Supreme Court Annual Digest 2024: Subject-Wise Index

Subject-wise Index - 

Administration

In public law proceedings, when it is realised that the prayer in the writ petition is unattainable due to passage of time, constitutional courts may not dismiss the writ proceedings on the ground of their perceived futility. In the life of litigation, passage of time can stand both as an ally and adversary. Our duty is to transcend the constraints of time and perform the primary duty of a constitutional court to control and regulate the exercise of power or arbitrary action. By taking the first step, the primary purpose and object of public law proceedings will be subserved. (Para 20) Manoj Kumar v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 143 : AIR 2024 SC 1265 : (2024) 3 SCC 563

While the primary duty of constitutional courts remains the control of power, including setting aside administrative actions that may be illegal or arbitrary, it must be acknowledged that such measures may not singularly address repercussions of abuse of power. It is equally incumbent upon the courts, as a secondary measure, to address the injurious consequences arising from arbitrary and illegal actions. This concomitant duty to take reasonable measures to restitute the injured is our overarching constitutional purpose. This is how we have read our constitutional text, and this is how we have built our precedents on the basis of our preambular objective to secure justice. (Para 19) Manoj Kumar v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 143 : AIR 2024 SC 1265 : (2024) 3 SCC 563

Advertisement

Guidelines for Prevention of Misleading Advertisements and Endorsements of Misleading Advertisements, 2022; Guideline No. 8, 12 & 13 – Held, advertisers/advertising agencies and endorsers are equally responsible for issuing false and misleading advertisements. Such endorsements that are routinely made by public figures, influencers, celebrities etc. go a long way in promoting a product. It is imperative for them to act with a sense of responsibility when endorsing any product and take responsibility for the same. It is the duty of manufacturers, service providers, advertisers and advertising agencies to ensure that the trust of the consumer is not abused or exploited due to sheer lack of knowledge or inexperience. Due diligence is to be undertaken for endorsement of advertisements and requires a person who endorses a product to have adequate information about, or experience with a specific good, product or service that is proposed to be endorsed and ensure that it must not be deceptive. (Para 21) Indian Medical Association v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 381 : (2024) 8 SCC 46

Arrest

The Supreme Court has directed the police to follow guidelines issued in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, 2014 INSC 463 and Amanatullah Khan v. The Commissioner of Police, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 351 to ensure that members of Denotified Tribes are not subjected to arbitrary arrest. Sukanya Shantha v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 771

Auction

Blacklisting of an entity amounts to 'civil death', must be justifiable and proportionate. Blue Dreamz Advertising Pvt. Ltd. v. Kolkata Municipal Corporation, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 559 : AIR 2024 SC 4183

Transferring public property at nominal price arbitrary; states' right can be sold only by auction/transparent process. City Montessori School v. State of U.P., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 545

Benami

Constitutional validity of provisions in the Prohibition of Benami Property Transactions Act, 1988, as amended by the Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Amendment Act, 2016 - Applicability of the 2016 Amendment Act retrospectively or prospectively - Held, the Court recalled its judgment dated August 23, 2022, which declared Section 3(2) of the 1988 Act unconstitutional for being arbitrary and violative of Article 20(1) of the Constitution. Section 5 of the 1988 Act was also declared unconstitutional for being arbitrary. The 2016 Act, being substantive, cannot apply retrospectively for forfeiture provisions under Section 5. The constitutional challenge cannot be adjudicated without a proper lis between the parties. The review petition is allowed, recalling the judgment dated August 23, 2022. Civil Appeal No. 5783 of 2022 is restored for fresh adjudication by a new Bench. Union of India v. Ganpati Dealcom, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 851

Bifurcation

Employees of the Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation (APSRTC), who were appointed at regional levels in areas which formed part of the State of Telangana, will continue as employees of the Telangana State Road Transport Corporation (TSRTC), which is the successor corporation following the bifurcation of the State of AP. Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation v. V.V. Bramha Reddy, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 665

Building

Guidelines for Addressing Unauthorized Constructions and Violations of Building Plans - Legal Principles - Strict Adherence to Rules - State Responsibility - Directions and Enforcement - Unauthorized constructions or deviations from approved building plans are impermissible and must be curtailed with strict enforcement. Administrative failure or negligence cannot shield illegal constructions from action. Regularization of violations should be an exception and only permissible under stringent conditions in the larger public interest, considering environmental and urban development concerns. Builders must provide an undertaking not to hand over possession without a completion/occupation certificate. Approved plans must be displayed at construction sites and periodic inspections conducted by authorities. Service connections (electricity, water, sewerage) must only be granted upon production of a completion/occupation certificate. Unauthorized constructions or post-completion deviations must be acted upon promptly, with liability imposed on officials issuing wrongful certificates. Businesses cannot be conducted in unauthorized buildings, whether residential or commercial. Development must align with zonal plans and be environmentally sustainable. State and local authorities must cooperate in addressing unauthorized constructions, with erring officials subjected to disciplinary action. Appeals concerning completion certificates or regularization of deviations must be resolved within 90 days. Financial institutions should sanction loans only after verifying the completion/occupation certificate. Violation of the court's directions will result in contempt proceedings and prosecution under applicable laws. High Court order confirmed. Appellants directed to vacate and surrender the unauthorized property within three months. Respondent authorities to demolish unauthorized construction within two weeks of surrender. Criminal and departmental action to be initiated against erring officials, with a report filed before the Court. Deposited amount in SLP refunded with interest. Appeals dismissed. Rajendra Kumar Barjatya v. U.P. Avas Evam Vikas Parishad, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 1009

Recover compensation from officers who demolished buildings ignoring status quo order. Ajay Kumar Yadav @ Ajay Rai v. State of Bihar, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 572

