March 10, 2019

Latest Supreme Court Civil Cases March 2019

Advocates Act, 1961 - Section 26 - Enrolment in the Bar Council - Government Service - Involvement in a Criminal Case - Subsequent acquittal cannot come to the rescue - Power on the Bar Council of India to remove the name of a person who entered on the Roll of Advocates by misrepresentation - Enrollment of the Appellant was cancelled - Order cancelling his enrolment as an advocate was confirmed by Apex Court - Appellant made another attempt for enrolment - Repeated attempts made by the Appellant later amount to an abuse of process. L. Nageswara Rao & M.R. Shah, JJ. Anand Kumar Sharma v. Bar Council of India, C.A. No. 294 of 2007 01-03-2019

Age Relaxation - The Division Bench did not consider the submissions whether the Respondents could, as a matter of right, claim relaxation in age limit. Without considering said aspect of the matter, the Division Bench proceeded to pass the directions. The assessment made by the Division Bench was completely incorrect. Uday Umesh Lalit & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Electronic Corporation of India v. M. Shivani, C.A. No. 2560 of 2019 08-03-2019



Army Law - Provisions governing the appointment of Army Commanders - Discussed. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Lt. Gen. Ravi Dastane AVSM VSM v. Union of India, C.A. No. 9721 of 2014 01-03-2019



Banking Law - Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of Undertakings) Act, 1970 / 1980 - Section 9 (3) (a) to (i) - Board of Directors consists of persons coming from different fields. There cannot, therefore, be a uniform qualification or/and disqualification for such persons. Indeed, the qualifications and disqualifications are bound to vary from category to category and would depend on the post, experience and the stream from where a person is being nominated as a Director. Moreover, the qualification and disqualification has to be seen prior to his/her becoming a Director and not after his/her appointment as a Director. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Federation of Bank of India Staff Union v. Union of India, C.A. No. 5570 of 2014 01-03-2019

Civil Law - Amendment of Plaint - Inadvertent mistake - Inadvertent mistake cannot be refused to be corrected when the mistake is apparent from the reading of the plaint. The Rules of Procedure are handmaid of justice and cannot defeat the substantive rights of the parties. It is well settled that amendment in the pleadings cannot be refused merely because of some mistake, negligence, inadvertence or even infraction of the Rules of Procedure. The Court always gives leave to amend the pleadings even if a party is negligent or careless as the power to grant amendment of the pleadings is intended to serve the ends of justice and is not governed by any such narrow or technical limitations. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Varun Pahwa v. Renu Chaudhary, C.A. No. 2431 of 2019 01-03-2019



Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order XXIII Rule 1-A read with Order I Rule 10 - Court may strike out or add parties - When transposition of defendants as plaintiff may be permitted - As per Rule 1-A, in the eventuality of plaintiff withdrawing the suit or abandoning his claim, a pro forma defendant, who has a substantial question to be decided against the co-defendant, is entitled to seek his transposition as plaintiff for determination of such a question against the said co-defendant in the given suit itself. Uday Umesh Lalit & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. R. Dhanasundari @ R. Rajeswari v. A.N. Umakanth, C.A. No. 7292 of 2009 06-03-2019

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order XXIII Rule 1-A read with Order I Rule 10 - Court may strike out or add parties - When transposition of defendants as plaintiff may be permitted - The basic requirement for exercise of powers under Rule 1-A would be to examine if the plaintiff is seeking to withdraw or to abandon his claim under Rule 1 of Order XXIII and the defendant seeking transposition is having an interest in the subject-matter of the suit and thereby, a substantial question to be adjudicated against the other defendant. In such a situation, the pro forma defendant is to be allowed to continue with the same suit as plaintiff, thereby averting the likelihood of his right being defeated and also obviating the unnecessary multiplicity of proceedings. Uday Umesh Lalit & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. R. Dhanasundari @ R. Rajeswari v. A.N. Umakanth, C.A. No. 7292 of 2009 06-03-2019

