Weekly Overview| Supreme Court Judgments: October 9 – October 13, 2023
1) Condonation of delay depends on sufficiency of cause and acceptability of explanation, length immaterial: SC upholds High Court's discretionary power
The Court upheld the High Court's decision to condone a delay of approximately 479 days in filing an appeal related to land acquisition by the Union of India. The Court emphasized that the power to condone delay is discretionary, contingent upon the sufficiency and acceptability of the explanation provided.
In this case, certain affected landowners have challenged an order passed by the High Court, which allowed the Union of India's application to condone a delay of around 479 days in filing an appeal related to land acquisition. The case involved the enhancement of compensation by the Reference Court, which was challenged by the Union of India in an appeal. Due to a series of bureaucratic delays and inefficiencies, the appeal was filed late, leading to the application for condonation of delay.
Cause Title- Sheo Raj Singh & Ors. v. Union Of India & Anr.
Date of Judgment- October 9, 2023
Coram- Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Dipankar Datta
2) Evidence of eye-witness should be such sterling quality that it’s accepted at face value: SC acquits 3 murder accused citing inadequate evidence
The Court acquitted three accused persons convicted under Section 302 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) by the Sessions Court. The Court found that the prosecution failed to establish the guilt of the appellants beyond reasonable doubt.
In these appeals, the three accused challenged their conviction which was affirmed by the High Court. The prosecution's case was based on an incident where the accused allegedly chased and fatally shot the victim.
Cause Title- Naresh & Ors. v. State of Haryana
Date of Judgment- October 9, 2023
Coram- Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar
3) Yet another endeavour to wriggle out of payment obligations: Supreme Court rejects bid to reopen settled matters in garb of ‘all future disputes’
The Court held that the order allowing the respondent to reopen settled matters and initiate another round of litigation was not sustainable. The Court noted that despite previous court orders specifying payment obligations, the respondent repeatedly attempted to evade payments. The Court reiterated that it did not preclude the respondents from raising ‘all future disputes’ but that cannot be to unsettle the effect on the main judgment abundantly clarified from time to time.
The respondent had filed a petition before the Regulatory Commission seeking directions against the appellant, including a refund of the principal amount, coal quality reports, and late payment surcharge. The appellant objected to the maintainability of this petition, arguing that the issues raised had already been settled. The impugned order, dated April 06, 2022, maintained the petition filed by the respondent, allowing another round of litigation.
Cause Title- Nabha Power Limited v. Punjab State Power Corporation Limited
Date of Judgment- October 9, 2023
Coram- Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia, and Justice Aravind Kumar
4) SC expounds two questions which should be asked to accused once presumption u/s. 139 of NI Act is applicable in cheque dishonour cases
The Court reversed the acquittal of an accused in a cheque dishonor case, while observing that there was a fundamental flaw in the approach taken by the Trial Court and the High Court.
Subsequently, the Court expounded that once the Courts have concluded that the signature in the cheque has been admitted and its execution has been proved, then the Courts should inquire into either of the two questions (depending on the method in which accused has chosen to rebut the presumption): Has the accused led any defense evidence to prove and conclusively establish that there existed no debt/liability at the time of issuance of cheque? In the absence of rebuttal evidence being led the inquiry would entail: Has the accused proved the nonexistence of debt/liability by a preponderance of probabilities by referring to the ‘particular circumstances of the case’?
Cause Title- Rajesh Jain v. Ajay Singh
Date of Judgment- October 9, 2023
Coram- Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice SVN Bhati
5) SC refers question of construction and meaning of 'vacant land' under Section 2 of Urban Land Ceiling Act to larger bench
The Court referred the question of construction, meaning and import of the term "vacant land" as under Section 2(q) of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, to a larger bench.
In this case, the appellants had acquired property in Kolkata and applied to the Calcutta Municipal Corporation for approval of their building plan. However, a portion of their property was declared as "excess vacant land" by the Competent Authority, leading to its acquisition by the State Government. The appellants challenged this decision. They asked the Supreme Court to send the case back to the Competent Authority for a revaluation of what constituted "vacant land," excluding areas where construction was not permitted under the Building Regulations of the Calcutta Municipal Corporation.
