(161) JUGAL KISHORE KHANNA(D) THR LRS AND ANOTHER Vs. SUDHIR KHANNA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 19-03-2024 Property Dispute - The dispute involves two properties, the Kamla Nagar and Malcha Marg properties, with claims of joint family ownership and subsequent settlements - The main issues are the ownership of the Kamla Nagar property after an alleged family settlement and whether the Malcha Marg property was purchased with joint family funds - The appellants argue that they have sole ownership of the Kamla Nagar property due to a family settlement and payment made to the respondents - The respondents India Law Library Docid # 1604017
(162) EKENE GODWIN AND ANOTHER Vs. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2024 Leave granted. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the appellants and the learned senior counsel appearing for the respondent State. The appellants are being prosecuted for offences punishable under Sections 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Section 66, read with Sections 43(J) and 66D of the Information Technology (Amendment) Act, 2008. The charge sheet has been filed, and the trial has proceeded. By the impugned order, the High Court rejected the appellants application for re India Law Library Docid # 1882467
(163) SOMNATH Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2024 The present appeal is directed against the Final Judgment and Order dated 08.10.2018 (hereinafter referred to as the Impugned Judgment) passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad (hereinafter referred to as the High Court) in Criminal Writ Petition No.215 of 2017 by which the writ petition filed by the appellant was partly allowed and the respondent no.2 was directed to pay a sum of Rs.75,000/- (Rupees Seventy Five Thousand only) from his own pocket to the appellant. A India Law Library Docid # 1882478
(164) M. RADHESHYAMLAL Vs. V SANDHYA AND ANOTHER ETC. [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2024 Property Dispute - The case involves disputes over property ownership after the original owner, ‘S’, passed away in 1947 - A settlement deed was executed in 1945, granting shares of the property to certain individuals and their male descendants - The main issue is whether the appellant (plaintiff in the original suit) has acquired ownership of the property through adverse possession - The appellant claims ownership by adverse possession since 1951, asserting continuous and open possession of th India Law Library Docid # 1604004
(165) SATYENDAR KUMAR JAIN AND OTHERS Vs. DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Section 109 IPC Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(e) - Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002- Section 45 – Bail - The case involves appeals against the denial of bail to Satyendar Kumar Jain and others, accused of money laundering related to disproportionate assets acquired during Jain’s tenure as a Minister in the Delhi Government - The primary issue is whether the appellants satisfy the conditions for bail under the Prevention of Mon India Law Library Docid # 1604005
(166) MS. X Vs. MR. A AND OTHERS[SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2024 Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 354D, 376(2)(n), 504 and 506 read with 34 - Committing rape repeatedly on the same woman - The appellant, a minor at the time of the incident, entered into a relationship with accused No.1, who later promised marriage - She became pregnant, and under coercion, underwent an abortion - The appeal challenges the High Court’s decision to quash the criminal proceedings against the accused under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C - The appellant’s counsel argued that the High Court India Law Library Docid # 1604006
(167) JAIPUR VIDYUT VITRAN NIGAM LTD. AND OTHERS Vs. ADANI POWER RAJASTHAN LTD. AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2024 Electricity Act, 2003 - Section 2(28)- Generatign Company - Adani Power Rajasthan Limited (APRL), a power generating company, sought payment from Rajasthan Discoms for Late Payment Surcharge (LPS) based on the Power Purchase Agreement (PPA-2010) - The main issue was the entitlement of APRL to LPS due to a delay in payments by Rajasthan Discoms, and whether the claim was maintainable post the disposal of the main appeals - APRL argued that they were entitled to LPS as per the PPA-2010 due to the India Law Library Docid # 1604007
(168) PERIYASAMY Vs. THE STATE REP. BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 109, 302 and 307 – Murder – Appeal against conviction - The case involves the death of two persons, allegedly stabbed by A-1 at the instigation of A-2 - A quarrel at a wine shop led to the fatal incident - The appeals challenge the judgments of the Trial Court and High Court, questioning the involvement of A-2 and the reliability of witnesses - A-1 claimed self-defense and questioned the credibility of “interested” witnesses - A-2 denied presence at the crime s India Law Library Docid # 1604008
(169) NAVAS @ MULANAVAS Vs. STATE OF KERALA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 18-03-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 302 and IPC – Murder – Conviction and Sentence - Modification of Sentence - The appeal concerns a judgment from the Kerala High Court involving a death sentence reference and criminal appeal arising from a trial court’s decision in a murder case - The appellant challenged the conviction and sentencing for the murder of four individuals, questioning the sufficiency of circumstantial evidence and the appropriateness of the sentence - The appellant argued for acqui India Law Library Docid # 1604009
(170) UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE Vs. JUSTICE (RETD) RAJ RAHUL GARG (RAJ RANI JAIN) AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-03-2024 The first respondent was appointed as a Judicial Magistrate in the State of Haryana on 11 May 1981. She was appointed as an Additional District Judge on 26 August 1997 and later, as a District Judge on 19 July 2010. In December 2013, she fied was recommended for appointment as a Judge of the High Court. Sometime before her appointment as a Judge of the High Court, she retired as a District Judge on 31 July 2014. On 25 September 2014, the first respondent assumed office as a Judge of the Punjab a India Law Library Docid # 1882463
