(1) SUPREME COURT
Commercial dispute
A. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—Ss. 30(2), 30(4), 31, 61(3) & 62—Commercial wisdom of CoC—Scope of judicial review—Held, CoC’s decision on feasibility, viability and value maximisation is non-justiciable—Judicial interference confined to statutory grounds under Ss. 30(2) and 61(3)—Neither NCLT nor NCLAT nor Supreme Court can substitute commercial assessment of CoC—Appeal under S. 62 maintainable only on substantial question of law—Concurrent findings of NCLT and NCLAT not interfered with. [Paras 7.1 to 8.3, 12.1 to 12.5] B. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—S. 61(3)(ii)—“Material irregularity” by Resolution Professional—Meaning and scope—RP acting strictly on instructions of CoC and uniformly seeking clarifications from all res...
(2) SUPREME COURT
Contract Law
A. Indian Contract Act, 1872—Sections 126 & 128—Contract of guarantee—Surety’s liability—Extent and nature—Held, liability of surety is co-extensive with that of principal debtor unless otherwise provided—Creditor entitled to proceed against surety without first exhausting remedies against principal debtor—However, surety cannot be made liable beyond terms of guarantee executed by him. [Paras 4.1, 5.2, 5.3, 7] B. Indian Contract Act, 1872—Section 133—Discharge of surety by variance in terms of contract—Overdrawal beyond sanctioned limit—Without consent of sureties—Effect—Held, permitting principal debtor to withdraw amounts in excess of sanctioned cash-credit facility constitutes variance in terms of contract—Surety discharged only i...
(3) SUPREME COURT
A. Constitution of India—Art. 141—Finality and binding effect of judgments of Supreme Court—High Court cannot reopen or dilute relief specifically granted by Supreme Court—Appellants promoted in compliance with earlier judgment of Supreme Court—Contempt petition disposed of recording compliance—Held, High Court, in proceedings to which appellants were not parties, could not render findings having effect of unsettling benefits flowing from Supreme Court judgment—Impugned judgment not to affect appellants’ career prospects. [Paras 13 to 15] B. All India Council for Technical Education Act, 1987—AICTE Regulations, 2003 & 2010—Kerala Technical Education Service (Amendment) Rules, 2004—Rule 6A—Ph.D qualification—Interplay between State Rules under Art. 30...
(4) SUPREME COURT
Electricity
A. Indian Evidence Act, 1872—Ss. 92, 94 & 95—Interpretation of written contract—PPA/PSA—“Captive source” of coal—Reference to surrounding circumstances—Held, though written contract ordinarily to be construed from its terms, surrounding circumstances may be looked into to identify subject-matter and link contractual language to existing facts—Minutes of Meeting dated 03.01.2011 and WBSEDCL’s letter dated 30.04.2012 clearly establish Ganeshpur Coal Block as designated captive source—WBSEDCL precluded from contending that PPA/PSA did not stipulate such source. [Paras 19 to 23] B. Electricity Act, 2003—PPA/PSA—Article 10—Change in Law—Coal block cancellation pursuant to Manohar Lal Sharma v. Principal Secy.—Coal Mines (Special Provisio...
(5) SUPREME COURT
A. Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016—Ss. 5(8), 7 & 60(2)–(3)—Indian Contract Act, 1872—S. 128—Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP)—Simultaneous proceedings against principal borrower and corporate guarantor—Maintainability—Held, liability of principal debtor and guarantor is co-extensive under S. 128, Contract Act—IBC, particularly S. 60(2)–(3), contemplates and permits separate or simultaneous CIRP against corporate debtor and corporate guarantor—Earlier view in Vishnu Kumar Agarwal (NCLAT) contrary to statutory scheme—Law settled in BRS Ventures Investments Ltd. v. SREI Infrastructure Finance Ltd.—Adjudicating Authority cannot reject S. 7 application solely on ground that CIRP already admitted against principal borrower/guarantor for same debt...
(6) SUPREME COURT
Arbitration
A. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Ss. 28(3) & 31(7)(a)—General Conditions of Contract (GCC), Cls. 16(3) & 64(5)—Pre-award / pendente lite interest—Contractual bar—Held, arbitral tribunal bound by terms of contract—Where contract expressly stipulates that no interest shall be payable on amounts payable to contractor under contract, tribunal lacks jurisdiction to award pre-award/pendente lite interest, even if described as “compensation”—Expression “amounts payable to the contractor under the contract” is wide and cannot be cut down by ejusdem generis—Statutory scheme under S. 31(7)(a) subordinates arbitral discretion to party autonomy—Award of pendente lite interest under Claim Nos. 1, 3 & 6 contrary to express contractual prohibition—Li...