Child Custody

Interim visitation rights of the father in the context of a minor child's welfare - Best interest and well-being of a two-year-old child in light of parental disputes - Modification of visitation venue to minimize hardship to the child - Held, the Supreme Court partly allowed the appeal, modifying the judgment of the High Court which directed visitation at Karur. Considering the best interest and welfare of the minor child, the Court ordered that visitation take place in Madurai, where the appellant-mother resides, rather than Karur. The Court emphasized: (i) The paramount importance of the minor child's health and welfare over the convenience of either parent. (ii) While the father's right to visit his child is recognized, it cannot come at the cost of compromising the child's well-being. (iii) Serious allegations of domestic violence and threat to life are matters for detailed trial and do not preclude interim visitation rights. Sugirtha v. Gowtham, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 1042 : AIR 2025 SC 305

Welfare of the child is of paramount consideration and will override any personal law or statute. The wishes/desire of the child who is capable of forming an opinion has to be considered by the court while deciding any matter of child custody. On interaction by the court with the child, it is found that the child is intelligent and capable of understanding her welfare and wishes to live with the Appellant. The welfare of the child lies with custody of the appellants. (Para 14, 16, 17 & 20) Shazia Aman Khan v. State of Orissa, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 193 : AIR 2024 SC 1299

Civil Appeal

Application for condonation of delay filed by stranger to suit – Held, the approach of the trial court in entertaining an application filed at the behest of a stranger for condonation of delay in filing an application for restoration of the subject suit is totally unsustainable in law and illegal. (Para 9) Vijay Laxman Bhawe v. P and S Nirman Pvt. Ltd, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 360 : AIR 2024 SC 2280

The appellant was an elected representative. Held, the elected members cannot be removed at the whims and fancies of the civil servants or their political masters only because some of such elected members are found to be inconvenient within the system. The removal of the appellant from the office of Councilor/Vice-President with a further ban on him to contest election for six years is highly excessive and disproportionate to the nature of the so-called misconduct attributed to him. (Para 10, 11, 12) Makarand @ Nandu v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 354

Conflict of Law

Conflict between laws – It is a settled position of law that in case of conflict between two laws, the general law must give way to the special law. A conjoined reading of the Stamp Act and the Companies Act would show that while the former governs the payment of stamp duty for all manner of instruments, the latter deals with all aspects relating to companies and other similar associations. In the case at hand, we are concerned with an instrument which is chargeable to Stamp Duty and finds its origin in the Companies Act. The various provisions of the Companies Act provide the purpose and scope of the instrument. Thus, it has to be said that the Companies Act is the special law and the Stamp Act is the general law with regards to Articles of Association, and the special will override the general. (Para 11) State of Maharashtra v. National Organic Chemical Industries Ltd., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 285 : AIR 2024 SC 2037

Corruption

Allegations of faulty contracts awarded by the State of Arunachal Pradesh to near relatives of the then Chief Minister. Direction for examination by the Comptroller and Auditor General of India (CAG). Voluntary Arunachal Sena v. State of Arunachal Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 283

Bribery not protected by legislative privileges - No immunity for MPs / MLAs taking bribes for vote/speech in legislature. Sita Soren v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 185 : AIR 2024 SC 1701 : (2024) 5 SCC 629

Corruption and bribery of members of the legislature erode the foundation of Indian parliamentary democracy. It is disruptive of the aspirations and deliberative ideals of the Constitution and creates a polity which deprives citizens of a responsible, responsive, and representative democracy. (Para 104) Sita Soren v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 185 : AIR 2024 SC 1701 : (2024) 5 SCC 629

Offence of bribery not dependent on actual performance of act for which bribe is taken, mere acceptance of bribe enough. Sita Soren v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 185 : AIR 2024 SC 1701 : (2024) 5 SCC 629

The contention that the commitments by a political party in its manifesto, which eventually lead to direct or indirect financial help to the public at large, will also amount to corrupt practice by a candidate of that party, is too far-fetched and cannot be accepted. Shashanka J. Sreedhara v. B.Z. Zameer Ahmed Khan, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 410

The offence of bribery is complete the moment illegal gratification is accepted and is not dependent on the actual performance of the promise for which the bribe was sought. Offence is complete one mere acceptance of undue advantage. Sita Soren v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 185 : AIR 2024 SC 1701 : (2024) 5 SCC 629

Court Martial

When reasons aren't recorded to appoint a junior officer as judge advocate, court martial proceedings stand invalidated. Union of India v. Lt. Col. Rahul Arora, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 677 : AIR 2024 SC 4427

Cow Slaughter

Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Cattle Preservation Act, 1964 (Karnataka); Section 10 – Power of competent authority to enter and inspect – The power of the authorized person was confined to enter and inspect. As per the provisions, the assistant director had no power to seize any sample of meat. (Para 9) Joshine Antony v. Asifa Sultana, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 195

Criminal Jurisprudence

Howsoever stringent the penal law may be, the over-arching postulate of criminal jurisprudence that an accused is presumed to be innocent until proven guilty cannot be brushed aside lightly. (Para 20) Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 437 : (2024) 9 SCC 813

The presumption of innocence comes to an end when an accused is put to trial and is held guilty of the offence with which he is charged. (Para 6) Bhupatji Sartajji Jabraji Thakor v. State of Gujarat, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 438

Criminal Justice System

It is the bounden duty of every Court of law that injustice wherever visible must be hammered and the voice of a victim of the crime is dispassionately heard. XXX v. State, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 110

In recent years the machinery of criminal justice is being misused by certain persons for their vested interests and for achieving their oblique motives and agenda. Courts have therefore to be vigilant against such tendencies and ensure that acts of omission and commission having an adverse impact on the fabric of our society must be nipped in the bud. Vishal Noble Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 96

