Weekly Overview| Supreme Court Judgments: Nov 7 – Nov 11, 2022
|1) Allegations of illegitimate relationship against army officer: SC holds general court martial trial to be time barred: The Court in an appeal held that the trial done by the General Court Martial was clearly beyond three years and hence, barred under Section 122 of the Army Act, 1950.
The Bench dealt with an appeal filed by the Colonel under Section 30(1) of the Armed Forces Tribunal Act, 2007 against the judgment and order passed by the Court No. 2 Armed Forces Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi.
Cause Title – IC-56663X Col Anil Kumar Gupta v. Union of India & Ors.
Date of Judgment – November 7, 2022
Coram – CJI UU Lalit & Justice Bela M. Trivedi
2) MMC Act- Capital value can be determined only by present physical attributes of land & building, not future prospects: The Court dealt with a matter elated to the levy of property tax in Greater Mumbai being changed from rateable value to capital value system through amendments under the Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888.
The Court held that only the present physical attributes and status of the property can be considered and not the future ones for the purpose of fixing the capital value.
Cause Title – Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors. v. Property Owners' Association & Ors.
Date of Judgment – November 7, 2022
Coram – CJI UU Lalit & Justice Ajay Rastogi
3) Education is not business to earn profit- SC affirms Andhra Pradesh HC's decision quashing seven-fold increase in MBBS tuition fee: While observing that education is not the business to earn profit, the Supreme Court has affirmed the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court quashing the decision of the State to enhance the tuition fee payable by the MBBS students.
The Court was hearing Special Leave Petitions challenging the decision of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh which quashed the Government Order (GO) hiking MBBS fees by almost seven times.
Cause Title – Narayana Medical College v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors.
Date of Judgment – November 7, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia
4) Company Secretary Regulations- There is distinction between absence and post fallen vacant- SC upholds election of chairman of EIRC: The Court while upholding the election of the Chairman of Eastern India Regional Council (EIRC) has held that under the Company Secretary Regulations, there is a distinction between absence and the post falling vacant.
The Court while allowing the appeal has set aside and quashed the judgment and order passed by the Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court quashing and setting aside the election of the office bearers of the EIRC of the ICSI held on 27th December 2021, on the ground that the meeting was not presided over by the Vice¬-Chairman who in absence of the Chairman was required to conduct and/or chair the meeting as Chairman.
Cause Title – Institute of Company Secretaries of India & Ors. v. Biman Debnath & Ors.
Date of Judgment – November 7, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice MM Sundresh
5) Even if draft criminal rules have not been adopted, accused has right to receive document in possession of prosecution: The Court by a 2:1 majority held that an accused has the right to receive the list of the statements, documents, material, etc. in the possession of the prosecution even if Draft Rules of Criminal Practice are not yet adopted.
The Bench of CJI Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat disagreed with Justice Bela M. Trivedi who, while dismissing the Criminal Appeal, observed that this right to receive the documents is only available after the Draft Rules are brought into force.
Cause Title – P. Ponnusamy v. The State of Tamil Nadu
Date of Judgment – November 7, 2022
Coram – CJI UU Lalit, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat & Justice Bela M. Trivedi
6) No Double Benefits- SC holds exclusion of other special communities from EWS quota is reasonable: The Court upheld the constitutional validity of the 103rd Constitutional Amendment, by which a 10% reservation for the Economically Weaker Sections (EWS) was introduced in education and public employment.
It was a 3:2 majority, with Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, Justice Bela Trivedi, and Justice JB Pardiwala forming the majority. Justice S Ravindra Bhat wrote a dissenting judgment, which was concurred with by CJI Uday Umesh Lalit.
Cause Title – Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India
Date of Judgment – November 7, 2022
Coram – CJI UU Lalit, Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat, Justice Bela M. Trivedi & Justice J.B. Pardiwala
7) It was only for contesting elections that he altered his DOB- SC while upholding disqualification of Azam Khan's Son as MLA: The Court dismissed the appeal filed by Rampur MLA Mohd. Abdullah Azam Khan challenging the Allahabad High Court ruling setting aside his election as Member of Legislative Assembly in Suar, District Rampur constituency.
The Bench dismissed the plea filed by senior SP leader Azam Khan's son in separate but concurring judgments for not having attained the age of 25 years on the date of the election.
