Weekly Overview| Supreme Court Judgments: July 3 – July 7, 2023
1) A person cannot have benefit of instrument while questioning it: Apex Court reiterates while dismissing appeal of FCI management
The Court while dismissing the appeal filed by the Management of the FCI (Food Corporation of India) reiterated that a person cannot have a benefit of an instrument while questioning the same and said that having allowed the workmen to put in regular service to its own benefit for over two decades, the management can no longer claim an indefeasible right to continue with and canvass its challenge to the Award, merely because it made its compliance with the Award conditional long ago.
In this case, by an order issued under Section 10(1)(d) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, the Ministry of Labour, Government of India, referred the industrial dispute raised by the Executive Staff Union of Food Corporation of India, espousing the cause of 21 casual workers, for adjudication and it was transferred to the Central Government Industrial Tribunal.
Cause Title- Their Workmen through the Joint Secretary (Welfare), Food Corporation of India Executive Staff Union v. Employer in relation to the Management of the Food Corporation of India & Anr.
Date of Judgment- July 3, 2023
Coram- Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Sanjay Kumar
2) Recruitment process initiated in 2006 still hanging fire: SC directs authority to strictly go by merit ranking while making appointments
The Court while dealing with a review petition filed by the ones who secured Diplomas in Art & Craft from Kurukshetra University directed the authority to strictly go by the merit ranking in the selection list while making appointments to available vacancies without disturbing the appointments already made.
The Court had earlier held that the equivalence of qualifications is a matter for the State as the recruiting authority, to determine and such an observation was made in the context of the High Court’s finding that the Diploma in Art & Craft of Kurukshetra University was equivalent to the Diploma in Art & Craft of Haryana Industrial Training Department. The review of the said judgment passed in 2021 was sought by way of the pleas by the petitioners.
Cause Title- Neeraj Kumar & Anr. v. State of Haryana & Ors.
Date of Judgment- July 3, 2023
Coram- Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Sanjay Kumar
3) Murder case| Principle of proportionality should guide the sentencing process
The Court in a murder case reiterated that the principle of proportionality should guide the sentencing process.
The appeal arose out of the judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court that converted their convictions under Section 302 read with 149 IPC to Section 304 Part II read with Section 149 IPC. It, however, affirmed the convictions under Section 148 and Section 323 read with Section 149 IPC. In this case, the main accused Krishan (A-1) had an altercation with Subhash (Deceased) and this led to Krishan calling along his sons and friends who hit the deceased and his friends and inflicted severe blows to the head.
Cause Title- Uggarsain v. The State of Haryana & Ors.
Date of Judgment- July 3, 2023
Coram- Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Dipankar Datta
4) Supreme Court dismisses appeal seeking increased allocation of raw pet coke for industrial use
The Court while hearing an appeal arising from the judgment of the Division Bench of Delhi High Court rejected the claims of the appellant seeking an increased allocation of Raw Pet Coke (RPC).
The appeal challenged the decision of a Division Bench of Delhi High, wherein the Court rejected a demand for increased allocation based on an increased manufacturing capacity. The Division Bench held that when this court passed the order, every calciner had given its capacity.
Cause Title- M/S. Sanvira Industries v. Rain CII Carbon (Vizag) Ltd. & Ors.
Date of Judgment- July 3, 2023
Coram- Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Dipankar Datta
5) Issues raised in cross objections not considered: Supreme Court remands land acquisition matter to HC for fresh adjudication
The Court remanded a matter to the High Court saying that the issues raised by the appellants in their cross objections were not considered by the court.
In this case, the State Government of Uttar Pradesh had issued a notification under Section 4(1) read with Section 17 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894 in the year 1993 whereby a large tract of land, including the land of the appellants was acquired for the purpose of Greater Noida. The declaration of the said lands under Section 6 of the Act was issued and the possession of the same was taken on different dates between 1993 and 1994.
Cause Title- Dheeraj Singh v. Greater Noida Industrial Development Authority & Ors.