(7) SUPREME COURT
A. Constitution of India, 1950—Arts. 14, 15, 21, 22 & 39-A—Model Prison Manual, 2016, Ch. XXIII—Model Prisons and Correctional Services Act, 2023, Ss. 2(21) & 50—Prison administration—Constitutional rights of prisoners—Rehabilitative justice—Held, prisoners do not lose fundamental rights upon incarceration—Right to life under Art. 21 includes right to dignity and protection against cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment—Incarceration must conform to constitutional morality—Open Correctional Institutions (OCIs) are humane, reformative alternatives to overcrowded closed prisons—Facilitate graded liberty, responsibility, rehabilitation and social reintegration—Consistent with domestic statutory frameworks and international standards including Nelson Mandela Rules&...
(8) SUPREME COURT
Registered sale deed
A. Transfer of Property Act, 1882—Section 105—Lease or licence—Determination of nature of document—99-year “lease deed”—Unilateral cancellation—Validity—Held—Substance of document and intention of parties determinative—Nomenclature not conclusive—Where document uses expressions such as “demises”, fixes definite term of 99 years, reserves annual rent, permits construction and alterations, and includes successors and assigns, it creates an interest in immovable property—Satisfies requirements of lease under S. 105 TPA—Exclusive possession to be examined vis-à-vis demised portion—Mere retention of first floor by lessor does not convert transaction into licence—Literal construction to be preferred where terms clear and unamb...
(9) SUPREME COURT
Complaint
A. Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940—Sections 18(a)(i), 17(b), 17(c) & 27(d)—Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973—Sections 200, 202 & 473—Complaint by public servant—Misbranding of drugs—Whether compliance with Section 202 CrPC mandatory where accused resides beyond territorial jurisdiction—Held—Proviso to Section 200 CrPC exempts a public servant from examination when filing complaint in discharge of official duties—Public servants are placed on a different pedestal in view of legislative intent—Where complaint is filed by a public servant acting in official capacity, compliance with Section 202 CrPC is not mandatory merely because accused resides beyond territorial jurisdiction. [Paras 40 to 40.2] B. Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940—Section 34—Vicarious liability of...
(10) SUPREME COURT
Quashing of FIR
A. Penal Code, 1860—Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471—Criminal breach of trust, cheating and forgery—Quashing of FIR—Dispute arising out of Joint Venture Agreement (JVA)—Allegation of false representation regarding title and non-refund of security deposit—Held, allegations primarily relate to breach of contractual terms—No specific averment of dishonest intention at inception of agreement—Security deposit adjustable and not refundable as per terms of JVA—No allegation satisfying ingredients of “false document” under S. 464 IPC—Delay of about 10 years in lodging FIR indicative of civil dispute—Continuation of criminal proceedings amounts to abuse of process—FIR quashed. (Paras 15–30) B. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 482&mdash...
(1) GAUHATI
A. RFCTLARR Act, 2013—Sections 64 & 77—Protest Against Compensation—If the award becomes effective on a specific date, any correspondence or action prior to that date is irrelevant for determining acceptance or protest—A valid protest must be contemporaneous with or precede the receipt of compensation for a reference to be maintainable. (Paras 43, 55) B. RFCTLARR Act, 2013—Section 77(2)—Second Proviso—Prohibition on Reference Application—A person who receives compensation without protest is barred from filing an application for reference under Section 64. (Para 41) C. Land Acquisition Act, 1894—Sections 18 & 31 / RFCTLARR Act, 2013—Sections 64 & 77—Interpretation of Protest—Supreme Court judgments on Sections 18 and 31 of the 1894 Act are applicable ...
(2) CHHATTISGARH
Condonation of delay
A. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Sections 31(5) & 34(3)—Limitation for Setting Aside Award—Compliance with Section 31(5) is essential to trigger the limitation period under Section 34(3)—If a signed copy of the arbitral award is not delivered to the party itself, the limitation period for filing an application to set aside the award does not commence—The three-month period under Section 34(3) begins from the date the party actually receives the signed copy, not from the date the award was passed. (Paras 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 14) B. Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996—Sections 34(3) & 5 of Limitation Act—Condonation of Delay—When proper service of the award under Section 31(5) is absent, rejection of a Section 34 application solely on limitation grounds, without considering...
(3) JAMMU & KASHMIR
A. Civil Services Regulations (J&K)—Schedule XIX & Rule 14(b) of Leave Rules—Foreign Assignment—Government employee must obtain prior permission before engaging in foreign employment; applying for or attending an interview without formal permission constitutes misconduct. B. Conduct Rules (J&K), 1971—Rule 10(1)—Prohibits engagement in any other employment without prior sanction; mandatory language makes violation liable for disciplinary action. C. Administrative Law—Judicial Review—Tribunal’s Role—Tribunal cannot substitute its judgment for employer’s administrative or policy decision; interference is limited to cases of illegality, arbitrariness, mala fide conduct, or violation of statutory rules or principles of natural justice. D. Administrative Law—...