Cause Title – Mohd. Abdullah Azam Khan v. Nawab Kazim Ali Khan
Date of Judgment – November 7, 2022
Coram – Justice Ajay Rastogi & Justice BV Nagarathna
8) SC quashes appointment of Vice Chancellor of Soban Singh Jeena University for violation of UGC Regulations & University Act: The Court has quashed and set aside the appointment of Narender Singh Bhandari as Vice Chancellor of Soban Singh University, Uttarakhand for being in violation of the provisions of the University Act, 2019 and University Grants Commission Regulations of 2018.
The Court held that the appointment of the appellant (Bhandari) as Vice-Chancellor of the university is just contrary to Section 10 of the University Act, 2019 read with Regulation 7.3.0 of the UGC Regulations, 2018, which has been specifically adopted by the state government.
Cause Title – Prof. Narendra Singh Bhandari v. Ravindra Jugran and others
Date of Judgment – November 10, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice MM Sundresh
9) Civil Courts are not barred from entertaining counterclaims of borrowers against banks & financial institutions: The Court observed that Civil Courts are not barred from entertaining counterclaims of borrowers against banks and financial institutions which are pursuing separate recovery proceedings against them before a Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT) under a special law.
The Apex Court was dealing with the vexed legal question of whether a borrower, facing the recovery proceedings by a lending bank under the Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions (RDB) Act, 1993 before the DRT, can file a counterclaim case in civil court against the lending financial institutions instead of filing it in the DRT itself.
Cause Title – Bank of Rajasthan Ltd. v. VCK Shares & Stock Broking Services Ltd.
Date of Judgment – November 10, 2022
Coram – Justice SK Kaul, Justice Abhay S. Oka & Justice Vikram Nath
10) Subsequent purchaser of land does not have any right to claim lapse of acquisition proceedings- SC reiterates: The Court while dealing with an appeal filed by the Delhi Development Authority in a land acquisition case held that as per the settled position of law, the subsequent purchaser of land does not have any right to claim lapse of acquisition proceedings.
The Bench observed, ""In the recent decision of this Court in the case of Delhi Development Authority Vs. Godfrey Phillips (I) Ltd. & Ors., Civil appeal No. 3073 of 2022 after considering the other decisions on the right of the subsequent purchaser to claim lapse of acquisition proceedings, i.e., Meera Sahni Vs. Lieutenant Governor of Delhi & Ors., (2008) 9 SCC 173 and M. Venkatesh & Ors. Vs. Commissioner, Bangalore Development Authority, (2015) 17 SCC 1, it is specifically observed and held that subsequent purchaser has no right to claim lapse of acquisition proceedings."
Cause Title – Delhi Development Authority v. Asha Jain & Ors.
Date of Judgment – November 9, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice MM Sundresh
11) Application seeking hearing of review petition by particular HC judge must be placed before CJ on administrative side: The Court held that an application that seeks to assign a review petition to a particular judge of a High Court should be placed before the Chief Justice of that High Court, and should not be dealt with on the judicial side.
The Bench observed, "once an application was preferred by any of the parties that a review may be heard by the Judge who had decided the matter and had passed the order from which the review arose, the matter ought to have been placed before the Chief Justice on the administrative side rather than order being passed on the judicial side."
Cause Title – Suresh G Ramnani v. Aurelia Ana De Piedade Miranda @ Ariya Alvares (Dead Thr. LRS) & Ors.
Date of Judgment – November 10, 2022
Coram – Justice Aniruddha Bose & Justice Vikram Nath
12) Purpose for which land has been acquired is relevant for determining market value of land- SC while enhancing compensation: The Court while enhancing compensation in a land acquisition case observed that the purpose for which the land is acquired is also a relevant factor for determining its market value.
In this case, the Andhra Pradesh High Court awarded the compensation for the lands acquired by the State Government at Rs.80,000/- per acre and Rs.10,000/- per acre for sub-soil rights on account of the coal deposits. Not satisfied with the compensation awarded by the High Court, land owners preferred the Appeal before the Apex Court.
Cause Title – S. Shankaraiah Thr. GPA Holder & Ors. v. The Land Acquisition Officer and Revenue Divisional Officer Peddapali Karimnagar Dist. & Ors.
