Legal Reference Library

In Haryana Urban Dev. Authority and Ors. Vs. Orchid Infrastructure Developers P. Ltd., the Respondent filed a suit for declaration with consequential relief as against the Appellants with regard to rejection of bid relating to the commercial tower when the bid submitted by the Respondent was the highest. Plaintiff questioned the rejection of the bid. The question before the court was - (i) Whether there being no concluded contract in absence of acceptance of bid and issuance of allotment letter, suit could be said to be maintainable for declaratory relief and mandatory injunction sought by Plaintiff (ii)  Whether Administrator had rejected bid in illegal or arbitrary manner Held, while allowing the appeal: (i) The Respondent prayed for a declaration that rejection of the bid was illegal. Merely by that, Plaintiff could not have become entitled for consequential mandatory injunction for issuance of formal letter of allotment. Court while exercising judicial review could n...

Andhra Pradesh High Court: While dealing with the question relating to grant of Arms license, the Court quashed the order of State Government of rejecting the application of Petitioner for grant of Arms License. The Petitioner in this case had filed an application before the Commissioner of Police, Cyberabad Commissionerate which was rejected. The State Government also rejected the application in its appeal phase. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the impugned order is highly illegal, arbitrary, unreasonable, violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India and opposed to the very spirit and object of the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959. But the learned Government Pleader vehemently contended that the impugned rejection order is in accordance with the provisions of the Arms Act, 1959. The bench comprising of A. V. Sesha Sai J minutely studied various sections of The Arms Act and analyzed that the  intention of the legislature is that the licensing aut...

The Supreme Court, in State of Rajasthan vs. Firoz Khan @ Arif Khan, has reiterated that a High Court, while passing orders rejecting the application for leave to appeal before it under Section 378 (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, should assign reasons for such rejection. Allowing the appeal by State of Rajasthan against an High Court order refusing to grant leave to file appeal before it against an acquittal by Trial Courtin a murder case, the Apex court bench comprising of Justices Abhay Manohar Sapre and Ashok Bhushan observed that the instant case is a clear case of total non-application of mind to the case by High Court. The High Court had passed the following order ““Heard. No case for grant of leave is made out. Accordingly, the leave to appeal stands dismissed.” ASSIGN REASONS WHILE REFUSING LEAVE TO APPEAL Referring to State of Maharashtra vs. Sujay Mangesh Poyarekar, the Court said: We are constrained to observe that the High Court grossly erred in passing the impugned ...

It is “not legal and logical” to reject plea without giving any opportunity to a complainant to lead evidence, a Delhi court has observed while asking a magistrate to pass a reasoned order on a complaint against an IAS officer for allegedly using a false OBC certificate. Special judge Anju Bajaj Chandna said observations given by metropolitan magistrate in the order dismissing the complaint against the bureaucrat and others were “premature” and the complainant should have been given an opportunity to lead pre-summoning evidence in support of his plea. The court’s order came on a revision petition challenging the magisterial court’s last year order in which the plea seeking registration of FIR against the IAS officer and two others was dismissed. Delhi-based complainant Mahesh Kumar had alleged in his plea that the IAS officer had got into civil services on the basis of “false, forged and fabricated non-creamy layer OBC certificate” and his father had given a false statement in an...

While observing that the theft of a vehicle is required to be reported to the insurance company immediately after the theft is detected otherwise the insurer is not liable to reimburse the insured for such a loss, NCDRC upheld the repudiation of insurance claim by insurance companies in two separate cases of theft of vehicle. This order was pronounced by the Commission during the hearing of two revision petitions. Subject matter of both the petitions was similar i.e. theft of vehicle and repudiation of claim by insurance companies on the ground of delay in intimation of the theft to the insurance company. In one case complainant purchased a truck dumper and got the same insured with the Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. for the period from 10.10.2010 to 09.10.2011. During the subsistence of the insurance policy, the vehicle was stolen between 06.6.2011 to 07.6.2011 and a report with the concerned police station was lodged on 07.6.2011 itself. The intimation to the insurance company h...

NCDRC has upheld the repudiation of claim by the insurance company in a case of theft of cash on the ground that complainant (appellant) failed to take reasonable care for protection of cash by leaving the doors of the car unlocked. Earlier, complainant who is the proprietor of a firm M.R. Jewellers, engaged in export of jewellery, had taken cash in transit policy to cover any single cash in transit upto Rs. 10 lacs from National Insurance Co. It was alleged by the complainant that one day when the complainant was carrying a cash bag of Rs. 9,85,000/-, on the rear seat of the car, two young boys on a motorcycle indicated the complainant that the rear left side tyre of his car was punctured. Therefore, complainant stopped the car on the side of the road and got down and took out stepany from the dickey of the car and changed the rear left side tyre within 10 to 12 minutes. When complainant entered the car after change of wheel, he found cash bag missing from the car. The insurance claim...

