Legal Reference Library

In Chandi Prasad Vs. State, the Himachal Pradesh High Court while deciding on Adverse Possession said that - It is well recognized proposition in law that mere possession however long does not necessarily mean that it is adverse to the true owner. Adverse possession really means the hostile possession which is expressly or impliedly in denial of title of the true owner and in order to constitute adverse possession the possession proved must be adequate in continuity, in publicity and in extent so as to show that it is adverse to the true owner. The classical requirements of acquisition of title by adverse possession are that such possession in denial of the true owner’s title must be peaceful, open and continuous. It is equally settled that a person pleading adverse possession has no equities in his favour and since such a person is trying to defeat the rights of the true owner, it is for him to clearly plead and establish necessary facts to establish his adverse possession. In...

The Supreme Court in Mrs. Hema Khattar & ANR. Vs. Shiv Khera has held that When an agreement is terminated by one party alleging breach committed by the other, the arbitration clause still survives and continues to be operative. This is particularly so when the contract is revoked by mutual consent and the arbitration clause is framed in general terms. The Supreme Court referred to earlier decisions in Sundaram Finance Limited and Another vs. T. Thankam (2015) 14 SCC 444, where this Court has held as under:- "8. Once there is an agreement between the parties to refer the disputes or differences arising out of the agreement to arbitration, and in case either party, ignoring the terms of the agreement, approaches the civil court and the other party, in terms of Section 8 of the Arbitration Act, moves the court for referring the parties to arbitration before the first statement on the substance of the dispute is filed, in view of the peremptory language of Section 8 of th...

In awarding tenders, the technical experience of a subsidiary company can be taken into account and the parent company cannot be ousted only because it has no experience on its own, the Supreme Court  said while upholding the award of a Metro rail project to a Chinese government company. In this judgment, Consortium of Titagarh Firema Adler SPA vs Nagpur Metro Rail Corporation, the contract for 69 passenger cars and training of personnel was awarded to the Chinese company, though its bid was only marginally lower than that of the consortium.  Therefore, it moved the Bombay High Court where the writ petition was dismissed. The Supreme Court held that there is no bar, whatsoever, express or implied, in the tender document to treat the parent company along with its 100% wholly owned subsidiaries as one entity. Therefore, the scope of judicial review should be limited in adjudging the decision taken by R 1 in the best interest of the project, and thereby, the public. the conce...

The credibility of a witness cannot be judged merely on the basis of his close relation with the deceased and as such cannot be a ground to discard his testimony, if it otherwise inspires confidence and, particularly so, when it is corroborated by the evidence of independent and injured witnesses. While appreciating the evidence of the witnesses related to the deceased, having strained relations with the accused party, their evidence cannot be discarded solely on that basis, but the court is required to carefully scrutinize it and find out if there is scope for taking view whereby the court can reach to the conclusion that it is a case of false implication. 1. Masalti v. The State of Uttar Praadesh, AIR 1965 SC 202 Speaking for a 5-Judge Bench P.B.Gajendragadkar, C.J. Said : “…There is no doubt that when a criminal Court has to appreciate evidence given by witnesses who are partisan or interest, it has to be very careful in weighing such evidence. Whether or not there are discrep...

The Supreme Court, in Anjan Kumar Sarma vs State of Assam, has reiterated that “last seen together” along with “absence of satisfactory explanation” cannot be made the sole basis of conviction, when the other circumstances could not be proved. The high court, in the instant case, had convicted the accused holding that the onus was on the accused to explain and exculpate themselves when the ‘last seen theory’ was established and in the absence of any satisfactory explanation, the presumption would suggest the guilt of the accused. The accused were charged with offences of murder and rape. The Trial Court had returned an order of acquittal which was later challenged before the High Court. Referring to various decisions on the aspect of ‘last seen together’, the bench comprising Justice L Nageswara Rao and Justice Navin Sinha observed that where the other links have been satisfactorily made out and the circumstances point to the guilt of the accused, the circumstance of last seen toge...

The fact that the witness may be related to the deceased by marriage, cannot be sufficient reason to classify him as a related and interested witness to reject his testimony, the Supreme Court has observed while dismissing the appeals in a murder case (Chandrasekar vs State). The wife of the deceased and her relatives were prime witnesses in this case and they had deposed seeing the murderous assault on the deceased by the accused. The trial court had convicted the accused and sentenced them to life imprisonment and the high court had upheld the verdict. “It may only call for greater scrutiny and caution in consideration of the evidence,” the court observed, while rejecting the contention that these witnesses were interested witnessed and their testimony be rejected. With regard to deposition by the wife, the bench observed: “Being the wife of the deceased, we find no reason why she would not be speaking the truth with regard to the real assailants instead of shielding them by fa...