Cause Title- M/s Kewal Court Pvt. Ltd. & Anr. vs The State of West Bengal & Ors.
Date of Judgment- October 9, 2023
Coram- Justice Surya Kant and Justice Dipankar Datta
6) Supreme Court interprets provisions of Electricity Act & Rules towards classifying as a captive generating plant & a captive user
The Court interpreted relevant provisions of the Electricity Act, 2003 and Rule 3 of the Electricity Rules, 2005, for being classified as a Captive Generating Plant and a captive user.
The Court perused the relevant provisions of the law and legal precedent, to frame three issues for specific consideration in view of the conflicting judgments of the APTEL, which were: 1) Eligibility criteria for a CGP/captive user under Rule 3(1)(a) of the Rules; 2) Interpretation of the second proviso under Rule 3(1)(a) of the Rules; 3) Whether a company set up as a Special Purpose Vehicle for generating electricity is an, “association of persons”, in terms of the second proviso to Rule 3(1)(a) of the Rules.
Cause Title- M/s Dakshin Gujarat Vij Company Ltd. v. M/s Gayatri Shakti Paper & Board Ltd. & Anr., Etc.
Date of Judgment- October 9, 2023
Coram- Justice Sanjiv Khanna and Justice MM Sundresh
7) Appellate court has caused grave prejudice by altering charge without giving any notice: SC while acquitting in triple murder case
The Court held that altering charges without notifying the accused and his advocate caused grave prejudice, violating principles of natural justice. The Court acquitted the appellant in a triple murder case due to the absence of legal representation during the hearing and the lack of notice regarding the alteration in charges.
The appellant (accused no. 2) was convicted of murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and concealment of evidence (Section 201 IPC). 17 accused were involved in a triple murder case. The Trial Court had acquitted several accused, and the High Court had acquitted three more. The appellant challenged the High Court's judgment based on the absence of legal representation and the modification of the charge under Section 34 IPC.
Cause Title- Chandra Pratap Singh v. State of M.P.
Date of Judgment- October 9, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal
8) Partition Suits| Courts must avoid partial adjudication of suit & must decide right entitlement & share of parties in same proceeding
The Court observed that in a suit filed for partition, Courts must endeavour to comprehensively adjudicate and decide the right entitlement and share of the parties in the same proceeding and must avoid multiplicity of proceedings or relegating parties to a fresh round of litigation.
In this case, the dispute revolved around the inheritance and partition of a property in New Friends Colony, New Delhi, measuring about 471 square yards, along with a house. Sheila Kapila, the original owner, passed away in 2003, and her husband predeceased her in 1994. She died intestate, and the parties claim to be governed by Hindu law.
Cause Title- Vikrant Kapila & Anr. vs Pankaja Panda & Ors.
Date of Judgment- October 10, 2023
Coram- Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice SVN Bhatti
9) Once there is no contract between parties of making payment in Indian currency, there would be no question of determining date of conversion
The Court established that the date of conversion of the awarded sum from USD to Indian Rupees should be as per the original agreement date. The Court emphasized that the absence of a provision for payment in Indian Rupees in the agreement meant there was no need to determine a conversion date for US Dollars to Indian Rupees.
The case involved two appeals filed under Article 134A read with Article 133(1)(a) of the Constitution of India before the High Court of Delhi. The central question was that in terms of the agreement dated June 29, 1982 between the parties and in light of the judgment dated February 24, 2015 of the Supreme Court of India, what should be the relevant date for conversion of the awarded sum from USD to Indian rupees.
Cause Title- National Projects Construction Corporation Limited v. Royal Construction Company Private Ltd.
Date of Judgment- October 10, 2023
Coram- Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Vikram Nath
10) 'Irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not a straight jacket formula on divorce under Article 142 of Constitution'- SC while holding marriage is sacred and pious
The Court observed that divorce on the ground of irretrievable breakdown of marriage is not always desirable, especially in India.