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 - Order XXIII Rule 1-A read with Order I Rule 10 - Court may strike out or add parties - When transposition of defendants as plaintiff may be permitted - the powers of the Court to grant a prayer for transposition are very wide and could be exercised for effectual and comprehensive adjudication of all the matters in controversy in the suit. Uday Umesh Lalit & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. R. Dhanasundari @ R. Rajeswari v. A.N. Umakanth, C.A. No. 7292 of 2009 06-03-2019

Constitution of India - Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 - Once the State permits sand to be excavated, neither can it legally restrict its movement within the territory of India nor is the same constitutionally permissible. Likewise, there is no restriction on the State importing sand from other states. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJJ. State of Gujarat v. Jayeshbhai Kanjibhai Kalathiya, C.A. No. 10373 of 2010 01-03-2019

Consumer Law - Medical Negligence - Granting of reasonability higher amount of compensation - to send the message to the professionals that their responsiveness and diligence has to be equi-balanced for all their consumers and all the human beings deserve to be treated with equal respect and sensitivity. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Shoda Devi v. DDU / Ripon Hospital Shimla, C.A. No. 2557 of 2019 07-03-2019



Consumer Law - Medical Negligence - Quantum of Compensation - Award of compensation cannot go restrictive when the victim is coming from a poor and rural background. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Shoda Devi v. DDU / Ripon Hospital Shimla, C.A. No. 2557 of 2019 07-03-2019

Consumer Protection Act, 1986 - Section 23 - the Commission does have the jurisdiction to dismiss the complaint in limine and decline its admission without notice to the opposite party. However, such jurisdiction to dismiss the complaint in limine has to be exercised by the Commission having regard to facts of each case, i.e., in appropriate case. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Anjaneya Jawellery v. New India Assurance, C.A. No. 6878 of 2018 07-03-2019

See Also : Latest Supreme Court Criminal Cases March 2019

Divorce - Customary Divorce - Neither an issue has been framed nor even the husband has led any evidence and proved that there was a customary divorce between respondent and his first wife - Even the husband was required to prove that such a customary divorce was permissible in their caste/community - In the absence of any such issue or any evidence, the Courts below were not justified in observing that there was a customary divorce between the respondent and his first wife. L. Nageswara Rao & M.R. Shah, JJ. Swapnanjali Sandeep Patil v. Sandeep Ananda Patil, C.A. No. 2534 of 2019 06-03-2019

Education - Closure of School - Directions. U.U. Lalit & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Sant Dnyaneshwar Shikshan Sansthan v. State of Maharashtra, C.A. No. 9384 of 2014 05-03-2019

Environmental Law - The National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 being a beneficial legislation, the power bestowed upon the Tribunal would not be read narrowly. An interpretation which furthers the interests of environment must be given a broader reading. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJJ. Mantri Technoze Pvt. Ltd. v. Forward Foundation, C.A. No. 5016 of 2016 05-03-2019



Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 68 - Cash Credits - Practice of conversion of un-accounted money through the cloak of Share Capital / Premium - Assessee is expected to establish to the satisfaction of the Assessing Officer : Proof of Identity of the creditors; Capacity of creditors to advance money; and Genuineness of transaction. U.U. Lalit & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) 1 v. NRA Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd. through Director, C.A. No. 2463 of 2019 05-03-2019

Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 68 - Cash Credits - Practice of conversion of un-accounted money through the cloak of Share Capital / Premium - Assessee is under a legal obligation to prove the receipt of share capital / premium to the satisfaction of the AO, failure of which, would justify addition of the said amount to the income of the Assessee. U.U. Lalit & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) 1 v. NRA Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd. through Director, C.A. No. 2463 of 2019 05-03-2019

Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 68 - Cash Credits - Practice of conversion of un-accounted money through the cloak of Share Capital / Premium - Initial onus is on the Assessee to establish by cogent evidence the genuineness of the transaction, and credit-worthiness of the investors. U.U. Lalit & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) 1 v. NRA Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd. through Director, C.A. No. 2463 of 2019 05-03-2019

Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 68 - Cash Credits - Practice of conversion of un-accounted money through the cloak of Share Capital / Premium must be subjected to careful scrutiny. U.U. Lalit & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) 1 v. NRA Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd. through Director, C.A. No. 2463 of 2019 05-03-2019

Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 68 - Cash Credits - Practice of conversion of un-accounted money through the cloak of Share Capital / Premium - In the case of private placement of shares, a higher onus is required to be placed on the Assessee since the information is within the personal knowledge of the Assessee. U.U. Lalit & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) 1 v. NRA Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd. through Director, C.A. No. 2463 of 2019 05-03-2019



Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 68 - Cash Credits - Practice of conversion of un-accounted money through the cloak of Share Capital / Premium - Use of the words “any sum found credited in the books” in Section 68 of the Act indicates that the section is widely worded, and includes investments made by the introduction of share capital or share premium. U.U. Lalit & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Central) 1 v. NRA Iron and Steel Pvt. Ltd. through Director, C.A. No. 2463 of 2019 05-03-2019

Income Tax Act, 1961 - Section 80HH - Deduction in respect of profits and gains from newly established industrial undertakings or hotel business in backward areas - Deduction @ 20% of ‘profits and gains’ - Deduction has to be of gross profits and gains, i.e., before computing the income as specified in Sections 30 to 43D of the Act. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJJ. Vijay Industries v. Commissioner of Income Tax, C.A. No. 1581 of 2005 01-03-2019

Income Tax Act, 1961 - Sections 234A, 234B and 234C - Issue relating to waiver of interest payable under Sections 234A , 234B, and 234C of the Act. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Kakadia Builders Pvt. Ltd. v. Income Tax Officer Ward 1 (3), C.A. No. 2491 of 2019 05-03-2019

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 - Section 4 (1) - it has now been almost 28 years since the subject land had been notified for acquisition - appellant has put up construction over the land without acquisition of the said land putting public exchequer at risk - appellant has not produced any document to substantiate its contention that the writ petitioners are not the title holders of the land - On the other hand the writ petitioners have produced their title deeds in relation to the said land - appellant is not justified in contending that the writ petitioners are not the title holders of the land - the direction of the High Court for determination of compensation of the disputed land is just and proper.A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJJ. New Okhla Industrial Development Authority v. Lt. Col. J. B. Kuchhal (Dead), C.A. No. 2478 of 2019 05-03-2019

Land Law - Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950 (U.P.) - Sections 134, 137 - Acquisition of bhumidhari rights by a sirdar - Grant of certificate. Ashok Bhushan & K.M. Joseph, JJ. Rakesh v. Board of Revenue U.P., C.A. No. 5040 of 2008 08-03-2019



Legal Guidance and Assistance - Unfair Trade Practices - Whether the terms and conditions in the agreement to sell / allotment agreement were valid and good - these aspects were not gone into and examined primarily because the appellant did not have proper legal guidance and assistance. Ranjan Gogoi (CJI), L. Nageswara Rao, Sanjiv Khanna, JJ. Sudha Gupta v. DLF Ltd., C.A. No. 9646 of 2013 07-03-2019

Limitation Act, 1963 - Article 54 - the vendee cannot claim that the cause of action for filing the suit has not arisen on the date fixed in contract on the ground that certain conditions in the contract have not been complied with. L. Nageswara Rao & Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ. Urvashi Aggarwal v. Kushagr Ansal, C.A. No. 2525 of 2019 06-03-2019

Mediation - Motor Accidents Mediation Authority (MAMA) - Directions / Recommendations - Government to consider the feasibility of enacting Indian Mediation Act to take care of various aspects of mediation in general. A.K. Sikri & S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ. M.R. Krishna Murthi v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., C.A. No. 2476 of 2019 05-03-2019