Custodial Violence

It is a fact that, in ordinary circumstances, we ought not to invoke our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India to invalidate an order granting bail to an accused. But this criteria, while dealing with the question of granting bail, would not apply in a case of custodial death, where police officials are arraigned as accused. Such alleged offences are of grave and serious nature. Ajay Kumar Yadav v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 266

Supreme Court delivers split verdict on police officers' convictions in decades-old custodial death case. Manik v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 747

The High Court directs the Director General of Police to issue a circular for medical examination of persons brought to police stations for investigation, aiming to curb custodial violence. The State submitted that there cannot be an omnibus direction of this nature and that certain guidelines are required to be framed in that regard. The Supreme Court rejects State's plea to quash direction but permits State to formulate Standard Operating Procedure for guidance. (Para 1 - 7) State U.P v. Ramadhar Kashyap, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 148

Death Sentence

Principles and Procedural Guidelines on Delay in Execution of Death Sentence and Clemency Petitions - Legal Principles - Delay as Grounds for Commutation - Effect of Clemency Petition Delays - Judicial Oversight - Executive Responsibility - Role of Sessions Courts - Operative Guidelines Issued - Dedicated Cells for Mercy Petitions - Transparent Communication - Execution Warrant Procedures - Judicial Compliance Monitoring - Inordinate, undue, and unexplained delay in executing a death sentence may entitle a convict to seek commutation to life imprisonment under Article 32. The delay must be examined post-confirmation of the death sentence, focusing on its impact on the convict's rights under Article 21 of the Constitution. Prolonged consideration of mercy petitions by constitutional authorities causes physical and psychological distress to the convict, infringing upon Article 21 rights. Such delays cannot be justified by the gravity of the offense alone. Courts, including High Courts under Article 226, have the authority to intervene in cases of inordinate delay in execution or processing of mercy petitions. There is no fixed standard for what constitutes "inordinate delay"; it must be determined on a case-by-case basis. The Executive must promptly process mercy petitions under Articles 72 and 161 and ensure timely forwarding to the appropriate constitutional functionaries. Sessions Courts must actively monitor the status of appeals, review petitions, and clemency proceedings to avoid delays in issuing execution warrants. State Governments and Union Territories must establish dedicated cells for prompt processing of mercy petitions, with specified responsibilities and timelines. Prisons, police, and authorities must ensure timely communication and sharing of essential information to expedite clemency processes. Sessions Courts must ensure detailed monitoring of cases post-confirmation of the death sentence and provide adequate notice to the convict before issuing warrants. A minimum gap of 15 days must be maintained between the issuance of the execution warrant and the actual execution date. Compliance reports from State Governments and High Courts must be submitted periodically, ensuring adherence to the guidelines. The judgment underscores the importance of upholding convicts' fundamental rights even at the execution stage, balancing the gravity of crimes with humane considerations under Articles 21, 32, and 226. These comprehensive guidelines aim to prevent procedural delays and ensure a fair and efficient justice delivery system. State of Maharashtra v. Pradeep Yashwant Kokade, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 997 : AIR 2025 SC 1 : 2025 Cri LJ 225

Date of Birth

In the case of conflicting documents, the School Leaving Certificate, which had statutory recognition, should take precedence over the Aadhar Card as proof of age. Aadhar Card could not be regarded as conclusive proof of date of birth. Saroj v. Iffco-Tokio General Insurance, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 837 : AIR 2024 SC 5720

Debt Recovery

Whether debts, which cannot be recovered by filing civil suits as they are time-barred under the Limitation Act 1963, can be recovered by invoking other remedies under special statutes for debt recovery ? The matter needs to be placed before the Hon'ble Chief Justice of India to constitute an appropriate three-judge bench. K.P. Khemka v. Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Corporation Ltd., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 357 : (2024) 8 SCC 391

Supreme Court criticizes finance ministry for treating debts recovery tribunal as “subordinate department”, seeks explanation. Superwhizz Professionals Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 764

Defamation

Supreme Court sets aside Delhi High Court Order quashing summons to 'the Wire' in ex-JNU Professor's criminal defamation case. Amita Singh v. Wire, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 534

Demolition

Alleged involvement in crime no ground to demolish legally constructed property, such demolitions against rule of law. Javedali Mahebubmiya Saiyed v. State of Gujarat, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 691

Legality of the demolition of the petitioner's ancestral house without due process. Procedural safeguards required for actions against alleged encroachments. State accountability for high-handed and unauthorized actions. The petitioner alleged that his ancestral home in Maharajganj, Uttar Pradesh, was unlawfully demolished during a road widening project for National Highway 730. The demolition was carried out without written notice, based solely on public announcements. The NHRC and Commissioner's reports revealed procedural lapses, including lack of demarcation, absence of land acquisition, and demolition beyond the alleged encroachment. No evidence was presented by the State to establish the width of the highway or the extent of encroachment. The demolition exceeded the purported encroachment of 3.70 meters, going up to 8 meters in some areas. No compensation was provided, and the State failed to follow due process as mandated by law. The demolition was declared illegal, high-handed, and violative of procedural safeguards under Article 300A of the Constitution, which protects the right to property. The Court emphasized the requirement of due process, written notice, and proper demarcation before taking actions against alleged encroachments. State authorities were ordered to adopt procedural safeguards, including written notice, demarcation, and compensation, before initiating demolitions. Disciplinary and criminal proceedings were recommended against officials involved in unauthorized actions. The principle of “justice through bulldozers” was condemned as incompatible with the rule of law and constitutional guarantees. The Court held that any demolition of private property must strictly adhere to legal procedures to uphold constitutional protections and ensure public accountability. Arbitrary actions by the State undermine the rule of law and cannot be justified in a civilized society. In Re Manoj Tibrewal Akash, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 878