While upholding the repudiation of the claim of the complainant by LIC on the ground of suppression of material facts, as proper, NCDRC observed that a contract between the parties falls in the category of contract uberrimae fidei, meaning a contract of utmost good faith on the part of the assured. When information on a specific aspect is asked for in the proposal form, an assured is under a solemn obligation to make a true and full disclosure of the information on the subject which is within his knowledge. It is not for the proposer to determine whether the information sought for, is material for the purpose of the policy or not. Earlier the deceased obtained LIC policy of Rs.1,00,000/- which commenced from July 9, 1994. He passed away due to cerebro-vascular accident in the hospital on 14.11.1994. The parents of the deceased filed the claim before LIC, which repudiated the claim stating that the assured was suffering from infective hepatitis and was hospitalized for treatment prior t...

State Of Punjab vs M/S. Bandeep Singh & Ors on 25 August, 2015 Author: …………………………………J. Bench: Vikramajit Sen, Shiva Kirti Singh                                                                               REPORTABLE                         IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA                         CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION                         CIVIL APPEAL No. 629 OF 2006 STATE OF PUNJAB                                               ...APPELLANT           ...

National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC): While declaring the repudiation of claim of a policyholder by the insurance company on the ground of non-disclosure of material facts as improper, NCDRC directed the insurance company to pay the insurance cover amount to the policyholder. A pilot of a private airline had approached NCDRC alleging that he was denied insurance claim on the ground that he did not disclose the fact that he was a known case of Hypertension and chronic kidney disease. Earlier, the complainant who was working for Jet Lite (India) Ltd. as pilot from 01.12.2007 had obtained a policy Ltd. of Rs.1.00 crore in April, 2009 from New India Assurance Co. and paid a sum of Rs.56, 200/- as premium. Later, in December, 2009, when the complainant was declared ‘permanently unfit’  for flying, he approached the insurance company for his policy claim but his claim was repudiated on the ground that he did not disclose the fact that he was a known case of Hypertensio...

1) UPC-600 (Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits, Sixth Edition) published by International Chambers of Commerce 2) Saleem Bhai v. State of Maharashtra, (2003) 1 SCC 557, Popat Kotecha Property v. State Bank of India Association, (2005) 7 SCC 510 3) Sopan Sukhdeo Sable v. Asst. Charity Commissioner, (2004) 3 SCC 137 4) R.D. Harbottle (Mercantile) Ltd. v. National Westminster Bank, (1977) 3 WLR 752 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 3103 OF 2015 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.9689 of 2014) M/S. MILLENIUM WIRES (P) LTD. ...APPELLANT  :versus: THE STATE TRADING CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD. AND ORS. ...RESPONDENTS “Banks must be allowed to honour their guarantees without interference except in clear cases of notice of fraud to the bank. The merchants take risk which are not to be imposed on the banks. Such interference will deter trust in international commerce.” (1) The Court must be slow in granting an order...

While deciding on the issue of rejection of claim on the ground of inordinate delay and laches in an industrial dispute, the bench of Sanjay Karol, J. held that delay in raising the dispute and referring the same to the Labour Court for adjudication is not erroneous and it also does not debar the workman from claiming rightful relief from his employer. The Court relying on Raghubir Singh v. General Manager, Haryana Roadways, (2014) 10 SCC 301, stated that the workman is entitled for reinstatement, back wages and consequential benefits from the date of raising the industrial dispute. Giving reasons, the Court observed that it is reasonable to adjudicate the industrial dispute in spite of the delay in raising and referring the matter, since there is no mention of any loss or unavailability of material evidence due to the delay. It further stated that the Labour Court is statutorily duty bound to answer the points of dispute referred to it by deciding the same on merits of the case, an...

It is well settled that at pre-conviction stage, there is presumption of innocence. The object of keeping a person in custody is to ensure his availability to face the trial and to receive the sentence that may be passed. The detention is not supposed to be punitive or preventive. Seriousness of the allegation or the availability of material in support thereof are not the only considerations for declining bail.  IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 220 OF 2015 (ARISING OUT OF SLP (CRL.) NO.7506 OF 2014) DR. VINOD BHANDARI ...APPELLANT VERSUS STATE OF M.P. .RESPONDENT J U D G M E N T ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal has been preferred against final judgment and order dated 11th August, 2014 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Misc. Criminal Case No.10371 of 2014 whereby a Division Bench of the High Court dismissed the bail application filed by the appellant. 3. M.P. Vyavsay...