Supreme court
Registry Has No Authority To Delete A Case From Cause List Unless Specifically Ordered By Concerned Bench Or Chief Justice: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Monday (February 4) held that the Registry has no authority to delete a case from the cause list once it has been listed, unless there is a specific order from the concerned bench or the Chief Justice of India.“The fact that service of notice of making alternate arrangements was not served is no ground to delete a case which is notified on the cause list. Once the case...
'Uma Devi' Judgment Can't Be Used To Justify Exploitative Engagements : Supreme Court Allows Regularisation Of Long-Serving Daily Wagers
The Supreme Court recently criticized the practice of public institutions hiring workers on daily wages (temporary contracts) to avoid providing them with permanent benefits. The Court reaffirmed that long-serving temporary workers appointed to sanctioned positions cannot be denied regularization simply because their initial appointments were temporary. While acknowledging the precedent set...
Appeals Of Accused & Victims Under NIA Act Can't Be Dismissed On Ground That Delay Can't Be Condoned Beyond 90 Days : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court today (January 4) directed that appeals filed by accused or victims in matters under the National Investigation Agency Act 2008 would not be dismissed on reason that delay beyond a period of 90 days cannot be condoned. The bench of CJI Sanjiv Khanna and Justices Sanjay Kumar and KV Viswanathan was hearing a batch of pleas challenging S. 21(5) of the NIA Act 2008. The...
Supreme Court Rejects NHAI Plea To Prospectively Apply 2019 Judgment Allowing Solatium & Interest For National Highway Land Acquisitions
The Supreme Court today dismissed plea(s) filed by NHAI seeking a clarification that the Court's 2019 ruling in Union of India v. Tarsem Singh on grant of solatium and interest to landowners shall apply prospectively.A bench of Justices Surya Kant and Ujjal Bhuyan rendered the decision, stating,"Granting such clarification would nullify the very relief that Tarsem Singh intended to...
'One-Sided Forfeiture Clause In Apartment Buyer Agreements Unfair Trade Practice' : Supreme Court Rejects Builder's Appeal
In a major relief to homebuyers, the Supreme Court (Feb. 3) ruled that earnest money forfeited upon flat booking cancellation must be reasonable and not excessive enough to be considered a penalty under Section 74 of the Contract Act, 1872. The Court criticized real-estate developers for including one-sided, excessive forfeiture clauses in builder-buyer agreements, deeming them "unfair...
S. 74 Contract Act | Forfeiture Of Earnest Money Permissible If It's Not Excessive Amounting To Penalty : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court today (Feb. 3) clarified that forfeiting a reasonable earnest money deposit in a contract does not constitute a penalty under Section 74 of the Contract Act, 1872. “It can be seen that this Court has held that if the forfeiture of earnest money under a contract is reasonable, then it does not fall within Section 74 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872, inasmuch as, such...
Laws Intended To Protect Women From Cruelty & Dowry Harassment Shouldn't Be Misused To Settle Personal Scores : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court recently, while quashing a case involving allegations of cruelty and dowry said that criminal law should not be used as a tool for harassment. It added that courts must be cautious while dealing with such cases to prevent misuse of the law. While the provisions are intended to protect women from cruelty and dowry harassment, they should not be used to settle personal scores...
Supreme Court Reiterates Narrow Scope Of Interference Under Section 37 Arbitration Act
The Supreme Court reiterated that in appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, the Court has a narrower scope to review the arbitral award if the award has already been upheld under Section 34 (application for setting aside arbitral awards). Reliance was placed on the recent decision in Larsen Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Company vs Union of India, wherein the...
Supreme Court Weekly Round-up: January 27, 2025 To February 02, 2025
Nominal IndexCitationsHarshit Harish Jain & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 110Surendra G. Shankar & Anr v. Esque Finamark Pvt. Ltd & Ors., Civil Appeal No. 928 of 2025 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 111Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 112Ramesh Baghel v. State of Chhattisgarh and Ors., SLP(C) No. 1399/2025 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 113Maulvi Syed Shad Kazmi @...
Supreme Court Allows All Disabled Candidates To Take Scribe In Exams Without Meeting Benchmark Disabilities
The Supreme Court today(February 3) allowed a writ petition filed by a candidate suffering from Focal Hand Dystonia(a type of a writ's camp), seeking to avail the benefit of the scribe by relying on landmark Vikas Kumar v. UPSC (2021) in which it held that benchmark disability is not the precondition to obtaining a scribe. The Court has held that the facility of scribe and other...
