A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Section 96(3)—Order XXIII Rules 3 and 3-A—Appeal against consent decree by a stranger—Maintainability—Held—The statutory bar against an appeal from a consent decree and the estoppel arising therefrom operate only against parties to the compromise—A person who was neither a party to the suit nor to the compromise, and asserts an independent legal interest prejudicially affected by the decree, is not barred from seeking leave to appeal under Section 96 CPC. (Paras 47, 51-54)B. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Sections 96 and 100—Appeal by non-party—Leave to appeal—Person aggrieved—Held—A stranger to the original proceedings may prefer an appeal with leave of the appellate Court if the decree prejudicially affects his legal rights or interests—Mere remote, indirect, imaginary or psych...
A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Section 227—Discharge—Scope of Judicial Scrutiny—Held—At the stage of discharge, the Court must sift and weigh the material to determine whether a prima facie case or grave suspicion exists—The Court must consider the broad probabilities and basic infirmities without conducting a mini-trial—Where only suspicion and not grave suspicion arises, the accused may be discharged. (Paras 25-30)B. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 375, 376(2)(n) and 90—Rape—Consent—Consensual Relationship—Held—Repeated sexual acts during a consensual relationship between adults cannot be retrospectively characterised as rape merely because the relationship subsequently soured—Where the woman continued cohabitation despite becoming aware of the man's earlier marriage, the material did not establish abse...
A. Electricity Act, 2003—Sections 14 (Fourth Proviso), 61, 62, 64, 173 and 174—Damodar Valley Corporation Act, 1948—Sections 40 and 58—Tariff Determination—Applicability of Special Statutory Provisions—Held—Provisions of the DVC Act, insofar as they are not inconsistent with the Electricity Act, continue to apply to DVC by virtue of the Fourth Proviso to Section 14—Section 174 does not repeal the DVC Act but overrides only inconsistent provisions—The special statutory framework governing DVC must therefore be given effect in tariff determination. (Paras 9-14)B. Damodar Valley Corporation Act, 1948—Section 40—Electricity Act, 2003—Section 61—CERC Tariff Regulations, 2009—Regulation 43(2)(iii) and (iv)—Sinking Fund—Depreciation—Recovery through Tariff—Held—Section 40 of the DVC Act permits provision for...
A. Indian Penal Code, 1860—Sections 302 and 201—Murder and causing disappearance of evidence—Circumstantial evidence—Sufficiency of evidence—Held—Where the prosecution case rests entirely on circumstantial evidence, the circumstances must provide credible substantive evidence connecting the accused with the crime—In the absence of such evidence, conviction under Sections 302 and 201 IPC cannot be sustained merely on suspicion. (Paras 8-10)B. Indian Evidence Act, 1872—Section 27—Discovery of fact—Recovery of weapon of offence—Evidentiary value—Held—Recovery of an alleged weapon pursuant to the accused’s disclosure statement, by itself, is insufficient to establish his involvement in the commission of murder—Such recovery, without credible substantive evidence connecting the accused with the crime, cannot form ...
A. Constitution of India—Articles 14 and 16—Public employment—Recruitment process—Corruption and nepotism—Cancellation of selection—Held—Where the entire recruitment process is vitiated by rampant corruption, nepotism and serious irregularities, the selection cannot be sustained merely by segregating tainted and untainted candidates. The purity of the selection process must be maintained, and no equity can be claimed by candidates selected through a tainted recruitment. (Paras 3-5, 11, 18).B. Karnataka Civil Services (Validation of Selection and Appointment of 2011 Batch Gazetted Probationers) Act, 2022—Constitutional validity—Legislative power—Overruling judicial decisions—Held—The Legislature cannot, by enacting a law, annul or render ineffective a judgment of a Constitutional Court. Though retrospective amendmen...
A. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Legally enforceable debt—Unlicensed money lending—Promissory note—HELD—In the State of Maharashtra, an advance at interest against a promissory note is not excluded from the definition of “loan” under Section 2(13)(j) of the Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014. Such lending without a licence is prohibited under Section 4 and the loan is unenforceable under Section 13; consequently, the debt does not constitute a legally enforceable debt for the purpose of Section 138 of the NI Act. (Para 6).B. Maharashtra Money-Lending (Regulation) Act, 2014—Sections 2(13)(j), 4 and 13—Unlicensed money lender—Promissory note—Threshold production of licence—HELD—Unlike the Tamil Nadu Money-lenders Act, 1957, the Maharashtra Act does not exclude an advance against a pro...
A. Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) (Abolition of Jagirs) Regulation, 1358 Fasli—Regulations 2(h), 4, 5 and 6—Abolition of Jagirs—Vesting of jagir lands in State—Succession to jagirdari rights—HELD—A jagirdar is not the title-holder of the jagir property but holds the estate in relation to its land revenue. Upon abolition of jagirs and transfer of administration to the State, the jagirdar’s powers, rights and liabilities in relation to the jagir ceased, and no person could thereafter be appointed or recognised as a jagirdar, whether by succession or otherwise. (Paras 26-30, 34-35).B. Andhra Pradesh (Telangana Area) (Abolition of Jagirs) Regulation, 1358 Fasli—Regulations 17 and 18—Home farms—Personal property—Exception to vesting—Burden of proof—HELD—The protection available to home farms and personal properties...
A. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Sections 34 and 37—Setting aside of arbitral award—Scope of judicial interference—HELD—The jurisdiction of the Court under Section 37 is coterminous with and as broad as its jurisdiction under Section 34. An arbitral award may be set aside under the unamended Section 34 where it is contrary to the terms of the contract, patently illegal or opposed to the public policy of India, provided the illegality goes to the root of the matter. (Paras 44-49).B. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Section 28(3)—Interpretation of contract—Arbitral tribunal—Rewriting of contractual terms—HELD—An arbitral tribunal is bound to decide the dispute by taking into account the express terms of the contract and cannot substitute its own terms or grant relief contrary to the agreed contractual ob...
A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 47—Constitution of India—Article 22(1)—Communication of grounds of arrest—Constitutional safeguard—Held—The object of communicating grounds of arrest is to enable the arrested person to understand the reasons for apprehension, consult legal counsel and effectively oppose remand or seek bail—The requirement is substantive and must be meaningfully complied with, having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case. (Paras 16, 20-22)B. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Sections 47 and 483—Regular bail—Non-furnishing of written grounds of arrest—Prejudice test—Held—A procedural lapse in the mode of communicating grounds of arrest does not ipso facto entitle an accused to regular bail in the absence of demonstrable prejudice or denial of a fair opportun...
A. Pension Regulations for the Army, 2008—Regulation 82—Ministry of Defence Policy Letter dated 31-1-2001—Category E(i), Para 4.1—War Injury Pension—Operations specially notified by Government—Held—Category E(i) is enabling in nature and covers operations specially notified by the Government from time to time—Where the notification does not expressly exclude an operation, the benefit of the policy cannot be denied by adopting a restrictive interpretation—Operation Rakshak falls within its ambit. (Paras 10-16, 19-21)B. Ministry of Defence Policy Letter dated 31-1-2001—Part II, Category E—War Injury Pension—Interpretation of pensionary policy—Held—The policymaker must demonstrate the circumstances governing applicability of the policy and cannot interpret its provisions contrary to their plain language or in a ma...
A. Electricity Act, 2003—Sections 82(5), 84(1) and 85(1), (4)—Appointment of Chairman, State Electricity Regulatory Commission—Powers of Selection Committee and State Government—Held—The statutory scheme vests the function of assessing suitability and recommending a panel of two candidates exclusively in the Selection Committee, while the State Government is the appointing authority—The Government cannot assume the role of an appellate authority over the Committee or reject its recommendations merely because, in its opinion, other candidates are more suitable or senior—Its choice is confined to appointment from the recommended panel. (Paras 78-85, 89-91)B. Electricity Act, 2003—Sections 84(1) and 85(1), (4)—Qualifications for appointment as Chairman—Ability, integrity, standing and relevant knowledge—Meaning and scop...
A. Land Acquisition Act, 1894—Section 5A(1) and (2)—Hearing of objections—Objective consideration—Extent of reasons required—Held—The inquiry by the Special Land Acquisition Officer is administrative in nature and does not require adjudication akin to a judicial or quasi-judicial proceeding—The objections must receive fair, genuine and objective consideration, but the report need not contain an elaborate discussion of each objection or detailed findings in the form of a judgment—Brevity of reasons, by itself, does not establish non-application of mind. (Paras 16-18, 21-28)B. Land Acquisition Act, 1894—Sections 5A(2) and 6(1)—Report of Special Land Acquisition Officer—Recommendatory nature—Powers of appropriate Government—Held—The report and recommendations of the SLAO are not binding on the appropriate Governme...
A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882—Section 52—Doctrine of lis pendens—Transfer of suit property during pendency of partition proceedings—Held, A transferee pendente lite is bound by the decree passed in the pending litigation, irrespective of whether such transferee is a bona fide purchaser for valuable consideration or had notice of the pending proceedings—Sale deed dated 22-05-2012 executed in favour of the appellant after the preliminary decree dated 09-02-2011 could not defeat the declared shares of the parties—Appellant's title remained subservient to the preliminary decree—Reliance placed upon Shingara Singh v. Daljit Singh, 2024 INSC 770. (Paras 61-63)B. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Section 97—Order 20, Rule 18—Partition suit—Preliminary decree—Finality and failure to challenge—Held, A preliminary decree i...
A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Section 96—Appeal against dismissal of recovery suit—Friendly loan—Proof of advancement and non-repayment—Held, Plaintiff's unrebutted testimony that Rs.10,00,000 was advanced to the defendant as a friendly loan, supported by bank statement showing transfer to the defendant's proprietary concern and Form 16A recording the defendant as deductor of tax on interest payable to the plaintiff, established the loan transaction—Defendant having failed to cross-examine the plaintiff or lead evidence, there was no reason to disbelieve his deposition—Trial Court's dismissal of the recovery suit held erroneous and unsustainable. (Paras 24-28, 32-35, 38-40)B. Evidence Act, 1872—Sections 101 to 103—Burden of proof—Written statement—Admission of receipt of money and plea of adjustment—Held, Where ...
A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Section 96—Appeal against dismissal of recovery suit—Friendly loan—Proof of advancement and non-repayment—Held, Plaintiff's unrebutted testimony that Rs.10,00,000 was advanced to the defendants as a friendly loan, supported by bank statement and Form 16A showing deduction of tax on interest payable by defendant No. 1, established the loan transaction—Defendants having failed to cross-examine the plaintiff or lead evidence, there was no reason to disbelieve his deposition—Trial Court's dismissal of the recovery suit held erroneous and unsustainable. (Paras 24-28, 32-35, 38-40)B. Evidence Act, 1872—Sections 101 to 103—Burden of proof—Written statement—Admission of receipt of money and plea of adjustment—Held, Where defendants did not deny receipt of Rs.10,00,000 but pleaded that the a...
A. Indian Evidence Act, 1872—Sections 3, 137, 138, 154(2) and 145—CrPC, 1973—Sections 161, 162 and 309—Hostile witness—Evidentiary value of examination-in-chief—Held, Testimony of a witness who resiles from his examination-in-chief during subsequent cross-examination is not effaced from the record—The entire deposition, including examination-in-chief, cross-examination and re-examination, must be read and assessed as a whole—Court may rely upon the credible and trustworthy portion of such testimony, notwithstanding permission to cross-examine the witness under Section 154 of the Evidence Act—Police statement under Section 161 CrPC is not substantive evidence and may be used only for contradiction in accordance with Section 145 of the Evidence Act and Section 162 CrPC—Reliance placed upon Vinod Kumar v. State of Punjab,...
A. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Sections 413, 419(4)—Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881—Section 138—Appeal against acquittal—Complainant also being victim—Requirement of special leave—Held, A complainant who is also the victim may challenge an acquittal either under the proviso to Section 413 BNSS before the Court of Session or under Section 419(4) BNSS before the High Court—Where the appeal is preferred before the High Court under Section 419(4), special leave to appeal is mandatory, even if the complainant is also the victim—The exemption from obtaining special leave applies where the victim prefers an appeal under the proviso to Section 413 before the competent appellate Court. (Paras 7-8)B. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023—Section 413, proviso—Appeal by victim against acquittal—Competent appel...
A. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Order 39 Rules 1 and 2—Temporary injunction—Co-sharers—Right to raise construction on joint property—Held, A co-sharer cannot be restrained from raising construction on joint land merely because partition has not taken place, unless the construction amounts to ouster or is prejudicial or adverse to the rights of other co-sharers—Mere raising of construction or improvement does not by itself constitute ouster or establish diminution in value or utility of the joint property—Injunction can be granted where the construction materially affects another co-sharer’s enjoyment, customary use or rights in the property. (Paras 32-34)B. Code of Civil Procedure, 1908—Order 39 Rules 1 and 2—Temporary injunction—Prima facie case, balance of convenience and irreparable injury—Held, All three condi...
A. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955—Section 13—Divorce—Ground of cruelty—Unrebutted testimony of wife—Held, Specific instances of harassment, physical and mental ill-treatment and dowry-related demands pleaded by wife and reiterated in her affidavit remained unchallenged in cross-examination, as no suggestion was put to her disputing those incidents—Husband’s evidence regarding provision of amenities and purchase of property in wife’s name could not nullify the uncontroverted evidence of cruelty—Finding of cruelty justified on the evidence on record. (Paras 10, 13)B. Hindu Marriage Act, 1955—Section 13—Mental cruelty—Subsequent conduct of parties—Protracted matrimonial litigation—Held, Subsequent events and conduct of spouses during pendency of divorce proceedings can be considered to determine the pattern of behaviour...