Skip to main content

Posts

Showing posts from July, 2015

Contract - Earnest money - Forfeiture

2015 STPL(Web) 681 ORI [AIR 2015 ORISSA 46] ORISSA HIGH COURT (AMITAVA ROY, C. J. AND DR. A. K. RATH, JJ.) CHANDANESWAR ENTERPRISES LTD. Petitioner VERSUS INDUSTRIAL PROMOTION & INVESTMENT CORPORATION OF ORISSA LTD. Respondent W. P. (C) No. 17035 of 2007-Decided on 22-12-2014. Contract Act,1872, Sections 7, 74 - Earnest Money - Forfeiture of - Sale notice stipulates that "if the offer is accepted by the Corporation and the offerer (s) does not come forward to accept the same, the amount deposited with the offer shall be forfeited - Amount deposited with the offer will be refunded without any interest in case the offer is not accepted by the Corporation Offers invited from intending parties for sale of assets - Final offer made by the petitioner was not accepted in toto - Since the offer was not accepted by the opposite party, the question of forfeiture of E.M.D does not arise at all - Forfeiting the E.M.D. of the petitioner liable to be quashed - Opposite party directed to

NI act - Sec 138 - cheque - dishonour - company

2015 STPL(Web) 1602 SC [2015(5) SCALE 16] SUPREME COURT OF INDIA (SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA AND N.V. RAMANA, JJ.) CHARANJIT PAL JINDAL Appellant VERSUS L.N. METALICS Respondent Criminal Appeal No.402 of 2015 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 1001 of 2013)-Decided on 24-2-2015. Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Sections 138, 141 – Dishonour of Cheque – Company not Made Accused - Offence by company – Arraigning director only and company not arraigned – Held that for maintaining the prosecution u/s 141 of the Act, arraigning a company as an accused is imperative - Appellant only was impleaded as an accused complaint with respect to the offence u/s 138 read with 141 of the Act was not maintainable -Judgment dated 17.4.2010 passed by the Trial Court, order dated 27.5.2011 passed by the Appellate Court and the impugned judgment dated 09.11.2012 passed by the High Court liable to be set aside and the appellant liable to be acquitted. (Paras 11 and 12) Cases Referred : Aneeta Hada v. M/s.

Agreement for sale - Specific performance - contract - time is essence

2015 STPL(Web) 678 MAD [AIR 2015 MADRAS 73] MADRAS HIGH COURT (TMT. PUSHPA SATHYANARAYANA, J.) NANJACHARY Appellant VERSUS P. CHENNAVEERACHARI AND OTHERS Respondents Second Appeal No. 966 of 2006-Decided on 9-9-2014. Specific Relief Act, 1963, Section 16 - Contract Act, 1872, Section 55 - Agreement to Sell - Time Essence of Contract – Specific Performance - Plaintiff has taken unfair advantage of his position to compel the defendants 1 and 2 to sell the suit property to him - When time is the essence of agreement insofar as the sale price is concerned the delay on the part of the plaintiff in not performing his part of the contract and taking advantage of his own wrong cannot be permitted - When the defendants were in dire need of money, they had proposed to sell the property - In such circumstances, the plaintiff ought to have offered the money at the earliest or else, the purpose is lost - Plaintiff had not established his case that he was ready and willing to perform his part of c

Property - Mutation - Title - Rights

Citations: 1) H. LAKSHMAIAH REDDY & ORS. VS L. VENKATESH REDDY, Civil Appeal Nos. 3725-3726 of 2015 [Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 3377-3378 of 2011]-Decided on 17-4-2015.  The assumption on the part of the High Court that as a result of the mututation, 1st defendant divested himself of the title and possession of half share in suit property is wrong. The mutation entries do not convey or extinguish any title and those entries are relevant only for the purpose of collection of land revenue. The observations of this Court in Balwant Singh's case (supra) are relevant and are extracted below :                 "21. We have considered the rival submissions and we are of the view that Mr Sanyal is right in his contention that the courts were not correct in assuming that as a result of Mutation No. 1311 dated 19-7-1954, Durga Devi lost her title from that date and possession also was given to the persons in whose favour mutation was effected. In Saw

Proof of will - Evidence Act - Succession - Execution of wil - Witness not found - Registration

[2015(2) CIVIL COURT CASES 100 = 2015(2) HLR 172] PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT (SNEH PRASHAR, J.) SURINDER SINGH (SINCE DECEASED AND NOW REPRESENTED BY HIS LEGAL HEIRS) Appellant  VERSUS PIARA SINGH Respondent  R.S.A. No. 1498 of 1986 Decided on 16-11-2014. (A) Evidence Act, 1872, Section 69 - Will - Proof of Will – When attesting witnesses not found – Held that, it becomes incumbent upon the propounder of the Will to prove two facts (i) that the attestation of one attesting witness atleast was in his handwriting; and (ii) that the signatures of the executant is in his handwriting.  (Para 13)  (B) Evidence Act, 1872, Section 68 – Succession Act, 1925, Section 63(c) - Will – Proof of Execution - Suspicious Circumstances - A Will is not a document which can be admitted in evidence without complying with the provisions specifically stipulated for proving the same - Factum of existence of the Will brought to light by the plaintiffs only when they filed the present

Widow who remarries does not lose rights over late husband’s property

In a judgment, a bench comprising of VM Kanade and CB Colabawalla, JJ  has ruled that a widow, even after she has remarried, has the rights over her former husband's properties. In the present case, the petition was filed by a man against his former sister-in-law who had claimed the right over her deceased husband’s properties after she married another man. The brother of the deceased relied  on the provisions of the  Hindu Widows' Re-marriage Act, 1856, which stated the limited right and interest which a widow had in her deceased husband’s property would cease to exist if she remarries without express permission, and the next heirs of her deceased husband, or other persons entitled to the property, shall thereupon succeed to the same. The Court ruled that provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 would prevail over the repealed Hindu Widows' Remarriage Act, 1856. There was no provision in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 which was pari materia with section 2 of the Hi