Discrimination

Gender Discrimination - Rural women empowerment - Elected representatives - Government land encroachment - Disqualification of Sarpanch - The Supreme Court allowed the appeal of the appellant, an elected Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat, challenging her disqualification based on allegations of residing in a house constructed on government land - Held, The disqualification was grounded on unverified and baseless allegations raised by private respondents, reflecting gender bias and resistance to female leadership in rural governance - Government authorities, including the Collector and Divisional Commissioner, acted mechanically without a thorough fact-finding process, while the High Court dismissed the appellant's writ petition on technical grounds - The Court underscored the disproportionate nature of the disqualification and the systemic challenges faced by women elected under reservation quotas. It emphasized the need for sensitivity in addressing issues affecting women in public office to foster gender parity and empowerment. The impugned orders disqualifying the appellant were set aside. The appellant was reinstated as Sarpanch to serve her full tenure. The Court called for a more conscientious approach by authorities in handling similar disputes. Manisha Ravindra Panpatil v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 783

Dispute

Nature of dispute – Dispute between the parties was essentially of a civil nature – There is no criminal element and consequently the case is nothing but an abuse of the process. The complainant has not been able to establish that the appellants had intention to cheat right from the beginning. Essentially, the present dispute between the parties relates to a breach of contract. A mere breach of contract, by one of the parties, would not attract prosecution for criminal offence in every case. Every breach of contract would not give rise to the offence of cheating, and it is required to be shown that the accused had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making the promise. (Para 4, 7, 8) Naresh Kumar v. State of Karnataka, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 228

Settlement of dispute between parties – The additional amount paid by the appellants pursuant to a settlement is primarily to bring a quietus to the dispute and to have peace and to avoid litigation. The mere fact that the appellants have paid an additional amount pursuant to the settlement, cannot be presumed as an act of cheating. The allegation that the complainant was coerced into a settlement, looks unlikely because there is no FIR or Complaint that the complainant was coerced into this settlement and the amount was duly accepted by the complainant. Further the complainant does not dispute that the additional amount paid by the appellants under the terms of the compromise deed. Hence, the dispute is settled. (Para 4) Naresh Kumar v. State of Karnataka, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 228

Dying Declaration

Dying declaration can be the sole basis of the conviction if it inspires the full confidence of the court. The Court is required to satisfy itself that the deceased was in a fit state of mind at the time of making the statement and that it was not the result of tutoring, prompting or imagination. Where the Court is satisfied about the dying declaration being true and voluntary, it can base its conviction without any further corroboration. There cannot be an absolute rule of law that the dying declaration cannot form the sole basis of conviction unless it is corroborated. The rule requiring corroboration is merely a rule of prudence. If after careful scrutiny, the court is satisfied that it is true and free from any effort to induce the deceased to make a false statement and if it is coherent and consistent, there shall be no legal impediment to make it the basis of conviction, even if there is no corroboration. (Para 7) Naeem v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 199 : AIR 2024 SC 1381

E-filing

The Supreme Court asks Allahabad High Court to enable e-filing and virtual appearance facilities at the Uttar Pradesh District Courts. Md. Anas Chaudhary v. Registrar-General High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 323

Enemy Property Act, 1968

The petitioner challenged an order of the High Court, which had directed that no coercive action be taken until the Municipal Building Tribunal was constituted. The Supreme Court stayed this order and directed the Municipal Corporation and Custodian of Enemy Property to proceed with the identification and demolition of unauthorized constructions. Custodian of Enemy Property for India v. Md. Yakub @ Md. Yakub Ansari, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 719

Union of India cannot assume ownership of the enemy properties once the said property is vested in the Custodian. This is because, there is no transfer of ownership from the owner of the enemy property to the Custodian and consequently, there is no ownership rights transferred to the Union of India. Therefore, the enemy properties which vest in the Custodian are not Union properties. (Para 22) Lucknow Nagar Nigam v. Kohli Brothers Colour Lab. Pvt. Ltd., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 156

Enforcement of Law

Power to court to enforce laws – It is not the function of the court to see the day-to-day enforcement of the law; that being the function of the Executive, but because of the non-functioning of the enforcement agencies, the courts out of necessity may pass orders directing the enforcement agencies to implement the law. (Para 77) In Re: T.N. Godavarman Thirumulpad v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 198 : AIR 2024 SC 1955

Exemplary Cost

The State of Madhya Pradesh is directed to pay costs to the appellant. The State Government is directed to recover the said amount from the officer(s) who were responsible of taking deliberate, illegal, mala fide actions for denying relief to the appellant. (Para 11) Smita Shrivastava v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 424 : AIR 2024 SC 2292

Eviction

Eviction proceedings of unauthorized occupants of 'public premises' ought to be carried out under the statutory provisions. The eviction proceedings initiated under the statute must continue without any interference unless the proceedings violate principles of natural justice. Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai v. Vivek V. Gawde, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 1017

Eviction - illegal demolition of premises with the support of the local police - Imposed a cost amounting to Rs. 6 lakhs on six police personnel for conspiring and illegally detaining tenants, coercing them to sign documents against their will, and demolishing the premises in question without any order from a competent court. (Para 9) Shatrughna Atmaram Patil v. Vinod Dodhu Chaudhary, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 77 : AIR 2024 SC 1068 : (2024) 4 SCC 458

While upholding the demolition drive of the Lucknow Development Authority (LDA) against unauthorized constructions in the Akbarnagar area of Lucknow city, the Supreme Court clarified that no slum dweller should be evicted without being given alternative accommodation. Shakeel Ahmad v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 398