Date of Judgment- July 4, 2023
Coram- Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Bela M. Trivedi
6) Accusation of non-disclosure can only be made if there is requirement to disclose: SC while dismissing appeals by CBIC
The Court while dismissing the appeals preferred by the Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs held that the demands were time-barred and period of extended limitation cannot apply.
In this case, an appeal was filed against the order of the Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Ahmedabad passed on March 17, 2009. A similar appeal involving dealing with related central issues was clubbed with the current appeal.
Cause Title- The Commissioner, Central Excise and Customers, and Anr. v. M/S Reliance Industries Ltd.
Date of Judgment- July 4, 2023
Coram- Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Bela M. Trivedi
7) Complainants have no right of audience before court unless situation for compounding of offence u/s. 420 IPC arises
The Court while deciding a case held that the complainants have no right of audience before it or even the High Court unless a situation for compounding of the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code arises.
In this case, on the instructions of the builder, the complainants on different dates allegedly made payments of additional amounts to the appellant as well as the builder, in cash as well as by cheques, totalling Rs. 35,00,000/-. However, the complainants failed to comply with the terms and conditions of the agreement dated December 14, 2018, triggering the institution of a civil suit by the builder against them seeking cancellation of such agreement and forfeiture of the amount of Rs. 13,00,000/-.
Cause Title- Ramesh Kumar v. The State of NCT of Delhi
Date of Judgment- July 4, 2023
Coram- Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Dipankar Datta
8) It is not the business of any of the courts to ascertain what would be the outcome of the trial
The Court while hearing a Special Leave Petition, dismissed the appeal stating that the charges, unless outrightly defective or erroneous, should not warrant quashing and that the Trial Court should ascertain the outcome with due process.
In this case, a complaint was filed by Respondent No.2 against the 7 accused including the Petitioner under Sections 406, 420, 506, and 120B, Indian Penal Code. The Police Report dated February 14, 2022 invoked the charges of Sections 420, 406, 506, 379, 120B and 180 of the IPC against the petitioner.
Cause Title- Supriya Jain v. State of Haryana and Anr.
Date of Judgment- July 4, 2023
Coram- Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Dipankar Datta
9) TN General Sales Tax Act: Maize starch would be covered by taxation entry and not by exemption entry
The Court in a case relating to the classification of maize starch under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act, 1959 held that the maize starch would be covered by the taxation entry and not by the exemption entry.
In this case, the appeals were filed against the orders passed by the Madras High Court and the appellant i.e., Santhosh Maize & Industries Limited was registered under the Tamil Nadu General Sales Tax Act which was dealing in maize starch since 1975. The classification of maize starch under the said Act was the subject of dispute in the appeals. The Tamil Nadu Government had exempted the products of millets including maize from tax payable under the Act vide a notification.
Cause Title- Santhosh Maize & Industries Limited v. The State of Tamil Nadu & Anr.
Date of Judgment- July 4, 2023
Coram- Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Dipankar Datta
10) Workmen's Compensation Act: Proving relationship of employee-employer is essential: SC in case of accidental death
The Court while hearing an appeal challenging the order of the Bombay High Court, dismissed the Appeal on the grounds of failure to establish the nature of the employee-employer relationship and inexplicable delay in filing the claim under the Workmen’s Compensation Act, 1923.
The appeal challenged the April 9, 2010 order of the Bombay High Court, which upheld the findings of the Commissioner for Workmen’s Compensation at Sangli by order dated July 04, 2008. The appeal before the Supreme Court was preferred by the legal heirs of the deceased. The deceased died in a road accident on August 17, 1993.
Cause Title- Shantabai Ananda Jagtap & Anr v. Jayram Ganpati Jagtap & Anr.
Date of Judgment- July 4, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal
11) Condition of right to repurchase in sale deed won’t be personal to the vendor unless terms in documents specifically state so
The Court held that the condition of the right to repurchase in the sale deed will not be personal to the vendor unless the terms in the documents specifically state so.