Land belonging to temples cannot be used for commercial purpose

The Kerala High Court on Thursday refused permission to the Travancore Devaswom Board to construct a Convention Centre near Shanghumugham Beach. According to TDB, the land was situated very close to Sanghumugham beach and the international airport. Considering the commercial importance of the locality, the board had decided to construct a convention center. The Court observed that the primary purpose of the Devaswom Boards was to put those lands to use in connection with the activities of the temple and religious, spiritual, cultural and other aspects which are intricately connected with the activities of the temple. Any activity of the Devaswom Boards, which are merely the statutory guardians of devaswom lands, to put such property to commercial use should be restricted to the bare minimum and which is indispensable in the context of any particular locality or temple. It has also to be done only by ensuring that any such investment generates appropriate income. Article referred:

Developer can't escape liability by outsourcing

A developer cannot escape his contractual obligation towards the buyer in a developed property by claiming that he had outsourced the development work to another builder, the Pune district consumer disputes redressal forum has held. In a recent order, the forum, headed by president V P Utpat, ordered a construction firm in Mundhwa to deliver the possession of a 180 sq ft shopping block to the complainant, Meena Harish Bhujbal, with whom he had a registered sale agreement. "As an alternative, if the developer expresses his inability to deliver possession of the block then he should pay the prevailing market price," the forum, which also comprised Mohan Patankar and Kshitija Kulkarni as members, ordered. The three-member bench further directed the firm, Sai Constructions, to pay Rs 25,000 damages to Bhujbal on account of deficiency in service by not delivering possession of the shopping block as promised and causing physical and mental agony to the complainant. The damage

Third Party Bound By Arbitration Agreement Which It Never Signed

  In the context of a right of direct action by an injured party (Spain and France) against a D&I insurer,  in  The London Steamship Owners' Mutual Insurance Association Ltd v The Kingdom of Spain & anr  [2015] EWCA Civ 333, 1 April 2015, Spain and France were held bound by an arbitration agreement contained in an insurance policy which they never signed. The case is an illustration of the circumstances in which state immunity will be waived and defines who is a "party" to an arbitration agreement contained in an insurance policy. It is also a reminder of the very limited category of disputes that will be inarbitrable under English law. The  Prestige  sank off the west coast of Spain in 2002. It was carrying 70,000 tonnes of fuel oil which polluted the Atlantic coastline of Spain and France. The Spanish and French authorities commenced criminal court proceedings against the ship's officers, its owners and the owners' protection and indemnity insurers (

Interpret - Contract - document - meaning - insurance

M/S Bhs Industries vs Export Credit Guarantee Corp.& ... on 7 July, 2015 Bench: Dipak Misra, V. Gopala Gowda                                     IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION                         CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2729 OF 2009 M/s. BHS Industries                     ... Appellant                                    Versus Export Credit Guarantee Corp. & Anr.    ... Respondents ............ 12. In Polymer India (P) Ltd. and Another v. National Insurance Co. Ltd. and Others[4], this Court has held thus:- “19. In this connection, a reference may be made to a series of decisions of this Court wherein it has been held that it is the duty of the court to interpret the document of contract as was understood between the parties. In [pic]the case of General Assurance Society Ltd. v. Chandumull Jain[5], it was observed as under: “In interpreting documents relating to a contract of insurance, the duty of the court

Heir - defined

M/S. Bay Berry Apartments Pvt. ... vs Shobha & Ors on 19 October, 2006 CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  8814 of 2003 DATE OF JUDGMENT: 19/10/2006 N.Krishnammal vs R. Ekambaram & Ors on 16 April, 1979 Equivalent citations: 1979 AIR 1298, 1979 SCR (3) 700 DATE OF JUDGMENT16/04/1979 Now, the principal question is as to what would be the meaning of expression 'heirs'. We have noticed hereinbefore that whereas in relation to the male descendancy the executor had used the expression 'heirs' in regard to the succession of property after their death, which were bequeathed in their favour; the expression 'children' has been used in relation to the inheritance of the property bequeathed in favour of daughters and daughters in law. The expressions 'children', 'issue' and 'heirs' would ordinarily be not synonymous but sometimes they may carry the same meaning. All the aforementioned terms have to be given their appropriate m

Supreme Court - Insurance - Good Faith - Uberrima Fides - Disclosure

Supreme Court of India United India Insurance Co. Ltd vs M.K.J. Corporation on 21 August, 1996 Bench: K. Ramaswamy, G.B. Pattanaik            CASE NO.: Appeal (civil)  6075-6076 of 1995 PETITIONER: UNITED INDIA INSURANCE CO. LTD. RESPONDENT: M.K.J. CORPORATION DATE OF JUDGMENT: 21/08/1996 BENCH: K. RAMASWAMY & G.B. PATTANAIK ............... It is a fundamental principle of Insurance Law that utmost good faith must be observed by the contracting parties. Good faith forbids either party from concealing (non-disclosure) what he privately knows, to draw the other into a bargain, from his ignorance of that fact and his believing the contrary. Just as the insured has a duty to disclose, "similarly, it is the duty of the insurers and their agents to disclose all material facts within their Knowledge, since obligation of good faith applies to them equally with the assured. The duty of good faith is of a continuing nature. After the completion o