directed by the National Commission because the only ground on which repudiation of the claim was made was lack of financial coverage. Thus, following the ratio of the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case of Saurashtra Chemicals Ltd. (supra), the National Commission ought not to have gone beyond the grounds of repudiation and into the nature of coverage..."
The Bench set aside the decisions of the National Commission and State Commission and remanded the matter to the State Commission for taking afresh on the claim of the appellants.
Cause Title – JSK Industries Pvt. Ltd. v. Oriental Insurance Company Limited
Date of Judgment – October 18, 2022
Coram – Justice Dinesh Maheshwari & Justice Aniruddha Bose
15) Statements such as 'I Will Expose The Scam' are not by themselves defamatory unless there is something more: SC in defamation case- While setting aside the order of summoning passed against BJP leader Vijender Gupta in a defamation case, the Court observed that statements such as "I will expose you", and "I will expose the scam in which you are involved, etc." are not by themselves defamatory unless there is something more.
Further, the Court also reiterated that defamatory statements must be very specific and not very vague and general.
The Bench was dealing with appeals challenging a Delhi High Court's order refusing to quash summons of a trial court against BJP leaders Manoj Tiwari and Vijender Gupta in a criminal defamation case.
Cause Title – Manoj Kumar Tiwari v. Manish Sisodia & Ors.
Date of Judgment – October 17, 2022
Coram – Justice S. Abdul Nazeer & Justice V. Ramasubramanian
16) Credentials of litigant must be tested before allowing to seek orders having far reaching effects: Supreme Court to NGT- The Court told the National Green Tribunal (NGT) that the credentials and bona fide of the applicants must be tested before they are permitted to "knock the doors of justice" and seek orders which have far-reaching effect of affecting the employment of thousands of people and stopping investment in the state.
The Bench made this observation in its judgement upholding the decision of the Uttar Pradesh government to grant provisional licenses for establishing new wood-based industries (WBIs). The Court was dealing with appeals filed against the orders passed by the National Green Tribunal.
Cause Title – The State of UP & Ors. Uday Education and Welfare Trust & Anr.
Date of Judgment – October 21, 2022
Coram – Justice BR Gavai & Justice BV Nagarathna
Read further... (Report 1)
Read further... (Report 2)
17) Motor Accident Claim| Future prospects were not taken into account: SC allows plea seeking enhanced compensation- The Court while allowing the appeal in part filed by the wife and children of the victim in a motor vehicle accident, held that the Appellants were entitled to enhanced compensation since loss of future prospects were not considered by the High Court.
The deceased was among the passengers in a bus of Jammu and Kashmir State Road Transport Corporation which was driven by the deceased husband of the respondent. The bus fell into the river Chenab due to which the husband of the appellant drowned in the river and died.
It was alleged that such an incident took place due to the rash and negligent driving of the driver of the bus. Therefore, the appellants filed the claim petition under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 seeking total compensation of Rs. 50 lakhs.
Cause Title – Raj Bala & Ors. v. Rakeja Begam & Ors.
Date of Judgment – October 18, 2022
Coram – Justice BR Gavai and Justice CT Ravikumar
18) Sinner With A Future- Supreme Court reviews its order to further reduce sentence of convict in rape-murder of 4 year old: The Court modified n earlier judgment whereby the Court had reduced the death sentence awarded to one Mohammed Firoz for rape-murder of a four-year-old girl, to life imprisonment. The Court has now further reduced the sentence of the convict to imprisonment for 20 years from life imprisonment.
The previous judgment had become controversial as the Court had quoted Oscar Wilde in saying, "The only difference between the saint and the sinner is that every saint has a past and every sinner has a future" while reducing the sentence to twenty years instead of imprisonment for the remainder of his natural life for the offence under section 376A of IPC.
Cause Title – Mohd Firoz v. State of Madhya Pradesh
Date of Judgment –October 21, 2022
Coram – CJI UU Lalit, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat & Justice Bela M. Trivedi
19) Illegal Appointment- SC sets aside appointment of Vice Chancellor of Abdul Kalam University, Thiruvananthapuram: The Court quashed and set aside the appointment of Dr. Rajasree M.S. as Vice Chancellor of the APJ Abdul Kalam Technological University, Thiruvananthapuram.
The Bench observed that the appointment of Dr. Rajasree M.S. on the basis of the recommendations made by the Search Committee, was not a duly constituted Search Committee as per the UGC Regulations.
Cause Title – Professor (Dr.) Sreejith P.S. v. Dr. Rajasree M.S. & Ors.
Date of Judgment – October 21, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice CT Ravikumar
20) Section 32, Advocates Act doesn't bar power of attorney holder to appear for a party just because they enrolled as an advocate: The Court quashed a judgment passed by Andhra Pradesh High Court by holding that Section 32 of the Advocates Act, 1961 does not prohibit a General Power of Attorney (GPA) holder to appear before the Court on behalf of a Plaintiff, simply because the GPA was an enrolled advocate. The Court also stressed on the principle of res judicata.
In this case, the issue concerned the capacity in which the Appellant's wife could appear and act on his behalf in certain civil proceedings. Notably, the Appellant's wife held his GPA and was also an enrolled advocate.
Cause Title – S Ramachandra Rao v. S Nagabhushana Rao & Ors.
Date of Judgment – October 19, 2022
Coram – Justice Dinesh Maheshwari & Justice Aniruddha Bose
21) Land Acquisition| Landowners not entitled to interest on enhanced compensation for period of delay in filing appeals before HC: The Court while adjudicating upon a land acquisition case held that the landowners were not entitled to interest on enhanced compensation for a period of delay in filing appeals before the High Court.
The Bench noted, ""...while condoning the delay in filing/refiling the appeals on condition that the landowners shall not be entitled to interest on the enhanced amount of compensation, if any, the landowners shall not be entitled to interest for the period of delay in filing/refiling the said appeals before the High Court."
Cause Title – Jaspal Singh & Others v. The State of Haryana and Others
Date of Judgment – October 20, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice MM Sundresh
22) Detaining authority supplying illegible copies of documents to detenu violates his right under Article 22(5) of Constitution: The Court observed that the right to make a representation is a fundamental right of the detenu under Article 22(5) of the Constitution and supply of the illegible copy of the documents relied upon by the detaining authority violates such a right.
The Bench observed that he right to make a representation implies that the detenu should be provided with all the information which will enable him to make an effective representation and refusing to supply the documents or supply of illegible or blurred copies of the documents relied upon by the detaining authority amounts to a violation of Article 22(5) of the Constitution.
Cause Title – The State of Manipur & Ors. Vs. Buyamayum Abdul Hanan @ Anand & Anr.
Date of Judgment – October 19, 2022
Coram – Justice Ajay Rastogi & Justice CT Ravikumar
23) NEET MDS 2018 | Institutions & students were hands in glove: SC sets aside 'illegal admission' granted to students: The Court set aside the decision of the Chhattisgarh High Court quashing the communication of the State of Chhattisgarh cancelling the admissions of the original writ petitioners in the Postgraduate Dental Course.
The Bench observed that the original writ petitioners were granted admissions illegally and their admissions are backdoor.
The Court further added, ""The only inference can be that the institutions and the students were hands in glove and the students got admissions illegally."
Cause Title – Dental Council of India v. Sailendra Sharma and Others with Ors.
Date of Judgment – October 21, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice MM Sundresh
24) If seized poppy straw tests positive for morphine & meconic acid, no other test is needed to constitute offence U/s. 15 NDPS Act: The Court while adjudicating upon a matter under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 held that once it is established that the seized 'poppy straw' tests positive for the contents of 'morphine' and 'meconic acid', no other test would be necessary for bringing home the guilt of the accused under the provisions of Section 15 of the 1985 Act.