In this case, the Court was considering a plea for divorce filed by an 89-year-old man from his wife of about 82 years old, citing an irretrievable breakdown of marriage. Notably, the respondent had maintained the sacred relationship since 1963 and cared for her three children all these years, although the appellant-husband had exhibited total hostility towards them. The respondent was still ready and willing to care for her husband and did not wish to leave him alone at such a late stage of life. She also expressed that she did not want to die with the stigma of being a “divorcee” woman.
Cause Title- Dr. Nirmal Singh Panesar vs Mrs Paramjit Kaur Panesar @ Ajinder Kaur Panesar
Date of Judgment- October 10, 2023
Coram- Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Bela M Trivedi
11) Deceased with chequered past involving several run-ins with law cannot justify his murder: SC dismisses appeal with bald assertions, upholds conviction
The Court held that a person's past criminal record cannot serve as a defense for their murder.
In this appeal, the accused appellants challenged their conviction by the High Court. They were found guilty of offenses under Sections 148, 302 read with 149, 307 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and Sections 4/5 of the Explosive Substance Act, 1908. The Trial Court had convicted 9 out of the 11 accused, a decision upheld in the appeal. The High Court affirmed the conviction, emphasizing the accused's intent to commit murder and the formation of an unlawful assembly.
Cause Title- Kamal Prasad & Ors. v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
Date of Judgment- October 10, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol
12) Section 141 NI Act| Mere management of affairs of company does not make person liable for its conduct: SC reiterates
The Court reiterated that merely because somebody is managing the affairs of the company, per se, he does not become in charge of the conduct of the business of the company or the person responsible for the company for the conduct of the business of the company.
The appellant had filed an appeal against an order passed by the High Court, related to a complaint filed under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act). The appellant argued that the complaint against him should be quashed because he had resigned from the partnership firm before the issuance of the cheque in question and because the complaint lacked mandatory averments required under Section 141(1) of the NI Act.
Cause Title- Siby Thomas v. M/s. Somany Ceramics Ltd.
Date of Judgment- October 10, 2023
Coram- Justice C.T. Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Kumar
13) SC invokes powers under Article 142 while directing State to pay Rs. 3 lakhs to party due to inordinate delay in adjudicatory process
The Court exercised powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India to direct the State to grant a lump-sum of INR 3 lakhs to a party owing to the time taken by the adjudicatory process in a service matter.
In this case, the appellant approached the Supreme Court against the High Court's judgment in a matter which involved the appointment of a Physical Education Trainer (PET) at a school in Odisha. A Managing Committee had appointed the appellant constituted on 15.12.1992, and this appointment was made while a stay order was in effect in favour of that Managing Committee.
Cause Title- Bichitrananda Behera v. State of Orissa & Others
Date of Judgment- October 11, 2023
Coram- Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah
14) If no post is vacant create a supernumerary post: SC directs Union of India to grant long-delayed postal assistant appointment
The Court held that the Union of India displayed carelessness by not producing the Amendment Rules and the gazette notification before the Tribunal in a Postal Assistant Recruitment case. The Court held that the third respondent could not be penalized for this negligence and must be given the rightful appointment as a Postal Assistant.
The Union of India challenged a series of judgments and orders related to the appointment of third respondent as a Postal Assistant. The dispute revolved around the interpretation of recruitment rules established in 1990 and subsequently amended in 1992.
Cause Title- Union Of India v. Uzair Imran & Ors.
Date of Judgment- October 11, 2023
Coram- Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Dipankar Datta
15) Accused has no caste or religion when court deals with his case: SC amends cause title, forbids lower courts from mentioning caste or religion in cause title
The Court observed that an accused has no caste or religion when the court deals with the case. The Court emphasized that such information should not be included in the cause title of judgments, and this practice needs to be discontinued.
In this case, the main issue was the enhancement of the sentence for the respondent-accused, who was convicted for multiple offenses including rape and sexual assault on a young girl. The Trial Court convicted the respondent–accused for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 342, clauses (i) and (m) of sub¬section (2) of Section 376 of the IPC read with Sections 3,4,8 and 10 of the POCSO. The High Court, while confirming the conviction, reduced the sentence for the rape charges from life imprisonment to twelve years.