Fair Opportunity

Neither arbitrariness nor malice found in the decision of the appellant-Board – The appellant-Board initially tried to purchase cardamom by issuing tenders and calling for bids, however due to failure of bidders to qualify the appropriate quality, the Board authorised the Chief Executive Officer to procure cardamom from local sources. Further, notice to purchase cardamom was published on the notice board and after price negotiations, respondent no. 2 was given supply orders after quoting the lowest rates. Hence, the decision of the appellant Board is legal, fair and transparent. There is neither arbitrariness nor malice in the decision of the appellant-Board as all the prospective bidders were given a fair chance. (Para 22) Travancore Devaswom Board v. Ayyappa Spices, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 207 : (2024) 7 SCC 543

Farmer

Shambhu Border Blockade - Supreme Court forms committee to negotiate with protesting farmers. State of Haryana v. Uday Pratap Singh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 642

Foreign Judgment

Foreign Judgment that goes against Indian law is not conclusive between parties involved and not binding on the Indian Courts. Rohan Rajesh Kothari v. State of Gujarat, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 579

Foreign Policy

The Supreme Court dismissed a petition seeking the suspension of military exports from India to Israel amidst the ongoing war against Gaza. The Court said that it was beyond its jurisdiction to direct the Government of India to not export materials to any country, as it was a matter which was completely within the domain of foreign policy. Ashok Kumar Sharma v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 678

Foreign Liquor

Foreign Liquor Rules, 1996 (Madhya Pradesh); Rule 19 – Penalty imposed as per the old Rule 19 is challenged to be invalid – Rule 19 amended by way of substitution – Process of substitution consists of two steps: first, the old rule is repealed, and next, a new rule is brought into existence in its place – A repealed provision will cease to operate from the date of repeal and the substituted provision will commence to operate from the date of its substitution subject to specific statutory prescription. Substituted Rule 19 is not been notified to operate from any other date by the Government. Held, the old Rule stood repealed from the statute book and only the substituted Rule applies to all pending and future proceedings. If the amendment by way of a substitution is intended to reduce the quantum of penalty for better administration and regulation there is no justification to ignore the subject and context of amendment and permit the State to recover the penalty as per the unamended Rule. (Para 7, 9, 12, 13, 17 & 32) Pernod Ricard India (P) Ltd. v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 321

Frivolous Petition

The Supreme Court imposed a cost of Rs. 5,00,000/ on the Union of India challenging an order passed by the Meghalaya High Court based on the Union's own concession that a previous decision covered the matter. Deprecating the Union's move to challenge the High Court's order, the Supreme Court recorded that this was a “sheer abuse of the process of law” and cautioned the Union against filing frivolous petitions. Union of India v. Sudipta Lahiri, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 326

Guardianship

Habeas Corpus - There is no legal right of an elder sister to exercise guardianship over her sister except when there is an order from a Court of competent jurisdiction. Rita Dwivedi v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 124

Section 17(3) – Guardianship – Importance of preference indicated by minor children – The desire / preference of the children to continue to reside with the Appellant, although in itself cannot be determinative of custody of the children, but it must be given due consideration on account of it being a factor of utmost importance. (Para 14) Col. Ramneesh Pal Singhv v. Sugandhi Aggarwal, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 356

Habeas Corpus

Habeas corpus - 25 year old woman detained by her parents - The matter had been adjourned by the High Court on 14 occasions and thereafter postponed for 2025, exhibiting "a total lack of sensitivity" on the part of the court, that too in a habeas corpus matter. When the question of liberty of a person is involved even a day's delay counts. The detenu was a highly qualified, mature woman with an understanding of what was right and what was wrong for her. In any case, a major girl cannot be compelled to do something against her wishes. K v. State of Karnataka, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 52

Hospital

Ensure basic safety conditions for doctors pending receipt of National Task Force (NTF) report : Supreme Court to States. In Re : Alleged Rape and Murder of Trainee Doctor, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 594

The Supreme Court holds hospital liable for handing over dead body to the wrong family, allows Rs. 25 lakh compensation. Ernakulam Medical Centre v. Dr. P.R. Jayasree, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 583

Vandalism at the Hospital - Unsafe working conditions of medical professionals, particularly women, in healthcare institutions - Lack of safety protocols in medical institutions, leading to vulnerability of healthcare professionals to violence, including gender-based violence. Unregulated access to sensitive areas of hospitals and insufficient security measures. Insufficient infrastructure, resting spaces, and basic amenities for medical professionals during long shifts. Absence of effective legislation addressing systemic and institutional issues in healthcare safety. The Court constituted a National Task Force (NTF) comprising healthcare professionals and government officials to address the safety and working conditions of medical professionals. The NTF was tasked with formulating recommendations for improving institutional safety, preventing violence, and creating enforceable protocols for the dignified treatment of medical workers. The Court emphasized the need for a national consensus and set guidelines for hospital safety measures, including the installation of security systems, provision of adequate restrooms, and monitoring access to sensitive hospital areas. The Court stressed the urgency of protecting healthcare workers and ensuring safe working conditions in medical institutions. It flagged the systemic failures in safety standards, particularly the vulnerability of women professionals to violence and harassment, and called for immediate remedial actions. In Re : Alleged Rape and Murder of Trainee Doctor, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 585 : AIR 2024 SC 3957 : (2024) 9 SCC 528

Injunction

Suit simpliciter for permanent injunction – A suit simpliciter for injunction is not maintainable as the title of the property of the plaintiff/respondent was disputed by the appellants/defendants. In such a situation it is required for the respondent/plaintiff to prove the title of the property while praying for injunction. The plaintiff failed to establish their title on the land. (Para 21) Tehsildar, Urban Improvement Trust v. Ganga Bai Menariya, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 153

Interim Relief

Injunction – Difference between prohibitory injunction and mandatory injunction – Prohibitory injunctions vary from mandatory injunctions in terms of the nature of relief that is sought. While the former seeks to restrain the defendant from doing something, the latter compels the defendant to take a positive step. The Courts are, therefore, relatively more cautious in granting mandatory injunction as compared to prohibitory injunction and thus, require the plaintiff to establish a stronger case. (Para 13, 14) State of Kerala v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 269