Motor Accidents Claims - Motor Accidents Mediation Authority (MAMA) - Directions / Recommendations - Flow Charts - Government may examine the feasibility of setting up MAMA by making necessary amendments in the Motor Vehicles Act. A.K. Sikri & S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ. M.R. Krishna Murthi v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., C.A. No. 2476 of 2019 05-03-2019

Motor Accidents Claims - Motor Accidents Mediation Authority (MAMA) - Directions / Recommendations - National Legal Services Authority (NALSA) is directed to set up Motor Accident Mediation Cell which can function independently under the aegis of NALSA or can be handed over to Mediation and Conciliation Project Committee (MCPC). A.K. Sikri & S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ. M.R. Krishna Murthi v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., C.A. No. 2476 of 2019 05-03-2019



Motor Accidents Claims - Motor Accidents Mediation Authority (MAMA) - Directions / Recommendations - Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit (MACAD) Scheme shall be implemented by all Claim Tribunals on All India basis. 21 Banks, Members of Indian Banks Assocation, who had taken decision to implement MACAD Scheme would do the same on All India basis. A.K. Sikri & S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ. M.R. Krishna Murthi v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., C.A. No. 2476 of 2019 05-03-2019

Motor Accidents Claims - Motor Accidents Mediation Authority (MAMA) - Directions / Recommendations - Motor Accident Claims Annuity Deposit (MACAD) Scheme - Government to look into the feasibility of framing necessary schemes and for the availability of annuity certificates. A.K. Sikri & S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ. M.R. Krishna Murthi v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., C.A. No. 2476 of 2019 05-03-2019

Motor Accidents Claims - Motor Accidents Mediation Authority (MAMA) - Directions / Recommendations - there should be programmes from time to time, in all State Judicial Academies, to sensitizing the Presiding Officers of the Claims Tribunals, Senior Police Officers of the State Police as well as Insurance Company for the implementation of the Procedure. A.K. Sikri & S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ. M.R. Krishna Murthi v. New India Assurance Co. Ltd., C.A. No. 2476 of 2019 05-03-2019

Motor Accidents Claims - the process of assessment of compensation in the present case had been too uncertain, rather vague, and unreasonably restrictive; and the amount as awarded to the appellants cannot be said to be that of just compensation. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Shantaben v. National Power Transport, C.A. No. 2523 of 2019 06-03-2019

National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 - Section 22 - Appeal to Supreme Court - findings arrived at by the Tribunal are not only based on the documents that were available on record but also on the pleadings that were made by the parties buttressed by the Committee's report and the inspection note of the Expert Members. Therefore, the directions passed and the penalty imposed by the Tribunal on both project proponents are valid and sustainable and do not suffer from any perversity. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJJ. Mantri Technoze Pvt. Ltd. v. Forward Foundation, C.A. No. 5016 of 2016 05-03-2019



National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 - Section 22 - Appeal to Supreme Court - Merely because the remedy of appeal is provided against the decision of the Tribunal on a substantial question of law alone, that does not ipso facto permit the appellants to agitate their appeal to seek re-appreciation of the factual matrix of the entire matter. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJJ. Mantri Technoze Pvt. Ltd. v. Forward Foundation, C.A. No. 5016 of 2016 05-03-2019

National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 - Section 22 - Appeal to Supreme Court - appellants cannot seek to re-argue their entire case to seek wholesale re-appreciation of evidence and the factual matrix that has been considered by the Tribunal is ex facie impermissible. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJJ. Mantri Technoze Pvt. Ltd. v. Forward Foundation, C.A. No. 5016 of 2016 05-03-2019

National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 - Section 22 - Appeal to Supreme Court - There cannot be fresh appreciation or re-appreciation of facts and evidence in a statutory appeal under this provision. A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJJ. Mantri Technoze Pvt. Ltd. v. Forward Foundation, C.A. No. 5016 of 2016 05-03-2019

Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972 - Section 2 (e) - the teachers were brought within the purview of “employee” as defined in Section 2(e) of the Payment of Gratuity Act by Amending Act No. 47 of 2009 with retrospective effect from 03.04.1997. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Indu Malhotra, JJ. Birla Institute of Technology v. State of Jharkhand, C.A. No. 2530 of 2012 07-03-2019

Review -The judgment of the High Court deciding Writ Petition without referring to the pleadings in the writ petition i.e. pleadings in the counter-affidavit and rejoinder-affidavit, cannot be upheld. Ashok Bhushan & K.M. Joseph, JJ. Krishna Nand Shukla v. Director of Higher Education, Allahabad, C.A. No. 2544 of 2019 06-03-2019



Service Law - Arrears and Other Benefits - Grant of - Delay - Only in a case where the delay is attributable to the employee the benefit can be restricted. L. Nageswara Rao & M.R. Shah, JJ. Giridhar v. State of Maharashtra, C.A. No. 957 of 2017 06-03-2019

Service Law - Central Civil Services (Commutation of Pension) Rules, 1981 - Rule 4 - Restriction on commutation of pension - Commuted Value of Pension (CVP) - What is the nature of CVP. Is there legal right to receive CVP? Can there be cases where for delayed payment of CVP, interest can be ordered? Is there any provision which provides for interest? - Discussed. Ashok Bhushan & K.M. Joseph, JJ. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. v. Manilal Ambalal Patel, C.A. No. 1681 of 2019 08-03-2019

Service Law - Seniority - Appellant did not at any stage challenge the appointment of the respondent to the post of JDTP nor did he challenge the GR dated 20 March 2003 providing for consequential seniority. The appellant was not eligible for the post of DTP on 30 April 2016, when the vacancy occurred. He cannot, hence, challenge the appointment of the first respondent. D.Y. Chandrachud & Hemant Gupta, JJ. Sudhakar Baburao Nangnure v. Noreshwar Raghunathrao Shende, C.A. No. 2468 of 2019 05-03-2019

Service Law - Unless and until that governing criteria was departed from specifically, mere expression “consequential benefits” would not entitle the concerned employees anything greater than what was contemplated in the policy documents issued by the State Government. Uday Umesh Lalit & M.R. Shah, JJ. K. Ananda Rao v. S.S. Rawat, IAS, Cont.P. (C) No. 1045 of 2018 07-03-2019

Special Marriage Act, 1954 - Sections 24 and 25 - Once the marriage is void the same is a nullity and at any time the same can be declared as nullity being a void marriage. L. Nageswara Rao & M.R. Shah, JJ. Swapnanjali Sandeep Patil v. Sandeep Ananda Patil, C.A. No. 2534 of 2019 06-03-2019



Specific Relief Act, 1963 - Section 16 (c) - Readiness and Willingness - the Plaintiffs have not proved their readiness and willingness to perform their part of the Agreement and, therefore, are not entitled to a decree of specific performance. L. Nageswara Rao & Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, JJ. Urvashi Aggarwal v. Kushagr Ansal, C.A. No. 2525 of 2019 06-03-2019

Tax Law - Whether the sugarcane purchase price paid to the cane growers by the assessee-society more than the SMP and is determined under Clause 5A of the Control Order, 1966, can be said to be the sharing of profit/appropriation of profit or is allowable as expenditure? A.K. Sikri, S. Abdul Nazeer & M.R. Shah, JJJ. C.I.T Bombay v. Tasgaon Taluka S.S.K. Ltd., C.A. No. 8890 of 2012 05-03-2019

Territorial Jurisdiction - An issue of territorial jurisdiction cannot be tried by filing an application for revocation of leave. A plea of territorial jurisdiction is essentially a mixed question of law and fact. It is for this reason, the defendants should be allowed to raise such plea in the written statement to enable the Court to try it on its merits in accordance with law. Abhay Manohar Sapre & Dinesh Maheshwari, JJ. Isha Distribution House Pvt. Ltd. v. Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd., C.A. No. 2554 of 2019 07-03-2019
Previous Post
Next Post