Supreme court
'Hierarchy of Judiciary Must Be Respected' : Supreme Court Cautions NCDRC Members Who Passed Directions Contrary To SC Order, Closes Contempt Case
The Supreme Court on Wednesday(May 15) warned/ cautioned the two members of the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) for issuing non-bailable warrants against the directors of a company, ignoring a previous interim order of the Supreme Court. While closing the contempt proceedings initiated against them, the Court categorically marked that all orders passed by the...
Prabir Purkayastha's Arrest By Delhi Police & Remand Illegal : Supreme Court Orders NewsClick Editor's Release In UAPA Case
In a major development, the Supreme Court on Wednesday (May 15) declared as illegal NewsClick founder and Editor-in-Chief Prabir Purkayastha's arrest by the Delhi police and his remand in a case under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act 1967.The Court noted that a copy of the remand application was not provided to Purkayastha or his counsel before passing the remand order on October 4,...
Consumer Cases Weekly Round-Up: 6th to 12th May 2024
Supreme Court Consumer Protection Act 1986 | Onus Of Proving That Service Was Availed For 'Commercial Purpose' Is On Service Provider : Supreme Court Case Title: SHRIRAM CHITS (INDIA) PRIVATE LIMITED EARLIER KNOWN AS SHRIRAM CHITS (K) PVT. LTD VERSUS RAGHACHAND ASSOCIATES In an important ruling relating to consumer protection law, the Supreme Court on Friday (May 10) set out...
S.144 CPC | Stranger Who Purchased Property Knowing About Appeal Pendency Can't Resist Restitution As Bona Fide Purchaser: Supreme Court
In an important ruling concerning the principle of 'restitution' under Section 144 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) the Supreme Court observed that if after knowing that the decree was likely to be reversed, a stranger auction purchaser (not being party to the proceedings) purchases the property in execution of the decree, then he couldn't claim the protection of being a...
Services Rendered By Advocates Come Under Contract Of Personal Service: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court (today on May 14) held that the Services rendered by an advocate would come under the “a contract of personal service” as opposed to a “contract for service”. In layman terms, 'a contract of personal service' relates to an arrangement where an individual is hired for rendering his/ her services. However, in the case of “contract for service” the services...
The Complete Supreme Court Annual Digests 2023- FULL SET [Part I to XX]
The Complete Supreme Court Annual Digest- 2023 [Part-I]The Complete Supreme Court Annual Digest- 2023 [Part-II]The Complete Supreme Court Annual Digest- 2023 [Part-III]The Complete Supreme Court Annual Digest- 2023 [Part-IV]The Complete Supreme Court Annual Digest- 2023 [Part-V]The Complete Supreme Court Annual Digest- 2023 [Part-VI]The Complete Supreme Court Annual Digest- 2023...
Judgment Bringing Doctors Under Consumer Protection Act Requires Reconsideration : Supreme Court
In a major development, the Supreme Court on Tuesday ( May 14) said that its 1995 judgment in the case of Indian Medical Association v VP Shantha, which brought medical professionals under the Consumer Protection Act, required reconsideration. A Bench of Justices Bela Trivedi and Pankaj Mithal held so while deciding an appeal that raised the issue of whether advocates can be held...
Advocates Not Liable Under Consumer Protection Act For Deficiency Of Services : Supreme Court
In a crucial development, the Supreme Court on Tuesday (May 14) held that advocates cannot be held liable under the Consumer Protection Act 1986 (as re-enacted in 2019) for deficiency of services. The Court held that professionals have to be treated differently from persons carrying out business and trade.As a corollary, the Court held that complaints against advocates alleging deficiency...
S. 102(3) Cr.P.C. | Police Seizure Wouldn't Get Vitiated Altogether Due To Delayed Reporting To Magistrate: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court on Monday (May 13) observed that the delay in reporting the seizure report by the police to the magistrate wouldn't vitiate the act of seizure by police under Section 102(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.Reversing that part of the High Court's findings which had declared the seizure report to be vitiated because the report wasn't sent forthwith to the magistrate,...
The Complete Supreme Court Annual Digest- 2023 [Part-XX]
Tamil Learning Act, 2006 Tamil Nadu Tamil Learning Act, 2006 - The State had issued circulars mandating the study of Tamil as a primary subject while allowing linguistic minorities the option to study their mother tongue. Held, the state's circulars should be executed in their entirety. Therefore, similar to other subjects, minimum qualifying marks should be stipulated for the...
Direct Tax Cases Weekly Round-Up: 5 To 11 May 2024
Supreme Court Interest-Free/Concessional Loans To Bank Employees Taxable As Perquisite : Supreme Court Upholds Rule 3(7)(I) Of Income Tax Rules Case Name- All India Bank Officers' Confederation Vs The Regional Manager, Central Bank Of India & Others Citation : 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 352 A Division bench of the Supreme Court comprising of Justice Sanjiv Khanna and...
Order 41 Rule 31 CPC | Omission To Separately Frame Issues Not Fatal If Appellate Court Has Otherwise Dealt With Them : Supreme Court
The Supreme Court held that an omission to frame points of determination by the first appellate court as per Order 41 Rule 31 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (“CPC”) would not prove fatal as long as that first appellate court dealt with all the issues that arise for deliberation in the said appeal.“Thus, even if the first appellate Court does not separately frame the points...