(4) JAMMU & KASHMIR
Compassionate appointment
A. Compassionate Appointment—Exception to General Rule—Not a Matter of Right—Appointments under SRO 43 are exceptions to general public service appointments based on merit and equality under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution—They aim to assist families facing financial hardship due to the death of a government employee and cannot be claimed as a guaranteed right or a route to a higher post. (Paras 9, 10, 12, 14) B. Eligibility and Norms—Compassionate appointments must adhere to State policy and eligibility criteria—Norms prevailing at the time of application consideration are applicable. (Para 9) C. Discretionary Power for Higher Posts—Under Rule 3(2) of SRO 43 of 1994, the Government may, at its discretion, appoint a family member to a higher non-gazetted post if eligible and qualified...
(5) ORISSA
Motor Accident Claims
A. Motor Vehicles Act, 1988—Section 166, 173(1)—Motor Accident Claims—Appeals—Both insurer and claimant challenged quantum of compensation awarded by Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (Rs.1,12,71,231/-); insurer disputed disability assessment, claimant challenged income determination. (Para 1, 2) B. Assessment of Disability—Disability Certificate—Insurer challenged disability evaluation relying on Raj Kumar v. Ajay Kumar but did not dispute genuineness of Medical Board certificate (Ext.9); certificate held genuine in absence of contrary evidence. (Para 5) C. Principles of Disability and Earning Capacity—Tribunal must determine if disablement is total/partial, effect on whole body functioning and earning capacity; assess what claimant can/cannot do, pre-accident avocation, and functional versus ...
(6) UTTARAKHAND
Bail Application
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 309—Speedy Trial—Mandates day-to-day proceedings once witness examination begins; adjournments require special reasons to ensure timely conclusion of trial. (Para 16) B. Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act) & SC/ST Act, 1989—Gravity of offences—Allegations under these Acts are serious and must be carefully weighed during bail proceedings. (Para 13, 14) C. Bail Application—Consideration—At bail stage, court need not probe contradictions or assess strength of evidence; it suffices to see if a prima facie case exists based on investigation material. (Para 13) D. Bail Application—Rejection—Serious charges under POCSO/SC-ST Act, supportive victim statements, risk of witness influence, and advanced tria...
(7) JHARKHAND
Bail
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 439—Bail—Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA)—Section 43D(5)—Grant of bail—Delay in trial—Prolonged incarceration and lack of progress in trial constitute valid grounds for granting bail, even under stringent statutes like UAPA. B. CrPC—Section 439—Bail—Constitutional Safeguards—Extended detention may render continued incarceration unconstitutional, potentially overriding statutory restrictions under Section 43D(5) if the trial is unlikely to conclude within a reasonable time. C. UAPA—Section 43D(5)—Bail—Consideration of Delay—Delay in trial must be assessed in totality, considering nature of allegations, statutory framework, and causes of delay, not merely passage of time. D. CrPC...
(8) MEGHALAYA
Bail
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 439—Bail—Accused charged under Section 142 BNS, 2023 read with Section 3(a)/4 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO) for alleged sexual relationship with a minor—Survivor’s statement under Section 180 BNSS admits love relationship and consensual sexual act—High Court recognizes seriousness of POCSO offences but, in exceptional circumstances involving consensual adolescent relationships, grants bail—Accused directed to be released on bail subject to conditions. (Para 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9) B. Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act)—Bail Consideration—POCSO provisions are stringent; however, courts may grant bail in cases of consensual sexual relationships between adolescents, taking int...
(9) CALCUTTA
Writ petition
A. Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)—Jurisdiction—High Courts can interfere with orders passed by the CAT in writ proceedings only if there is a manifest error of law or perversity in the exercise of jurisdiction—Mere dissatisfaction with findings of fact is not sufficient for interference. B. Constitution of India, 1950—Article 21 (Right to Life)—The right to health and right to medical treatment are integral to the right to life with dignity—Retired government employees are entitled to medical benefits to uphold their fundamental rights. C. Central Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1944 (CSMA Rules)—These rules apply to pensioners as well—Pensioners residing in non-CGHS areas are not automatically deprived of medical facilities—Medical benefits under these rules must be ...
(10) RAJASTHAN
A. Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958—Rule 16—Delay in Disciplinary Proceedings—Inordinate or unexplained delay in initiating or concluding proceedings can be a ground to quash only if it causes manifest prejudice; mere delay without prejudice is insufficient. (Paras 9, 10, 11, 23, 27, 53) B. Rule 16—Charge Sheet—Vagueness—Charge sheet must contain precise allegations; vague or generalized charges violate natural justice. If facts and nature of accusation are discernible and reply is filed, charge sheet is not necessarily vague. (Paras 14, 21, 40–42, 55) C. Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940—Section 33P—Binding Directions—Central Government directions to States under Section 33P are binding; State authorities cannot dilute or deviate. (Para...