Cause Title- State of Rajasthan v. Gautam
Date of Judgment- October 11, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal
16) Departmental proceedings are initiated only after issuance of chargesheet and not merely on issuance of a show cause notice: SC reiterates
The Court reiterated that issuing a show cause notice does not qualify as initiating departmental proceedings and such proceedings can only be initiated after issuing a charge sheet.
The Court dismissed a Civil Appeal filed by the Appellant Bank whereby the High Court had set aside the punishment order against the First Respondent. The Court emphasized that the United Commercial Bank Officer’s Service Regulations, 1979 (Regulations, 1979) can be applied only when disciplinary proceedings have been initiated before the employee's service ceases. The Court noted that Regulations 1979 provides for the continuation of disciplinary proceedings, which should be initiated per the United Commercial Bank Officer, Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1976 (Regulation, 1976).
Cause Title- UCO Bank v. MB Motwani (thr LRs) and Ors.
Date of Judgment- October 12, 2023
Coram- Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Rajesh Bindal
17) Mere fact that 2 institutes controlled by same mgmt, offer different courses or established at different times not relevant for clubbing under EPF act
The Court held that mere fact that two institutes controlled by the same management, offer different courses or were established at different times is not relevant for their clubbing under the EPF Act (Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952).
The Court was dealing with a civil appeal in which the order passed by the Karnataka High Court was challenged by the appellant. The Division Bench had upheld the order of the Single Judge who had upheld the order passed by the Employee Provident Fund Appellate Tribunal and also upheld the application of EPF Act to the appellant’s institution.
Cause Title- M/s Mathosri Manikbai Kothari College of Visual Arts v. The Assistant Provident Fund Commissioner
Date of Judgment- October 12, 2023
Coram- Justice Hima Kohli and Justice Rajesh Bindal
18) Interpretative tools should be employed to make a statute workable and not to reach a particular outcome
The Court held that interpretative tools should only be used to make a statute workable rather than to achieve a specific outcome. It noted that there is a difference between using interpretative tools to make a statute workable and engaging in judicial legislation.
The Court dismissed a set of Civil Appeals filed by the Commissioner (Customs, Central Excise, and Service Tax) challenging the order and judgment of the Patna and Orissa High Court. The Court emphasized that courts should not interpret a statute based on the desired outcome, even when a particular interpretation of a statute does not produce the expected results.
Cause Title- Commissioner, Customs Central Excise And Service Tax, Patna v M/S Shapoorji Pallonji And Company Pvt. Ltd. & Ors
Date of Judgment- October 13, 2023
Coram- Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Dipankar Datta
19) Infraction of prescribed statutory procedure for taking possession not a sole basis to discard State’s claim when it’s taken long before issue is raised
The Court in a land dispute held that the infraction of prescribed statutory procedure for taking possession cannot be a sole basis to discard the State’s claim of possession, when it is taken long before the date the issue is raised.
A civil appeal was filed against the judgment of the High Court by which the writ petition of the original petitioner was disposed of by declaring that the land in dispute shall continue to be in possession of the said petitioner and would not be treated as surplus land as he was entitled to the benefits of the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999. Additionally, a direction was issued to the Competent Authority (Urban Ceiling) to ensure that the name of the said petitioner is restored in the revenue records.
Cause Title- State of U.P. & Anr. v. Ehsan & Anr.
Date of Judgment- October 13, 2023
Coram- Justice P.S. Narasimha and Justice Manoj Misra
20) Holding TIP in superintendent’s office is a method not known to law: SC while acquitting murder accused citing irregular witness identification
The Court held that the identification of the appellant by a crucial witness was not reliable due to irregular procedures. The Court pointed out that the witness was shown the accused at the office of the Superintendent of Police, a method not recognized by law, raising doubts about the identification's credibility acquitting the accused.
The appellant was convicted under Sections 302 and 201 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, receiving sentences of life imprisonment and three years' rigorous imprisonment, respectively. The High Court confirmed this judgment.