In STATE OF U.P vs  SUNIL, settling a doubt which has troubled crime investigators for long, the Supreme Court has ruled that asking an accused to give finger or foot prints for investigation purposes did not violate his fundamental right to protect himself from becoming a witness against himself. The question before a bench of Justices Pinaki Chandra Ghose and Rohinton Fali Nariman was "whether compelling an accused to provide his fingerprints or footprints etc would come within the purview of Article 20(3) of the Constitution of India, that is compelling an accused of an offence to be a 'witness' against himself"? This question arose in a case involving the murder of four persons of a family in Etawah in September 2000. The main accused died during the trial but his alleged associate, who had refused to give finger and foot prints to the investigating officer despite a direction from the trial court, was convicted of the crime and sentenced to death. The HC ac...

Supreme Court Baliraj Singh v. State of Madhya Pradesh MANU/SC/0500/2017 25.04.2017 Criminal Value of medical evidence is only corroborative; it proves that, injuries could have been caused in manner alleged Present appeal arises out of impugned judgment passed by a Division Bench of High Court of Madhya Pradesh, upholding conviction and sentence passed by trial Court against Appellant herein for offence punishable under Section 302/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860. High Court found the statements of eyewitnesses to be cogent and trustworthy, therefore concurred with judgment of Trial Court and dismissed appeal of Appellant-Accused. Case on behalf of Appellant is that, most of prosecution witnesses are interested witnesses, particularly eyewitnesses belong to one family and they had a longstanding grudge against Accused over property dispute between both families, and hence, Appellant was falsely implicated in retaliation. Admittedly, there was no peace and harmony between v...

The issue that this article discusses is whether the registration of a First Information Report (FIR) against an accused needs to be followed by his/her imminent arrest. Nowadays, when an allegation of committing a cognizable offence comes up against a person - particularly a celebrity - there will be a public outcry for his/her arrest even though such an arrest is unwarranted in accordance with criminal jurisprudence or its practice. Unnecessary arrests and unjustified pre-trial detention pose grave threat to many citizens accused of committing cognizable criminal offences. The five-member constitutional bench of the Supreme Court in Lalithkumari case categorically stated that the arrest of a person is not directly linked to the registration of FIR. The verdict states both are entirely different concepts operating under different parameters and if a police officer misuses his power of arrest, he can be tried and punished under Section 166 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefor...

Supreme Court Vedanta Limited V.  Emirates Trading Agency LLC MANU/SC/0474/2017 21.04.2017 Contract Existence of a concluded contract is sine qua non in compensation claim for loss and damages Respondent's Suit for breach of contract and damages was decreed by Principal District Court, in Original Suit for a sum of Rs. 5,25,55,460/- with interest @ 8% from date of plaint till realisation. First Appeal by Appellant was dismissed by High Court. In Special Leave Petition preferred against same, liberty was granted to approach High Court in the review jurisdiction, on issue whether agreement between parties constituted a concluded contract or matters rested at stage of a proposal and a counter proposal only. Liberty was further granted to approach this Court again, if aggrieved. Review application was dismissed by High Court. Appellant submitted that, agreement was a draft proposal from Respondent regarding supply of phosphoric acid by Appellant in a specified duration. App...

When the seriousness of the offence is such, the mere fact that he was in jail for however long time should not be the concern of the Courts, the Supreme Court  in The State Of Bihar vs Amit Kumar @ Bacha Rai has said, while holding that bail cannot be granted on the sole ground that accused was in custody for a long time. A bench comprising Justice NV Ramana and Justice Prafulla C Pant set aside a Patna High Court order, which had granted bail to Bihar toppers’ scam accused Amit Kumar @ Bacha Rai. In a brief order, the high court, while granting bail, relied on the fact that the accused has already been in custody for a long time.

In Halliburton Offshore Services INC Vs. Principal Officer of Mercantile Marine Department, the Supreme Court has held that :- For grant of PCOR to a ship becoming Indian ship abroad, all the requisite conditions for obtaining final registration must be satisfied viz.: (i) satisfaction of ownership of ship in terms of Section 21 of the M.S. Act; (ii) the ship must be fully built and sea-going so that it can reach the Indian port for obtaining certificate of final registry and (iii) satisfaction of other requirements contained in Sections 23 to 32 of the M.S. Act. As per sub-section (2) of Section 40 of the M.S. Act, the Provisional certificate of registry will cease to have effect after six months of the date of issuance or until the arrival of the ship at a port where there is a registrar whichever first happens. The Provisional certificate of registry cannot be renewed nor its validity can be extended beyond six months.

In Gurnam Singh (D) Thr. Lrs. Vs. Gurbachan Kaur(D), Supreme Court of India held that On the death of a party to the appeal, if no application is made by the party concerned to the appeal or by the legal representatives of the deceased on whom the right to sue has devolved for substitution of their names in place of the deceased party within 90 days from the date of death of the party, such appeal abates automatically on expiry of 90 days from the date of death of the party. In other words, on 91st day, there is no appeal pending before the Court. It is “dismissed as abated”.