(171) M/S GLOBAL TECHNOLOGIES AND RESEARCH Vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, NEW DELHI (IMPORT) [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-03-2024 Customs Act, 1962 - Section 129A - Appeals process to the Appellate Tribunal - The appellant contested a CESTAT judgment regarding the valuation of imported camera stabilizer devices - The dispute involved the declared value of goods under a Bill of Entry dated 16th February 2018 - The main issues were the timeliness of the review order by the Committee of Commissioners and the correctness of the CESTAT’s decision, which was based on the comparison of the imported goods with similar or identica India Law Library Docid # 1603999
(172) RAKESH RANJAN SHRIVASTAVA Vs. THE STATE OF JHARKHAND AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-03-2024 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 – Section 143A - Power to direct interim compensation - Applicability of Section 143A, which pertains to interim compensation in cheque dishonour incidents - The court examines whether Section 143A is directory or mandatory and the factors to consider while exercising powers under it - The appellant contends that the provision is discretionary, not mandatory, and that the court must consider the merits of the case before ordering interim compensation - The respon India Law Library Docid # 1604000
(173) JAFAR Vs. STATE OF KERALA [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-03-2024 Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 397 read with 395 - Dacoity - The appeal challenges the judgment of the High Court and trial court, questioning the identification of the appellant and the admissibility of evidence - The appellant’s counsel argued that the conviction was based on no evidence, making the appeal worthy of allowance - The State’s counsel contended that the concurrent findings of guilt by both courts should not be interfered with – This Court found the identification of the appell India Law Library Docid # 1604001
(174) SUSELA PADMAVATHY AMMA Vs. M/S BHARTI AIRTEL LIMITED [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-03-2024 Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 - Sections 138 and 142 - Appellant, is a director of Fibtel Telecom Solutions, which owes Rs. 2,55,08,309 to Bharti Airtel Limited for telecom services - Five post-dated cheques were issued by Fibtel Telecom Solutions to Bharti Airtel, which were later returned unpaid - The main issue is whether the appellant, as a director not involved in day-to-day affairs and not a signatory to the cheques, can be held liable under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instru India Law Library Docid # 1604002
(175) ASSOCIATION OF DEMOCRATIC REFORMS AND ANOTHER Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-03-2024 Electoral Bond Scheme - The Election Commission of India (ECI) filed an application seeking further directions to comply with the Court’s order to upload certain data on its website - The ECI did not retain a copy of the data, which was submitted to the Court in sealed custody, and now requires the data to fulfill the Court’s directive - The Court directed the Registrar (Judicial) to digitize the data and return the originals to the ECI to enable the uploading of documents - The Court referenced India Law Library Docid # 1604003
(176) UNION OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE Vs. JUSTICE (RETD) RAJ RAHUL GARG (RAJ RANI JAIN) AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 15-03-2024 High Court Judges (Salaries and Conditions of Service) Act 1954 - Section 2(1)(g), 14 and 15 – Salaries of the Judges - Computation of pensionary benefits - The case involves the computation of pensionary benefits for Justice (Retd) Raj Rahul Garg, who served as a Judicial Magistrate, Additional District Judge, District Judge, and later as a Judge of the Punjab and Haryana High Court - The main issue is whether the service period as a High Court Judge should be blended with the district judicia India Law Library Docid # 1604010
(177) SAMAJ PARIVARTANA SAMUDAYA AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 14-03-2024 The present applications relate to mining activities being undertaken in Districts - Bellary, Chitradurga and Tumkur in Karnataka. In 2009, the petitioner - Samaj Parivartana Samudaya had filed a writ petition praying for this Courts intervention on grounds of the illegality of such mining activities and consequent harm caused to the environment. This Court intervened and has passed several directions and orders. To avoid prolixity, we will not be referring to the catena of orders passed by this India Law Library Docid # 1882465
(178) SRIKANT UPADHYAY AND OTHERS Vs. STATE OF BIHAR AND ANOTHER [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 14-03-2024 Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act, 1999 – Sections 3 and 4 - Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) - Sections 341, 323, 354, 354 (B), 379, 504, 506 and 149 – Prohibition of the branding and accusation of someone as a witch - Anticipatory bail – The central issue revolves around whether anticipatory bail should be granted in this specific case - The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail, emphasizing that they are not an absconder or proclaimed offender - They argue that the allegations lack substantial evi India Law Library Docid # 1603997
(179) BABAN BALAJI MORE (DEAD) BY LRS. AND OTHERS Vs. BABAJI HARI SHELAR (DEAD) BY LRS. AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 14-03-2024 Maharashtra Hereditary Offices Act, 1874 Sections 5, 11, 11A and 77- Maharashtra Tenancy and Agricultural Lands Act, 1948 - Section 32 - Maharashtra Revenue Patels (Abolition of Offices) Act, 1962 - The dispute centers around Watan property and tenancy rights following the death of the original Watandar, ‘B’ - The applicability of the Tenancy Act to Watan lands - The rights of tenants in such lands - The impact of the Abolition Act on Watan lands and tenancy - The petitioner likely argued for t India Law Library Docid # 1603998
(180) SRI PUBI LOMBI Vs. THE STATE OF ARUNACHAL PRADESH AND OTHERS [SUPREME COURT OF INDIA] 13-03-2024 Election Law - The main issue is whether the transfer order, influenced by a UO Note from an MLA, is valid without allegations of malafide exercise of power - The petitioner contends that judicial review of transfer orders is limited and should not be interfered with unless there’s a statutory violation or malafide action - The respondent argues that the transfer is a result of arbitrary power exercise, not in public interest or service exigency - The Court reasons that transfers are an administ India Law Library Docid # 1603996