In this case, a registered gift deed was executed in favour of the respondent and it was mentioned therein that the property as mentioned in column no. 5 was transferred to the appellant by way of a registered sale deed which can be purchased back by the respondent from the appellant. The vendors were ready and willing to return ₹ 5000/- to the vendee to get the sale deed registered back in their name but the vendee was not agreeing to the same.
Cause Title- Indira Devi v. Veena Gupta & Ors.
Date of Judgment- July 4, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal
12) Motor accident claim: SC restores higher compensation award of tribunal to man who suffered 85% disability after accident
The Court in a motor accident claim case restored the higher compensation award that was granted to a man who met with an accident and suffered 85% disability.
In this case, the appellant who was working as a gunman in a hotel met with an accident in 2013 with Tempo as a result of which he suffered injuries and remained hospitalised for around one month and ten days. He remained under follow-up treatment for about a year and suffered 85% disability in relation to his right lower limb as the same had to be amputated.
Cause Title- Sarnam Singh v. Shriram General Insurance Co. Ltd. & Ors.
Date of Judgment- July 4, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal
13) Non-mentioning of disease is immaterial for renewal of insurance policy when the deceased died due to different disease
The Court while dealing with an appeal, directed the Respondent Insurance Company to renew the Insurance Policy of the Appellant and dismissed the grounds cited by the Insurance Company for non-renewal.
The Appeal challenged the common order dated November 26, 2018 passed by the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (National Commission). The Plaintiff had purchased a health insurance policy from the Respondent for his family, for the period of July 7, 2007 to July 6, 2008. The coverage was for ₹2 lakhs against any health problem and ₹4 lakhs in case of critical illness. The policy was further renewed up to July 6, 2009.
Cause Title- Om Prakash Ahuja v. Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd.
Date of Judgment- July 4, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal
14) Not safe to base conviction only on testimony of minor witness: SC acquits man convicted of murdering mother of three sons
The Court acquitted a man who was convicted of killing a mother of three sons on the ground that it will not be safe to base the conviction only on the testimony of a minor witness.
The appellant had challenged the judgment passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court by which his appeal against the order of conviction by the Sessions Court was dismissed. He was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the IPC and Sections 449 and 324 of the IPC and was sentenced to suffer life imprisonment.
Cause Title- Pradeep v. The State of Haryana
Date of Judgment- July 5, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal
15) An order of reinstatement in service does not guarantee payment of back wages automatically: SC reiterates
The Court while dealing with an appeal filed by a terminated employee explained that mere reinstatement of a job does not guarantee back wages automatically and that there is a burden of proof on the employee to show he was entitled to back wages.
In this case, the Appellant was employed with the Respondent, Delhi Transport Corporation as a conductor. A Charge Sheet was served to the Appellant on September 8, 1992 wherein it was alleged that the Appellant took ₹ 4 from two passengers but did not provide them with a ticket.
Cause Title- Ramesh Chand v. Management of Delhi Transport Corporation
Date of Judgment- July 5, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal
16) Section 338 IPC| Human life was endangered due to negligence of bus conductor: SC modifies sentence in 2005 case
The Court while dealing with an appeal sentenced the Appellant to Six Months Imprisonment under Section 338, Indian Penal Code (IPC), modifying it from the initial conviction under Section 308, IPC.
In this case, the Appellant was a conductor of a school bus, Accused No. 1 was the driver and Accused No. 3 was the cleaner. While at a bus stop, some students were boarding the bus when the Appellant rang the bell due to which the driver started driving the bus. One of the students (PW-1) suffered injuries as she was halfway through boarding and fell down.
Cause Title- Abdul Ansar v. State of Kerala
Date of Judgment- July 5, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal
17) POCSO case| Impact of obnoxious act on mind of victim-child will be lifelong: SC convicts man accused of sexual assault
The Court in a POCSO case convicted the Respondent-Accused under Section 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act while observing that the impact of the obnoxious act on the victim child will be lifelong.
