Author: Advocate Amaresh Singh

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – A GOVERNMENT SERVANT CANNOT APPROACH CONSUMER FORUM FOR RETIRAL BENIFITS

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 11.07.2013 A government servant can raise any dispute regarding his service conditions or for payment of gratuity or GPF or any of his retiral benefits before any of the Forum under the Act. The government servant does not fall under the definition of a “consumer” as defined under Section 2(1)(d)(ii) of the Act. Such...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SECTION 311 – THE FOLLOWING PRINCIPLES WILL HAVE TO BE BORNE IN MIND BY THE COURTS

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 4 July 2013 While dealing with an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. read along with Section 138 of the Evidence Act, we feel the following principles will have to be borne in mind by the Courts: a) Whether the Court is right in thinking that the new evidence is needed by it? Whether...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT SECTION 138 – FILING OF COMPLAINT AFTER SECOND NOTICE

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 26.09.2012 In the result, we overrule the decision in Sadanandan Bhadran’s case (supra) and hold that prosecution based upon second or successive dishonour of the cheque is also permissible so long as the same satisfies the requirements stipulated in the proviso to Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The reference is answered...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT SECTION 138 – PROSECUTION OF PERSON IN CHARGE OF A COMPANY IS NOT POSSIBLE IN THE ABSENCE OF THE COMPANY AS AN ACCUSED

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 27.04.2012 In this Criminal Appeal the common proposition of law that has emerged for consideration is whether an authorised signatory of a company would be liable for prosecution under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act without the company being arraigned as an accused. These two appeals were initially heard by a two-Judge Bench and there was difference of...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – APPEARANCE OF THE ADVOCATES BEFORE THE LABOUR COURTS & INDUSTRIAL DISPUTES TRIBUNALS

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 06.05.2011 The Hon’ble Supreme Court prima facie, are of the opinion that the provision of  the Industrial Disputes Act [Section 36 (4)] debarring the lawyers from appearing before the Labour Court/Industrial Tribunal is unconstitutional being violative  of  Articles 14   and 19(1)(g)   of   the   Constitution  of  India. This is  because industrial law has become...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – WHETHER THE CONSENT ONCE GIVEN IN A PETITION FOR DIVORCE BY MUTUAL CONSENT CAN BE SUBSEQUENTLY WITHDRAWN BY ONE OF THE PARTIES?

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 18.04.2011 The language employed in Section 13B(2) of the Hindu Marriage Act is clear. The Court is bound to pass a decree of divorce declaring the marriage of the parties before it to be dissolved with effect from the date of the decree, if the following conditions are met: The second motion by both the parties...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – EVEN AFTER EXECUTION OF FULL AND FINAL DISCHARGE VOUCHER/RECEIPT/NO DUE CERTIFICATE A PARTY CAN CLAIM FURTHER

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 14.01.2011 Even after execution of full and final discharge voucher/receipt by one of the parties, if the said party able to establish that he is entitled to further amount for which he is having adequate materials, is not barred from claiming such amount merely because of acceptance of the final bill by mentioning “without prejudice” or by issuing ‘No...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – WHETHER THE DEFENDANT CAN BE PERMITTED TO AMEND THE WRITTEN STATEMENT?

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 09.10.2009 On amendments the principles which ought to be taken into consideration while allowing or rejecting the application for amendment are as follows:- Whether the amendment sought is imperative for proper and effective adjudication of the case; Whether the application for amendment is bona fide or mala fide; The amendment should not cause...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – A CHEQUE ISSUED FROM THE ACCOUNT OF GUARANTOR AS SECURITY ALSO WOULD FALL WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 138 OF NI ACT

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 12.08.2002 The security cheques also would fall within the purview of the Section 138 of NI Act and a person could not escape his liability, as such, when there is existence of debt on the date of presentation of the cheque and the security cheques issued are dishonoured, the accused would be liable under...