Articles

9th Dec, 2019

“Resignation” of an employee results in forfeiture of past service and would not entitle such employee for claiming pension

The Court further held that “resignation” has the effect of termination of an employee and entails consequences different from that of “voluntary retirement” and pension cannot be claimed in the former case. The above ratio […]
27th Nov, 2019

Dismissal of an application under Order IX Rule 13 of CPC does not bar the statutory right of first appeal under Section 96 of CPC

The Court further held that both the remedies could be pursued simultaneously however, if an appeal is dismissed earlier then an application under Order IX Rule 13 is rendered not maintainable. The above ratio was […]
27th Nov, 2019

There is no embargo on filing counter claim after filing written statement as per Order VIII Rule 6A, Code of Civil Procedure 1908

The Supreme Court has held that a Court can exercise its discretion and permit the filing of a counterclaim after the written statement till the stages of framing of issues of the trial.   It […]
21st Nov, 2019

Hotel cannot take shelter of “owner’s risk” clause in valet parking to avoid liablity caused by theft.

The Supreme Court of India delivered the above-mentioned judgment in Taj Mahal Hotels v United India Insurance Company Ltd & Ors [C.P. (W) 8611/2019), decided on 14.11.2019.   Issues:   Following issues were raised before […]
21st Nov, 2019

Accused is not competent to tender affidavit by way of evidence in Section 138 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 proceedings

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that an accused facing trial under the provisions of Negotiable Instruments Act cannot be allowed to tender affidavit by way of evidence.   The said ruling was […]
19th Nov, 2019

A certificate of registration of marriage and not a registered contract of marriage is a valid proof of marriage

The Supreme Court held that a contract of marriage does not fulfil the requisites of sub-clause (2) of Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act and cannot be taken to be proof of a valid […]
19th Nov, 2019

Government servant cannot raise any dispute before Consumer forum about their service conditions or retiral benefits:

The Supreme Court has observed that a government servant is not a consumer under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 and cannot raise any dispute regarding the pension and retiral benefits before the consumer forum under […]
4th Nov, 2019

The State cannot enact a legislation providing an appeal directly to the Supreme Court.

The Supreme Court in its latest decision held that State Legislature cannot make law which takes away the supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court and provides an appeal directly to the Supreme Court. The Court […]
2nd Nov, 2019

The provisions of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code 2016 would have an over­riding effect over the Tea Act, 1953 and that no prior consent of the Central Government before initiation of the proceedings under Section 7 or Section 9 of the IBC would be required.

The Supreme Court in the matter of Duncans Industries Ltd. vs. A.J. Agrochem upheld the order of the NCLAT allowing the insolvency petition under Section 9 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 initiated by […]
31st Oct, 2019

‘Amount Due’ not required to be proved in a proceeding under Negotiable Instruments Act in the same manner as if proving debt before Civil Court

The Supreme Court has observed that a complainant in a cheque bounce case need not prove the ‘amount due’ as if he is to prove a debt before civil court. The said ratio was held […]
30th Oct, 2019

Revenue Records do not confer title to a property, nor do they have any presumptive value on title:

The Supreme Court has reiterated that the revenue records do not confer title to a property nor do they have any presumptive value on the title.   The above mention observation was made in the […]
25th Oct, 2019

Purchaser of goods for Commercial Purpose is a ‘Consumer’ under Section 2 (1) (d) of COPRA, if he uses it himself for earning his livelihood

  The Supreme Court observed that if the commercial use of goods is by the purchaser himself for the purpose of earning his livelihood by means of self-employment, such purchaser of goods is a ‘consumer’. […]