The Respondent was prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 377 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) along with Section 5 read with Section 6 of the POCSO Act by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jhansi. The respondent was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for ten years for the offence punishable under Section 6 of the POCSO Act.
Cause Title- State of U.P v. Sonu Kushwaha
Date of Judgment- July 5, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Rajesh Bindal
18) Forest Act| Evidence which has been confirmed by lower courts must only be reversed by High Courts in rarest of rare cases
The Court while dealing with a dispute relating to the possession of land observed that the evidence which has been confirmed by lower courts must only be reversed by the High Courts in the rarest of rare cases.
In this case, the appellants were the bhoomidars and were in possession of the lands which were used by them for agricultural purposes since a permanent lease was executed in their favour by the then zamindar in the year 1952. A part of the subject land including the land in possession of the appellants was declared as reserved forest and the other part was subject to a notification under Section 4 of the Forest Act.
Cause Title- Hari Prakash Shukla & Ors. v. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.
Date of Judgment- July 5, 2023
Coram- Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah
19) Dismissal of special leave petition by way of a non-speaking order does not attract doctrine of merger: Supreme Court reiterates
The Court in a case relating to will reiterated that dismissal of a Special Leave Petition by way of a non-speaking order does not attract the doctrine of merger.
In this case, the appeals were preferred against the judgment passed by the Karnataka High Court whereby the appeal and review filed by the appellants were dismissed. A man was the original owner of a property and had two daughters. Before his death, he executed a will in favour of his daughters in equal share, and in the said will, it was stated that both the legatees were to enjoy the property during their entire lifetime and then be transferred to their respective male heirs.
Cause Title- S. Narahari & Ors. v. S.R. Kumar & Ors.
Date of Judgment- July 5, 2023
Coram- Justice Krishna Murari and Justice Sanjay Karol
20) Courts below haven’t granted any amount towards future prospects: SC while enhancing compensation by 15% in 1994 motor accident case
The Court allowed an addition of 15% in compensation towards future prospects in a motor accident case saying that the courts below did not grant any amount towards future prospects.
In this case, an appeal was preferred by the injured/claimant against the judgment passed by the High Court whereby it awarded a compensation of Rs. 8,66,787/- over and above the compensation of Rs. 7,21,895/- awarded by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal. The Tribunal awarded Rs. 5 lakhs as overall compensation and in addition, actual medical expenses incurred Rs. 2,21,895/- making a total figure of Rs.7,21,895/- and on an appeal, the High Court enhanced the overall compensation to Rs. 10,71,000/-.
Cause Title- Rahul Ganpatrao Sable v. Laxman Maruti Jadhav (Dead) Through LRS and Ors.
Date of Judgment- July 5, 2023
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Vikram Nath
21) Arguments don’t fall within settled contours of order XLVII Rule 1 CPC relating to error: SC while dismissing review applications
The Court dismissed the review pleas on the ground that the arguments advanced did not fall within the settled contours of Order XLVII Rule 1 of the Civil Procedure Code relating to an error.
In this case, review petitions were filed praying for a review of the judgment of the Supreme Court passed on August 10, 2021, whereby the civil appeals were dismissed. A Representation Agreement was executed between DMC Management Consultants Limited and Integrated Sales Service Ltd. (respondent company) and under the said agreement, the respondent company was to find customers for DMC on a commission basis. Any dispute between the two companies was agreed to be subjected to the laws of the State of Missouri, USA.
Cause Title- Arun Dev Upadhyaya v. Integrated Sales Service Ltd. & Anr.
Date of Judgment- July 5, 2023
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice Vikram Nath
22) Company neither sought nor consumed electricity more than the maximum demand of 10000 KVA: SC directs TN Electricity Board to refund amount
The Court directed the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board to refund the amount to the appellant company, the Madras Aluminium Co. Ltd., on the ground that it neither sought nor consumed electricity more than the maximum demand of 10000 KVA.