Cause Title- Mohd. Rijwan v. State of Haryana
Date of Judgment- October 13, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal
21) Samples drawn in gazetted officer's presence not enough u/s. 52a(2), NDPS Act: Supreme Court emphasizes magistrate's certification
The Court held that the mere presence of a gazetted officer during the seizure of contraband, without adherence to the specific procedures outlined in Section 52A(2) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 does not validate the seizure or sampling process. The Court emphasized that proper documentation, including inventory preparation and certification by a Magistrate, is crucial.
Based on information from the Narcotics Control Bureau, a lorry was intercepted in 2000. It contained 20 kgs of heroin. Four individuals were arrested, and a case was registered under the NDPS Act. All four were found guilty, but one person died during the appeal process. The High Court affirmed the trial court's decision. The owner of the contraband among them appealed the High Court's judgment.
Cause Title- Yusuf v. State
Date of Judgment- October 13, 2023
Coram- Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal
22) UP Trade Tax Act| “Tinted glass sheets” is liable to be taxed as “goods or wares made of glass”
The Court in a case relating to the U.P. Trade Tax Act, 1948 held that the “tinted glass sheets” is liable to be taxed as “goods or wares made of glass” under Entry No. IV of the Notification No. 5784.
The Court was dealing with a batch of civil appeals whereby the point that arose for consideration was whether “tinted glass sheets” manufactured by the appellants is liable to be taxed as “goods or wares made of glass” under the Notification No. 5784 dated September 7, 1981 being Entry No. IV or as unclassified item.
Cause Title- M/s. Triveni Glass Limited v. Commissioner of Trade Tax, U.P.
Date of Judgment- October 9, 2023
Coram- Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar
23) Mere mention of product name in which business establishment is being run would not be advertisement unless customers are solicited by such display: SC reiterates
The Court reiterated that merely mentioning the name of the product on which the business establishment is being run would not be an advertisement until and unless the customers are solicited by such displays.
The Court disposed of a set of Civil Appeals challenging the order of the High Court which affirmed the demand notices passed by the Indore Municipal Corporation (IMC). The IMC had demanded advertisement taxes from the Appellants (Tata Motors and Hyundai Vehicles) for display boards depicting the respective vehicles. The Court emphasized that depicting the nature of the respective vehicles would be an inseparable part of the Appellants' business.
Cause Title- M/S Harsh Automobiles Private Limited v Indore Municipal Corporation
Date of Judgment- October 9, 2023
Coram- Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar
24) Revisional court cannot sit as appellate court and start appreciating evidence: Supreme Court calls out HC for unnecessary interference in corruption case
The Court held that the High Court overstepped its jurisdiction by evaluating the defense's evidence and probabilities of the case at the stage of framing charges, which led to the interference being deemed unjust and the trial court's order being reinstated. The respondent in this case was facing proceedings under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
Respondent filed an application for discharge, arguing that the investigating officer failed to consider his written explanation and supporting documents. The respondent contended that the conclusion of the sanctioning authority, stating he possessed disproportionate assets, was erroneous. The trial court rejected his application, but the High Court allowed his revision petition, concluding that the trial court had made a mistake in dismissing the application. Consequently, the respondent was discharged from the case.
Cause Title- State of Gujarat v. Dilipsinh Kishorsinh Rao
Date of Judgment- October 9, 2023
Coram- Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar
25) Candidate not possessing valid documentation entitling his eligibility before prescribed cut-off date cannot complain of rejection of his claim
Refusing to accept the claim of the petitioners that they were eligible EWS candidates and that it was only a delay caused in the production of proof thereof, the Court held that Rules 13, 27(3) and 28 of the CSE-Rules, 2022 are constitutionally valid to the extent it prescribes that candidate must be in possession of a EWS certificate as on the closing date of the application for preliminary examination to be ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution.
The Supreme Court explained that where there is absence of any rule or absence of any prescription, the last day for fulfilling the eligibility is the last date of submission of the application, which is a judicially recognized default date.
Cause Title- Divya v. Union of India and Ors.
Date of Judgment- October 9, 2023
Coram- Justice J.K Maheshwari and Justice K.V. Viswanathan