International Law

International agreements and treaties – It is the duty of the Court to give effect to international agreements and treaties to which India is a party. India's international obligations and commitments have not been enacted in domestic law. Regardless, the Court must be alive to these obligations while adjudicating writ petitions which seek reliefs that may hinder these obligations from being fulfilled or otherwise interfere with India's international commitments as well as the right to be free from the adverse effects of climate change. (Para 56 & 58) M.K. Ranjitsinh v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 286

Internet Shutdown

The Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir agreed before the Supreme Court to publish the orders passed by the review committees regarding internet shutdown in the region, except for the internal deliberations. Foundation for Media Professionals v. Union Territory of Jammu and Kashmir, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 173

Investigation

The power to transfer an investigation is exercised in extraordinary situations. (Para 32) Vishal Tiwari v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 2 : AIR 2024 SC 414 : (2024) 4 SCC 115

Judicial Review

Courts do not and cannot act as appellate authorities examining the correctness, suitability, and appropriateness of a policy, nor are courts advisors to expert regulatory agencies on matters of policy which they are entitled to formulate. (Para 17 (a)) Vishal Tiwari v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 2 : AIR 2024 SC 414 : (2024) 4 SCC 115

The scope of judicial review, when examining a policy framed by a specialized regulator, is to scrutinize whether it (i) violates the fundamental rights of the citizens; (ii) is contrary to the provisions of the Constitution; (iii) is opposed to a statutory provision; or (iv) is manifestly arbitrary. The legality of the policy, and not the wisdom or soundness of the policy, is the subject of judicial review, (Para 17 (b)) Vishal Tiwari v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 2 : AIR 2024 SC 414 : (2024) 4 SCC 115

When technical questions arise – particularly in the domain of economic or financial matters – and experts in the field have expressed their views and such views are duly considered by the statutory regulator, the resultant policies or subordinate legislative framework ought not to be interfered with. (Para 17 (c)) Vishal Tiwari v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 2 : AIR 2024 SC 414 : (2024) 4 SCC 115

Hate Speech

Offence of hate speech cannot be equated to the act of wrong assertions or false claims that one may make. Hindu Sena Samiti v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 935

Legal Maxim

'Nullus commodum capere potest de injuria sua propria' – It means that no man can take advantage of his own wrong. He who prevents a thing from being done shall not avail himself of the non-performance he has occasioned. A wrong doer ought not to be permitted to make profit out of his own wrong. (Para 18 & 19) Municipal Committee Katra v. Ashwani Kumar, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 373 : AIR 2024 SC 2855

Legislation

Though a legislation affecting a single entity or a single undertaking or a single person would be permissible in law, it must be on the basis of reasonable classification having nexus with the object to be achieved. There should be a reasonable differentia on the basis of which a person, entity or undertaking is sought to be singled out from the rest of the group. Further, if a legislation affecting a single person, entity or undertaking is being enacted, there should be special circumstances requiring such an enactment. Such special circumstances should be gathered from the material taken into consideration by the competent legislature and shall include the Parliamentary/Legislative Debates. (Para 48) Khalsa University v. State of Punjab, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 773

Letter of Intent

The Letter of Intent is merely an expression of intention to enter into a contract. It does not create any right in favour of the party to whom it is issued. There is no binding legal relationship between the party issuing the LOI and the party to whom such LOI is issued. A detailed agreement/contract is required to be drawn up between the parties after the LOI is received by the other party more particularly in case of contract of such a mega scale. (Para 10) Level 9 Biz Pvt. Ltd. v. Himachal Pradesh Housing and Urban Development Authority, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 275 : AIR 2024 SC 1808

Liquor

The restrictions which were introduced by this Court in K Balu, (2017) 2 SCC 281 were in the context of national and State highways. As clarified subsequently, where the area in question falls within municipal or local limits, the distance requirements which are spelt out in the applicable Rules or Regulations would have to be complied with. (Para 16) Alankar Wines Pvt. Ltd. v. Human Rights and Consumer Protection Societies, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 89

States have the power to regulate 'denatured spirit or industrial alcohol'. State of U.P. v. Lalta Prasad Vaish, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 832

Murder Trial

Merely on the basis of suspicion, conviction would not be tenable. (Para 20) Raja Naykar v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 60 : AIR 2024 SC 695 : (2024) 3 SCC 481

Only on the sole circumstance of recovery of a blood-stained weapon, it cannot be said that the prosecution has discharged its burden of proving the case beyond reasonable doubt. (Para 19) Raja Naykar v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 60 : AIR 2024 SC 695 : (2024) 3 SCC 481

Muslim Law

Partition of Property during owner's lifetime impermissible in Mohammedan law. The Supreme Court reiterated that the partition of a property via gift deed during an owner's lifetime cannot be validated under Mohammedan Law. The concept of partition is not recognized under Mohammedan Law, and thus, a 'partition of property' through a gift deed cannot be upheld as valid due to the absence of a clear and unequivocal 'declaration' by the donor of the intention to make a gift. Mansoor Saheb v. Salima, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 1023

Can muslim women claim equality in succession ? Can Will be executed for the entire property as per Mohammedan law? Supreme Court to decide. Tarsem v. Dharma, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 396

National Highways

Encroachments on National Highways and road safety measures - Proper mechanisms for inspection and removal of encroachments - The Supreme Court directed the Ministry of Road Transport & Highways to: Constitute inspection teams for regular and frequent inspections of National Highways to prevent and remove encroachments. Ensure each team is responsible for specific stretches of highways and immediately reports encroachments to the competent authority. Develop a public portal where citizens can report encroachments, upload photographs, and location details, and introduce a toll-free number for reporting. Ensure action taken reports are uploaded on the portal and give wide publicity to the portal and toll-free number. Additionally, the court indicated that similar mechanisms should be extended to State Highways and forwarded the matter to the Road Safety Committee chaired by Justice Abhay Sapre. The Amicus Curiae was asked to submit a note on other relevant issues. Gyan Prakash v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 633