Date of Judgment – November 9, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice Krishna Murari
13) Tenant liable to pay compensation at same rate at which landlord would earn rent if premises was vacated & let out- SC reiterates: The Court reiterated that from the date of the decree of eviction, the tenant is liable to pay compensation at the same rate at which the landlord would have earned rent if the premises were vacated by the tenant and let out.
The Bench placed reliance on Atma Ram Properties (P) Ltd. Vs. Federal Motors (P) Ltd., (2005) 1 SCC 705 wherein it was observed that from the date of the decree of eviction, the tenant is liable to pay mesne profits or compensation for use and occupation of the premises at the same rate at which the landlord would have been able to let out the premises and earn rent if the tenant would have vacated the premises.
Cause Title – Sumer Corporation Vs. Vijay Anant Gangan & Ors.
Date of Judgment – November 9, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice MM Sundresh
14) Non-disclosure of exclusion clauses by insurance companies would take away their right to plead repudiation of contract: The Court has cautioned the insurance companies on the mandatory compliance of disclosing the exclusion clauses to the insured as per clauses (3) and (4) of the Regulatory and Development Authority (Protection of Policy Holder's Interests, Regulation 2002) Act (IRDA Regulations, 2002).
The Bench was dealing with a matter related to fire accident claim against Tata AIG General Company Ltd and observed, "Once it is proved that there is a deficiency in service and that respondent No. 1 knowingly entered into a contract, notwithstanding the exclusion clause, the consequence would flow out of it. … Even as per the common law principle of acquiescence and estoppel, respondent No. 1 cannot be allowed to take advantage of its own wrong, if any. It is a conscious waiver of the exclusion clause by respondent No. 1."
Cause Title – M/s Texco Marketing Pvt. Ltd. v. TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors.
Date of Judgment – November 9, 2022
Coram – Justice MM Sundresh & Justice Surya Kant
15) Protest & Police actions are tools of society and establishment respectively- SC in Kerala panchayat election dispute: The Court in an appeal filed by an election candidate of Kerala Gram Panchayat held that as the strike is a weapon of workmen and lock-out is a weapon of the employer, in a similar way, a protest is a tool of civil society and police action is a tool of the Establishment.
The Bench while allowing the appeal of the appellant whose election was declared void, observed, "Just as strike is a weapon in the hands of the workmen and lock-out is a weapon in the hands of the employer under Labour Welfare legislations, protest is a tool in the hands of the civil society and police action is a tool in the hands of the Establishment. All State enactments such as Kerala Police Act, Madras Police Act etc., are aimed at better regulation of the police force and they do not create substantive offences. This is why these Acts themselves empower the police to issue necessary directions for the maintenance of law and order and the violation of any of those directions is made a punishable offence under these Acts."
Cause Title – Ravi Namboothiri v. K.A. Baiju & Ors.
Date of Judgment – November 9, 2022
Coram – Justice S. Abdul Nazeer & Justice V. Ramasubramanian
16) State Government's recommendation of not opening new B.Ed. colleges well within its right under NCTE Act & not arbitrary: The Court while dealing with an appeal filed by the State of Uttarakhand against the Nalanda College of Education held that the decision of the appellant not to recommend the new B.Ed. colleges cannot be said to be arbitrary and is well within its right to make suitable recommendations under the provisions of the National Council for Teachers Education (NCTE) Act, 1993.
The Court held that the High Court committed a serious error in holding that the decision not to recommend the new B.Ed. colleges can be said to be arbitrary and also that the State is well within its right to make suitable recommendations.
Cause Title – The State of Uttarakhand v. Nalanda College of Education and Others
Date of Judgment – November 10, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice MM Sundresh
17) Stamp Act- Once court approves auction bid price, interference by registering authority on transaction price would be wholly unjustified: The Court observed that once a bid price is approved by the Court n the basis of the material before it, any interference by the Registering Authority on the aspect of price of transaction would be wholly unjustified.
The Court also observed that public auction carried out through Court process/receiver is the most transparent manner of obtaining the correct market value of the property.
The Court made this observation while answering regarding the scope of Section 47A of Indian Stamp Act (as applicable to West Bengal).
Cause Title – Registrar of Assurances & Anr. v. ASL Vyapar Private Ltd. & Anr.
