Tagged: Supreme Court of India

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – ADMISSIBILITY OF UNREGISTERED DOCUMENTS IN EVIDENCE – ANY DOCUMENT WHICH HAS EFFECT OF CREATING OR TAKING AWAY ANY RIGHTS IN RESPECT OF AN IMMOVABLE PROPERTY MUST BE REGISTERED

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 08.10.2015 Section 17 (1) (b) of the Registration Act mandates that any document which has the effect of creating and taking away the rights in respect of an immovable property must be registered and Section 49 of the Act imposes bar on the admissibility of an unregistered document and deals with the documents that...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – MATRIMONIAL DISPUTES – CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE SECTION 41 – INDIAN PENAL CODE SECTION 498-A AND DOWRY PROHIBITION ACT SECTION 4 – ANTICIPATORY BAIL AGAINST ARREST – PROVISIONS ARE USED AS WEAPONS RATHER THAN TOOL OF LAW

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 02.07.2014 Supreme Court of India-Matrimonial Disputes-Code of Criminal Procedure Section 41 – Indian Penal Code Section 498-A  and Dowry Prohibition Act Section 4- Anticipatory bail against arrest – provisions are used as weapons rather than tool of law – attitude to arrest first and then proceed with the rest is despicable – it has...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT SECTION 138 – COMPLAINT CAN BE FILED EVEN AFTER SECOND NOTICE

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 10.09.2013 Negotiable Instruments Act Section 138 – Complaint can be Filed Even after Second Notice This matter was referred before the larger Bench by order dated 25th March, 2009. The question referred to the larger Bench was : “whether the action of the appellant was time-barred under Section 138(b) of the Negotiable Instruments Act or not...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT SECTION 138 -WHETHER THE COMPLAINT FILED IS WITHIN LIMITATION OR NOT

Supreme Court of India Date of Judgement: 26.08.2013 Whether the complaint filed under Section 138 of the NI Act is within limitation or not…… from the date on which the cause of action arose under clause (c) of the proviso to Section 138 of the NI Act? …. Whether for calculating the period of one month …. under Section 142(b),...

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA – NON BAILABLE WARRANTS CAN NOT BE ISSUED UNLESS AN ACCUSED IS LIKELY TO TAMPER THE EVIDENCE OR IS LIKELY TO EVADE THE PROCESS OF LAW

Supreme Court Of India Date of Judgement: 16 August 2013 There cannot be any straight-jacket formula for issuance of warrants but as a general rule, unless an accused is likely to tamper or destroy the evidence or is likely to evade the process of law, issuance of non-bailable warrants should be avoided. …. This could be when firstly it is...

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...