Natural Justice

Principles of Natural justice – Opportunity of being heard – The insured claims that the copies of the surveyor's report and the investigators' report were not provided timely and thus, the insured-appellant did not get proper opportunity to rebut the same. Held, the ends of justice require that the insured-appellant should have been provided proper opportunity to file its rebuttal/objections to the affidavit/reports submitted by the insurer-respondent before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission and consequently, the complaint should be reconsidered on merits after providing such opportunity to the appellant. The appellant shall be permitted to file its rebuttal/rejoinder affidavit before the National Commission and shall be reheard and decided on merits afresh. (Para 17, 18 & 19) Kozyflex Mattresses Pvt. Ltd. v. SBI General Insurance Company Ltd., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 255 : (2024) 7 SCC 140

Notice

Notices sent to the residences of the accused while they were under custody cannot be proper service of notice. Saher Ali Mia v. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 578

Partition

Co-owner whose share in the joint property remained undetermined cannot transfer the entire suit property to another person without its partition being completed by metes and bounds. Golam Lalchand v. Nandu Lal Shaw, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 705 : AIR 2024 SC 4193

Chandigarh (Sale of Sites and Buildings) Rules, 1960 - There cannot be partition of property by metes and bounds at Chandigarh. Hence, the only resolution in a suit seeking partition of joint property is sale by way of auction. Rajinder Kaur v. Gurbhajan Kaur, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 514

Police Manual

Pertinently, there is no discernible conflict or contradiction between the definitions of 'Reporting Authority' and 'Reviewing Authority' in the 1970 Rules, post 1987, and in the 2007 Rules. The clear import of these definitions is that such authorities must be from within the same service or department. Invocation of the doctrine of harmonious construction vis-à-vis these definitions, therefore, does not arise. Given the clear intent of the 1970 Rules/2007 Rules that the reporting, reviewing and accepting authorities should be from within the same service or department, the question is whether breach of such requirement can be permitted in the State of Assam under Rule 63(iii) of the Manual. State of Assam v. Binod Kumar, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 46 : AIR 2024 SC 760 : (2024) 3 SCC 611

Possession

Identification of Property - Suit for possession has to describe the property in question with accuracy and all details of measurement and boundaries. This was completely lacking. A suit for possession with respect to such a property would be liable to be dismissed on the ground of its identifiability. (Para 23) Mary Pushpam v. Telvi Curusumary, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 12 : AIR 2024 SC 714 : (2024) 3 SCC 224

Panchayat (General) Rules, 1961 (Rajasthan); Rule 266 – Only in certain specified situation, the land could be transferred by way of sale on private negotiation, namely, where any person has a plausible claim of title to the land and auction may not fetch reasonable price or it may not be the convenient mode for disposal of land or where such a course is regarded by the Panchayat necessary for advancement of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes or other Backward Classes. Another situation envisaged is where the person is in possession of land for more than 20 years but less than 42 years. Nothing was produced on record to show that the due process required for leasing out/sale of the land in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs by private negotiation was followed. Gram Panchayat from whom the land was taken was not impleaded as party to admit or deny the allegations made by the respondents/plaintiffs in the plaint. The alleged lease deed/sale deed has been issued in favour of the respondents/plaintiffs is clearly violative of Rule 266. (Para 29) Tehsildar, Urban Improvement Trust v. Ganga Bai Menariya, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 153

Power of Attorney

Attorney holder can maintain a plaint on behalf of the person he represents provided he has personal knowledge of the transaction in question. Attorney holder can depose and verify on oath before the court but he must have witnessed the transaction as an agent and must have due knowledge about it. The Power of Attorney holder who has no knowledge regarding the transaction cannot be examined as a witness. Evidence given by person who has no authority to act as power of authority, is meaningless to establish. (Para 28 & 29) Manisha Mahendra Gala v. Shalini Bhagwan Avatramani, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 301 : AIR 2024 SC 1947 : (2024) 6 SCC 130

Sub-delegation of Powers - The functions of the General Power of Attorney holder cannot be delegated to any other person without there being a specific clause permitting such delegation in the Power of Attorney. Hence, ordinarily there cannot be any sub-delegation. (Para 28) Manisha Mahendra Gala v. Shalini Bhagwan Avatramani, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 301 : AIR 2024 SC 1947 : (2024) 6 SCC 130

Precedent

'Ignoring precedent a material error' : Supreme Court recalls its 2022 verdict for not considering constitution bench Judgment. Karnail Singh v. State of Haryana, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 386 : AIR 2024 SC 2694

Pre-emption

Pre-emption Act, 1913 (Punjab); Section 16, 8(2) and 3(3) - 'Land' and 'Immovable property' are two different terms. As per Section 3(3), immovable property is more than the land on which certain construction has been made. Notification dated 08.10.1985 limits its application for taking away the right of pre-emption only with reference to sale of 'land' falling in the areas of any municipality. In the present case, it is sale of immovable property, which is more than the land as a rolling mill had already been set up on the land. Held, notification is not applicable to property in dispute. (Para 17) Jagmohan v. Badri Nath, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 95 : AIR 2024 SC 900 : (2024) 3 SCC 588

Pre-emption Act, 1913 (Punjab); Section 8(2) - Notification issued in exercise of powers under Section 8(2) enables the State Government to exclude any transaction of sale of any land or property for exercise of right of pre-emption. Notification exempts right of pre-emption in respect of sale of land falling in the area of municipalities in Haryana. (Para 8) Jagmohan v. Badri Nath, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 95 : AIR 2024 SC 900 : (2024) 3 SCC 588

