Digest Of Supreme Court Cases

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Or. 41 Rr. 1(3), 5 and Or. 27 R. 8-A — Deposit of decretal amount for maintaining appeal:

Instead of depositing entire decretal amount as directed by High court, the deposit as directed by State Government of Rs 45,00,000 can be taken as sufficient compliance of direction issued by the High Court? Held, deposit of Rs 4500000 would meet the ends of justice.  Thus direction of High Court to deposit entire decretal sum […]

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Or. 41 Rr. 1(3), 5 and Or. 27 R. 8-A — Deposit of decretal amount for maintaining appeal: Read More »

Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302/34 and 307/34: In the event of failure of the prosecution to prove the case against the accused beyond the reasonable doubt, the accused will be entitled to be acquitted from all the charges

In this case, around 6:30 p.m., Shri Iqbal Bahadur Saxena, Principal of the Chandra Shekhar Azad Inter-College, since deceased was sitting with his family physician and private practitioner Dr. Asghar Ali in the verandah outside his office, situated in the college campus. He sent his security guard Fazal Maseeh to fetch an empty bottle of

Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302/34 and 307/34: In the event of failure of the prosecution to prove the case against the accused beyond the reasonable doubt, the accused will be entitled to be acquitted from all the charges Read More »

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Or. 33 and S. 11 — Application to file suit as indigent person

Legality of refusal of application to file suit as indigent person, on ground of res judicata and lack of cause of action, determined. When having prima facie found that the plaint does not disclose any cause of action and the suit is barred by res judicata it cannot be said that the Trial Court committed

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — Or. 33 and S. 11 — Application to file suit as indigent person Read More »

Companies Act, 1956 — Ss. 290 and 283 to 289 and Ss 397 and 398- Applicability of Duomatic Principle

Duomatic Principle applicable even in the Indian context – Strict adherence to a statutory requirement may be dispensed with if it is demonstrated otherwise on facts, if the same is consented by all members – Principle is only applicable in those cases wherein bona fide transactions are involved – Fraud is a clear exception. (Para

Companies Act, 1956 — Ss. 290 and 283 to 289 and Ss 397 and 398- Applicability of Duomatic Principle Read More »

Penal Code, 1860 — S. 302

In this case of double murder based on circumstantial evidence, links in the chain of circumstances were completely established. High Court, held, has not properly appreciated entire evidence on record. Findings recorded by High Court are perverse. High Court, held, committed grave error in observing that prosecution failed to prove link evidence, which could establish

Penal Code, 1860 — S. 302 Read More »

Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — Ss. 5 to 14: Core philosophy of GST Regime, explained

A writ petition was filed before the Gujarat High Court challenging Notification 8/2017 and Notification 10/201713. Core taxable event under GST Regime is supply of goods or services, or, both, either individually or as composite supply, which composite supply cannot be dissected and taxed separately or additionally if the composite supply itself is taxable. The

Integrated Goods and Services Tax Act, 2017 — Ss. 5 to 14: Core philosophy of GST Regime, explained Read More »

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — S. 166 — Accident claims- Whether insured offending vehicle was involved in accident or not

Application under the MV Act has to be decided on basis of evidence led before it and not on basis of evidence which should have been or could have been led in a criminal trial. The entire approach of the High Court is clearly not sustainable. Para 11. Held, We find that the appellants are

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 — S. 166 — Accident claims- Whether insured offending vehicle was involved in accident or not Read More »

error: Content is protected !!

Terms And Condition

The rules of the Bar Council of India prohibit law firms from soliciting work or advertising in any manner. By clicking on ‘I AGREE’, the user acknowledges that:

  1. The user wishes to gain more information about Re Legal, its practice areas for his/her own information and use
  2. That the information provided in the website is only for personal use or reference of the visitor and is provided only on his/her specific request.
  3. That the material available for downloading on the website and other information provided on the website would not create any lawyer-client relationship.
  4. That we are not responsible for any consequence of any action taken by the user relying on material/information provided under this website.
  5. That in case the visitor has any legal issues; he or she should seek independent legal advice.

The information provided under this website is for informational purposes only and solely available at your request. It should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertising.