(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) DELHI
A. Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC)—Sections 13(c), 13(f), 44A—Enforcement of foreign judgments—The Indian courts are obligated to recognize and execute decrees passed by courts in reciprocating territories, such as the United Kingdom, even if practical difficulties exist in enforcement—Recognition of foreign rights is emphasized over procedural inconvenience—In Alcon Electronics Private Limited v. Celem S.A. of FOS 34320 Roujan, Frane and Another (2012) 2 SCC 253, it was held that foreign judgments must be enforced unless expressly barred by law (Para 32). B. Execution of foreign judgments involving transactions under the Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999 (FEMA)—Violations of FEMA do not render the underlying transaction void, and ex-post facto approval from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) can r...
(2) MEGHALAYA
Quashing of FIR, Rape
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 482—Quashing of FIR—The High Court may quash FIRs to prevent abuse of process of law—However, allegations must be examined in context, and where the FIR contains specific allegations of cognizable offences, mere delay or generality is insufficient for quashing—In the present case, the marriage was solemnized on 08.06.2023, the wife left on 07.08.2023, and the FIR was lodged on 19.09.2023; the chain of events spanning just over three months does not justify quashing (Paras 11, 14, 15). B. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)—Sections 376, 498A—Section 376 (Exception 2) exempts sexual intercourse with one’s own wife, not a minor, from constituting rape; however, FIRs alleging other offences cannot be quashed on this ground alone (Para 13) C. Section 498A...
(3) GUJARAT
Appreciation of evidence
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 378—Appeal against acquittal—The High Court has the power to review and reconsider evidence but must respect the double presumption of innocence in favour of the accused following acquittal by the trial court—Interference is justified only if the trial court’s approach suffers from manifest illegality, the conclusion is perverse, or material evidence was ignored—If two reasonable conclusions are possible, the appellate court should not disturb the acquittal (Paras 11–16, 30–32). B. Penal Code, 1860 (IPC)—Sections 302, 324, 504, 147, 148, 149—Murder, voluntarily causing hurt, intentional insult, and rioting—The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt—Inconsistent and contradictory statements by star wit...
(4) MEGHALAYA
Bail
A. Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC)—Section 397(2)—Revisional powers of High Court—Cancellation of bail constitutes an interlocutory order; hence, the High Court cannot exercise revisional jurisdiction against such orders (Para 20). B. CrPC—Sections 77 and 79—Execution of warrant beyond territorial jurisdiction—A warrant issued to a police officer for execution outside the issuing court’s jurisdiction must ordinarily be endorsed by an Executive Magistrate or the Officer-in-Charge of the local police station where the arrest is to occur—Non-compliance renders the arrest illegal (Para 11). C. Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS)—Sections 35(1)(b), 35(3), 35(7)—Arrest not mandatory—Notices under Section 35(3) apply to offences punishable with imprison...
(5) ALLAHABAD
A. Uttar Pradesh Municipalities Act, 1959, Sections 331 & 334—U.P. Regulation of Urban Premises Tenancy Act, 2021, Section 21—Demolition of dangerous building—Where a structure is officially declared dilapidated and unsafe, issuance of demolition notice is valid—Tenants are bound to vacate and cannot resist demolition—Public safety prevails (Paras 6, 9, 13, 16, 17). B. Statutory duty of Municipal Commissioner—Once a building is found unfit for human habitation and poses threat to life or property, the Municipal Commissioner is legally obligated to act—Authority extends to seeking police assistance for removal of occupants—Tenancy or ownership rights cannot obstruct statutory action (Paras 11, 12, 16). C. Tenants’ protection under Section 21 of 2021 Act—Right of reoccupa...
(6) ORISSA
Sale deed
A. Hindu Succession Act, 1956—Section 14—Self-acquired Property of Female Hindu—Registered Sale Deed in Name of Mother—Held, property purchased through registered sale deed and recorded exclusively in name of female Hindu vests absolutely in her; plea of joint family property or contribution by sons not sustainable in absence of proof—Concurrent findings of courts below affirmed. [Paras 16–17] B. Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005—Sections 17 & 19—Shared Household—Claim by Son and Daughter-in-law—Held, where suit property is self-acquired and exclusively owned by mother-in-law, same cannot be treated as “shared household” enabling son and daughter-in-law to claim right of residence against her wishes. [Paras 17–18] C. Code o...
(7) KARNATAKA
A. Fraudulent Preference—Section 531: A lease or other transfer executed by the management of a company shortly before a winding-up petition, transferring valuable property for inadequate consideration within six months of proceedings, constitutes a fraudulent preference and is void ab initio. B. Void Transactions Against Liquidator—Section 531A: Transactions not in the ordinary course of business, not in good faith, and without valuable consideration, executed within one year before winding-up, are void against the liquidator. C. Distinction (Sections 531 & 531A): Section 531 renders the transaction void ab initio; Section 531A renders it void only against the liquidator. D. Custody of Property—Section 456(1) & (2): Upon a winding-up order, all properties and effects of the company vest in the Tribunal ...
(8) KARNATAKA
Commercial Courts / Civil Procedure / Statutory Bars—Temporary Injunctions and Jurisdiction A. Under Section 13(1A) of the Commercial Courts Act, 2015, appellate courts considering challenges to temporary injunction orders must examine preliminary jurisdictional issues, including statutory bars under SARFAESI Act, RDB Act, and IBC, even if not explicitly raised by the parties. B. SARFAESI Act, 2002 (Section 34) bars civil courts from entertaining suits or granting injunctions affecting recovery actions, including prospective measures, as such matters fall within DRT jurisdiction. C. RDB Act, 1993 (Sections 17–18) vests exclusive jurisdiction in DRT for debt recovery; civil courts cannot entertain declaratory or defensive suits relating to debts recoverable under the Act. D. IBC, 2016 (Section 63) grants NCLT exclus...
(9) DELHI
Quashing of proceeding
A. Companies Act, 1956—Sections 108 & 629A—Transfer of Shares—Issue Estoppel: A complaint filed by the Registrar of Companies based on allegations already adjudicated in a prior private complaint by a shareholder is barred by the principle of issue estoppel—Re-litigation of matters conclusively decided in earlier proceedings is impermissible. B. CrPC, 1973—Section 482—Quashing of Proceedings—Where a complaint by the Registrar of Companies is based on the same facts as a previously dismissed private complaint, it is barred by issue estoppel—The High Court may exercise inherent powers to quash such proceedings to prevent abuse of process. C. Issue Estoppel—Application in Criminal Trials—The principle of issue estoppel applies in criminal trials, precluding re-litigation o...
(10) DELHI
Bail Application
A. Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002—Section 439 CrPC—Bail Application—Applicant arrested on 03.03.2025, not named in initial FIR/ECIR, only included in 7th Supplementary Prosecution Complaint; no prima facie allegations in NIA predicate offence proceedings—Delayed inclusion reflects absence of a prima facie case, supporting bail consideration. B. PMLA, 2002—Sections 3, 4 & 70—Money Laundering; "Proceeds of Crime"—Mere association with an organization or holding position is insufficient to establish personal involvement in money laundering—Property qualifies as “proceeds of crime” only if directly derived from criminal activity relating to a scheduled offence. C. PMLA, 2002—Section 66(2)—Disclosure to Concerned Agency—Disclosure of inf...