The Supreme Court, in State of Madhya Pradesh vs Kallo Bai, has clarified that confiscatory proceedings are independent of the main criminal proceedings, and it is meant to provide a deterrent mechanism and to stop further misuse of the vehicle. A bench comprising Justice NV Ramana and Justice Prafulla C Pant was considering an appeal by the state against the high court order which had upheld a session’s court order directing the vehicle to be released on the ground that unless the guilt of the accused is proved, the authority had no right to confiscate the vehicle and forest produce. The authorsed officer-cum-sub divisional officer had held that the vehicle operator and his companion had deliberately transported teak wood without the requisite permit or any valid document and that the owner was aware of the said illegal transport. The bench, referring to various other decisions and also on provisions of the Madhya Pradesh Van Upaj (Vyapar Viniyam) Adhiniyam, 1969, observed that ...

1. District Mining officer v. Tata Iron and Steel co., (2001) 7 SCC 358 Function of the court is only to expound the law and not to legislate. A statute has to be construed according to the intent of them and make it the duty of the court to act upon true intention of the legislature. If a statutory provision is open to more than one interpretation, the court has to choose the interpretation which represents the true intention of the legislature. 2. Krishna v. state of Maharashtra, (2001) 2 SCC 441 In absence of clear words indicating legislature intent, it is open to the court ,when interpreting any provision, to read with other provision of the same statute. 3. Essen Deinki v. Rajiv Kumar, (2002) 8 SCC 409 It is the duty of the court to give broad interpretation keeping in view the purpose of such legislation of preventing arbitrary action however statutory requirement can not be ignored. 4. Grasim industries ltd. v. Collector of Custom, (2002) 4 SCC297 While interpreti...

In Rajasthan Wakf Board Vs. Devki Nandan Pathak, the Supreme Court held that Once the property is declared to be a Wakf property, a fortiori, whether the sale of such property is made by a person not connected with the affairs of the Wakf or by a person dealing with the affairs of the Wakf, the same becomes void by virtue of Section 51 of the Act unless it is proved that it was made after obtaining prior permission of the Board as provided under the Act.

The Supreme Court, in State vs KS Palanichamy, has upheld the state government’s power to issue ad interim order under Section 3 of the Tamil Nadu Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1997, attaching the immovable properties belonging to a financial establishment which defaults in returning deposits after maturity or fails to pay interest on deposit or fails to provide any service for which the deposit has been made, basing on the complaint of investors. A bench comprising Justice NV Ramana and Justice Prafulla C Pant set aside a Madras High Court order which, while setting aside the GO, observed that before passing an order under Section 3 of the Act, the government has to take steps under Section 4 of the Act by identifying the properties. The court observed that the state of Tamil Nadu had enacted the statute to protect the interest of innocent investors, curb the malady of financial swindlers and to deal with such problems effectively. “It ...

The Supreme Court, in Venu vs Ponnusamy Reddiar, has held that there is no limitation period for the execution of preliminary decree for partition. In 1989, an application for execution of the decree was filed after 30 years of the preliminary decree for partition, which was passed in 1959. It prayed for the appointment of a court commissioner so as to carry out the preliminary decree. The  high court had rejected the contention that since the application had been filed for the appointment of court commissioner, it ought to governed by provisions of Article 137 of the Limitation Act 1963. A bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra and Justice Amitava Roy observed that a preliminary decree for partition crystallises the rights of parties for seeking partition to the extent declared, the equities remain to be worked out in final decree proceedings and till partition is carried out and final decree is passed, there is no question of any limitation running against right to claim partit...

The Supreme Court, in Palam Gas Service vs Commissioner of Income Tax, has held that though the word used in Section 40(a) (ia) of the Income Tax Act, is ‘payable’, it would also cover the situations where the amount is already paid, but no advance tax was deducted thereupon. A bench comprising Justice AK Sikri and Justice Ashok Bhushan extensively quoted the judgments of high courts of Punjab & Haryana, Madras and Calcutta in this regard and affirmed the same. The court also overruled the Allahabad High Court judgment, which had held that Section 40(a) (ia) would apply only when the amount is ‘payable’. Section 40 of the Act enumerates certain situations wherein expenditure incurred by the assessee, in the course of his business, will not be allowed to be deducted in computing the income chargeable under the head ‘Profits and Gains from Business or Profession’. Section 40(a) (ia) states that certain payments made, which includes amounts payable to a contractor or sub-contr...

Disposing of a two decade old defamation suit, the High Court of Delhi in Tosiba Appliances Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs Kabushiki Kaisha Toshiba & Others  opined that public apology is a more fitting relief than monetary damages in defamation cases. “..I may also record that in my opinion, the harm done by defamation being to the reputation of a person, a direction to issue a public apology or a direction to correctthe errors, if any, particularly in defamation arising out of libel by media appears to be a more appropriate relief than a relief of monetary damages. Compensation in monetary damages can never set the record straight or restore the damaged reputation caused by a libelous news report. The person aggrieved by a libelous news report having a large circulation can never exactly know who all have had access thereto and cannot possibly go to each and every one of those persons with the judgment of award of compensation to him,” Justice Rajiv Sahai Endlaw observed. “R...