In this case, the accused was caught indulging in the illicit trading of "poppy straw" by some police officers on patrolling duty. It was alleged that she had kept a huge quantity of "poppy straw" in a room where fodder for cattle had been stacked.
Cause Title – State of Himachal Pradesh vs Nirmal Kaur @ Nimmo and Others
Date of Judgment – October 20, 2022
Coram – Justice BR Gavai & Justice CT Ravikumar
25) SC enhances compensation to ₹1lakh for loss of foetus in motor accident case in which lady died while being pregnant: In a motor accident case, the Court enhanced the compensation to Rs. 1 lakh for each of the claimants for loss of foetus. The deceased was a 25-year-old lady who died while she was pregnant.
The wife of the Appellant No. 1 had died in a vehicular accident. The Motor Accident Claim Tribunal awarded Rs.19,12,200/ with the interest at the rate of 7.5% towards the compensation under different heads. The Tribunal awarded the loss of dependency at Rs.3,24,000/ considering the income of the deceased at Rs.1,500/ per month. As at the relevant time the deceased was pregnant, the Tribunal awarded Rs. 50,000/- for foetus.
Cause Title – Shiv Kumar & Ors. v. Gainda Lal & Ors.
Date of Judgment – October 21, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice MM Sundresh
26) Matters still pending at pre-appointment stage cannot be left hanging until larger bench settles issue: SC reiterates- The Court reiterated that matters which are still pending at a pre-appointment stage, cannot be left hanging until the larger Bench settled the issue.
The Bench was dealing with arbitration petitions seeking appointment of a sole arbitrator to adjudicate upon the disputes arising out of the three agreements executed between the parties.
Cause Title – Weatherford Oil Tool Middle East Limited v. Baker Hughes Singapore PTE & Ors.
Date of Judgment – October 20, 2022
Coram – CJI UU Lalit & Justice Bela M. Trivedi
27) High Court committed serious error in discarding sale exemplars: SC enhances compensation in land acquisition case: The Court while enhancing the compensation payable to landowners in land acquisition case has observed that the High Court committed a very serious error in discarding the sale exemplars.
The Bench while allowing the appeals in part held that the common judgment and order passed by the High Court are modified and the landowners shall be entitled to the compensation of Rs. 12,16,800/- for the lands acquired with all other statutory benefits and the interest.
Cause Title – Hari Ram (Deceased) Thr. His LRs. and Anr. v. Land Acquisition Collector cum District Revenue Officer Gurgaon and Ors.
Date of Judgment – October 20, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice MM Sundresh
28) DMC Act- Crematorium cannot be ordered to be closed unless it dangerously affects human health or becomes offensive: The Court observed that under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, a crematorium cannot be ordered to be closed unless it dangerously affects human health or becomes offensive.
The Bench also held that the Municipal Corporation must take steps to modernize the crematorium by shifting it to a modern electric crematorium which shall be in the larger public interest of the village people as well as the residents of the neighborhood area.
Cause Title – South Delhi Municipal Corporation v. Federation of Residents Welfare Association, Vasant Kunj (Regd.) and Ors.
Date of Judgment – October 21, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice MM Sundresh
29) Sealed cover procedure sets as dangerous precedent, makes adjudication vague & opaque: The Court observed that sealed cover procedure sets a 'dangerous precedent' as it makes 'the process of adjudication vague and opaque.
The Bench further held, "A judicial order accompanied by reasons is the hallmark of the justice system. . A judicial order accompanied by reasons is the hallmark of the justice system. It espouses the rule of law. However, the sealed cover practice places the process by which the decision is arrived beyond scrutiny. The sealed cover procedure affects the functioning of the justice delivery system both at an individual case- to case level and at an institutional level."
Cause Title - Cdr Amit Kumar Sharma etc Vs Union of India & Ors etc
Date of Judgment - October 20, 2022
Coram - Justice DY Chandrachud & Justice Hima Kohli