Date of Judgment – November 10, 2022
Coram – Justice SK Kaul, Justice Abhay S. Oka & Justice Vikram Nath
18) Letter of credit is independent of and unqualified by contract of sale or underlying transactions- SC reiterates: The Court observed that a letter of credit is independent of and unqualified by the contract of sale or underlying transactions.
The Bench set aside and quashed the judgment passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and has restored the judgment and order passed by the State Consumer Dispute Redressal Commission.
Cause Title – M/s. Bawa Paulins Pvt. Ltd. v. UPS Freight Services (India) Pvt. Ltd. and Another
Date of Judgment – November 10, 2022
Coram – Justice BR Gavai & Justice BV Nagarathna
19) UGC Regulations- Career advancement scheme benefits to be provided if previous appointment as ad hoc service is more than year: The Court upheld the decision of the Division Bench of the Kerala High Court whereby the decision of the Single Judge was confirmed, directing the appellant University to grant the benefit of the Career Advancement Scheme ('CAS') to the respondent after counting her earlier service rendered as a Lecturer.
The Court observed that under the UGC Regulations, the benefit of CAS must be provided if the previous appointment as ad hoc service is of more than a year.
Cause Title – The Mahatma Gandhi University and Ors. v. Rincymol Mathew
Date of Judgment – November 10, 2022
Coram – Justice MR Shah & Justice MM Sundresh
20) Seniority cannot be reckoned from date of occurrence of vacancy unless expressly provided under rules: The Court reiterated that in matters related to inter se seniority, any departure from the statutory rules, executive instructions, or otherwise must not be inconsistent with the requirements of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
The Court said that the seniority cannot be reckoned from the date of occurrence of the vacancy and cannot be given retrospectively unless it is so expressly provided by the relevant service rules.
Cause Title – Amit Singh v Ravindra Nath Pandey & Ors. Etc. Etc.
Date of Judgment – November 11, 2022
Coram – Justice BR Gavai & Justice BV Nagarathna
21) "Bulk of investment has come from amrapali group towards purchase of properties"- SC rejects prayer for release of attachment of assets: The Court while dealing with an interlocutory application being filed by Mr. Prem Mishra challenging the proceedings/ order passed by the Presiding Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT)-III, New Delhi, and directions issued in respect of 12 lakh square feet offered in the affidavit of Mr. Anil Kumar Sharma, Chairman and Managing Director of Amrapali Group of Companies stated that bulk of investment has come from the Amrapali Group towards the purchase of the properties and rejected the prayer for the release of attachment of the assets.
The Court recalled its June 10, while hearing the Amrapali case that led to the setback for the builders in Noida and Greater Noida. That order capped the rate of interest at 8% on the dues for land given on lease to different builders.
Cause Title – Bikram Chatterji & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.
Date of Judgment – November 7, 2022
Coram – CJI UU Lalit & Justice Bela M. Trivedi
22) Many glaring lapses during course of trial- SC acquits 3 convicts in 2012 Chhawla Gang Rape & Murder Case: The Court while giving benefit of doubt to three murder accused in the 2012 Chhawla Gang Rape & Murder case has observed there were many glaring lapses having occurred during the course of trial.
The Court acquitted three men (accused) who were sentenced to death by the Delhi High Court based on a lack of fair trial giving them the benefit of doubt. The Court however ordered that the family members of the victim are entitled to compensation.
Cause Title – Rahul v. The State of Delhi Ministry of Home Affairs & Anr.
Date of Judgment – November 7, 2022
Coram – CJI UU Lalit, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat & Justice Bela M. Trivedi
23) Imperative to hold TIP at the earliest, undue delay in conducting TIP has serious bearing on credibility of identification process: The Court held that undue delay in conducting Test Identification Parade (TIP) has a serious bearing on the credibility of the identification process.
The Court held that it is imperative to hold TIP at the earliest and thus observed, "Undue delay in conducting a TIP has a serious bearing on the credibility of the identification process. Though there is no fixed timeline within which the TIP must be conducted and the consequence of the delay would depend upon the facts and circumstances of the case, it is imperative to hold the TIP at the earliest."
Cause Title – Gireesan Nair & Ors. Etc v. State of Kerala
Date of Judgment – November 11, 2022
Coram – Justice BR Gavai & Justice PS Narasimha