The questions that the Court was called upon to decide were, whether the action of the respondents in taking considerable time from when the application was made for reduction to 10000 KVA, to when the revised agreement was entered into, was arbitrary and unreasonable. Contingently, whether the appellant was entitled to a refund of the amount of difference between the amounts payable for 23000 KVA and 10000 KVA which, were paid under protest.
Cause Title- The Madras Aluminium Co. Ltd. v. The Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and Anr.
Date of Judgment- July 6, 2023
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Sanjay Karol, and Justice Aravind Kumar
23) Supreme Court sentences four convicts to life imprisonment without remission for 1996 Lajpat Nagar bomb blasts
The Court sentenced four individuals accused in the 1996 Lajpat Nagar bomb blast case to life imprisonment without remission. It upheld the conviction of two individuals and restored the sentence of two other former death row convicts.
In 1996, a bomb blast occurred in Delhi's Lajpat Nagar Central Market, resulting in the loss of 13 lives, injuring 38 people, and causing extensive property damage. The Jammu and Kashmir Islamic Front (JKIF), designated as a terrorist organization, claimed responsibility for the attack. The Delhi Police arrested six suspected Kashmiri militants and two others, including a woman, for their alleged involvement. Certain mafia figures were also named as accused in the blast.
Cause Title- Mohd. Naushad v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)
Date of Judgment- July 6, 2023
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai, Justice Vikram Nath, and Justice Sanjay Karol
24) Land Acquisition| District Magistrate has no jurisdiction for apportionment of amount: SC while setting aside order
The Court in an Appeal filed against the order passed by the Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court held that the Civil Courts are the competent authority to determine disputes of land appropriation and set aside the order passed by the District Magistrate.
The Court was dealing with a matter arising out of acquisition of land under the National Highways Authority Act, 1956. The primary contention in the case stems from a Central Government Notification to acquire some land for expansion of a highway in Mau.
Cause Title- Vinod Kumar & Ors. v. District Magistrate Mau & Ors.
Date of Judgment- July 7, 2023
Coram- Justice B.R. Gavai and Justice J.B. Pardiwala
25) Compensation awarded towards 'pain and suffering' on lower side- SC increases compensation in road accident case
The Court increased the compensation awarded to a claimant who was injured in a road accident in the year 2007. It said that the claimant being a graduate and working as Marketing Executive, his plea of salary being Rs.8,000/- p.m. deserves to be accepted, as it is within proximity of truth and same could not have been ignored by the Tribunal and the High Court on hyper-technical grounds.
In this case, a Civil Appeal was filed before the Supreme Court against the judgement passed by the Karnataka High Court. The High Court affirmed the compensation granted to the claimant by Motor Vehicle Claims Tribunal (Tribunal). The claimant met with a road accident in December 2007, and sustained injuries and hence filed a claim petition for compensation under Section 166 of the Motor Vehicles Act (MV Act). The insurer contested the matter, but the Tribunal partially allowed the claim petition and awarded compensation of Rs. 2,36,812/-.
Cause Title- Sri Lakshmana Gowda B.N v The Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. And Another
Date of Judgment- July 7, 2023
Coram- Justice Surya Kant and Justice Aravind Kumar
26) Tight rope between safeguarding individual rights and protecting public interest: SC sets aside anticipatory bail in land mafia case
The Court while dealing with a Special Leave Petition (SLP) challenging the anticipatory bail granted by the Punjab & Haryana High Court, set aside the order and directed the Commissioner of Police, Gurugram to form a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to look into the matter.
In this case, the claim made by the Appellants was that the Sale Deed of February 24, 2002 and the GPA of September 18, 1996 were forged by the Respondents. Following which, the Appellants lodged a First Information Report (FIR) at Police Station (PS), Badshahpur, Gurugram.
Cause Title- Pratibha Manchanda & Anr v. State of Haryana & Anr.
Date of Judgment- July 7, 2023
Coram- Justice Surya Kant and Justice C.T. Ravikumar