Prisoner

Guidelines and standard operating procedure for implementation of the scheme for support to poor prisoners. Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 151 : (2024) 9 SCC 198

Reasoning

Judgment cannot be sustained in absence of reasoning. State Project Director, UP Education for all Project Board v. Saroj Maurya, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 647

Receiver

Whether the High Court was justified in appointing a court receiver concerning the suit-scheduled property. The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order appointing a court receiver, and restored the Civil Court's order rejecting the appointment of a receiver. The Civil Court had previously restrained the defendants from creating third-party interest in the suit property but rejected the prayer for appointing a receiver, finding an injunction sufficient. The High Court's decision to appoint a court receiver lacked sufficient reasoning, with no compelling circumstances demonstrated to justify such an appointment. The Supreme Court reiterated that appointing a receiver is an exceptional remedy requiring specific circumstances, which were absent in the present case. Hitesh Bhuralal Jain v. Rajpal Amarnath Yadav, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 903

Rent Control

Rent Control Act, 1999 (Maharashtra); Section 16(1)(k) - Eviction of a tenant cannot be ordered merely based on a demolition notice issued by the Municipal body. The Court has to examine the "immediate urgency" of the need for demolition. (Para 13) Baitulla Ismail Shaikh v. Khatija Ismail Panhalkar, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 79 : AIR 2024 SC 846

Sale

Ownership over property can't be claimed when a sale deed is executed by a person having no title. Savitri Bai v. Savitri Bai, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 178 : AIR 2024 SC 1193 : (2024) 4 SCC 282

Sale agreement with minor void, not enforceable in law. Krishnaveni v. M.A. Shagul Hameed, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 165

Not every plaintiff must prove the execution of a sale agreement if another plaintiff with knowledge of the transaction proves the execution. A plaintiff's absence should not be viewed adversely, as testimony from another plaintiff present can substantively support the claims of absent plaintiffs. Shyam Kumar Inani v. Vinod Agrawal, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 883

SEBI

SEBI's wide powers, coupled with its expertise and robust information gathering mechanism, lend a high level of credibility to its decisions as a regulatory, adjudicatory and prosecuting agency. (Para 17 (d)) Vishal Tiwari v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 2 : AIR 2024 SC 414

The Court must be mindful of the public interest that guides the functioning of SEBI and refrain from substituting its own wisdom in place of the actions of SEBI. (Para 17 (e)) Vishal Tiwari v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 2 : AIR 2024 SC 414

The power of the Court to enter the regulatory domain of SEBI in framing delegated legislation is limited. The court must refrain from substituting its own wisdom over the regulatory policies of SEBI. The scope of judicial review when examining a policy framed by a specialized regulator is to scrutinise whether it violates fundamental rights, any provision of the Constitution, any statutory provision or is manifestly arbitrary. (Para 67 (a)) Vishal Tiwari v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 2 : AIR 2024 SC 414

Sexual Offence

Refusal of accused in sexual offence case to undergo medical examination shows unwillingness to cooperate with investigation. X v. State of Karnataka, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 419

Shops and Establishments

Shops and Establishments Act, 1947 (Tamil Nadu); Section 2(3) & 2(6) – Industrial establishment – For an establishment to be covered under the definition of establishment under the 1947 Act, unless it is one of those specifically mentioned, it must satisfy being a commercial establishment. For any establishment to be commercial, it has to be established that the activities undertaken by it are for making some monetary gain. (Para 19 & 21) Tamil Nadu Medical Services Corporation Ltd. v. Tamil Nadu Medical Services Corporation Employees Welfare Union, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 402 : AIR 2024 SC 2943

Slum Rehabilitation

Slum rehabilitation scheme not to be seen as a real estate development project, it's linked to right to life. Yash Developers v. Harihar Krupa Co-operative Housing Society Ltd; 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 524 : AIR 2024 SC 4113

Society

Societies Registration Act, 1860; Section 15 - Such members in default of membership fee would not be entitled to vote and would not be counted as members of the Society. If they were not entitled to vote and they were not to be counted as members, there would be no illegality or for that matter any prejudice being caused by not issuing any notice as the same would be an exercise in futility. (Para 22) Adv. Babasaheb Wasade v. Manohar Gangadhar Muddeshwar, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 59 : AIR 2024 SC 768

Special Leave Petition

Show proof of applying for certified copy while seeking exemption from filing certified copy of judgment with SLP. Harsh Bhuwalka v. Sanjay Kumar Bajoria, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 554

The Supreme Court prima facie disagrees that a second SLP can be filed if the first SLP was dismissed without any reasons or was withdrawn. N.F. Railway Vending and Catering Contractors Association v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 542

Stay

If an interim protection order passed by a High Court stood automatically vacated pursuant to Asian Resurfacing but the trial has not been concluded, the vacation of stay shall be invalid and inoperative from the date of overruling. Pawan Agarwal v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 511

Can there be a blanket stay on money decree ? Shekhawati Art and Exports v. United India Insurance Company Ltd; 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 408

Applications to vacate interim reliefs can't be kept pending for long' - Issued guidelines to High Court's on granting and vacating interim stay. High Court Bar Association Allahabad v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 177 : (2024) 6 SCC 267

High Courts and Supreme Courts should refrain from fixing time-bound schedules for case disposal in other courts ordinarily. High Court Bar Association Allahabad v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 177 : (2024) 6 SCC 267

No automatic vacation of stay orders of High Courts on civil and criminal trials - Overruled Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency Pvt. Ltd. v. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2018) 16 SCC 299. High Court Bar Association Allahabad v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 177 : (2024) 6 SCC 267

Suppression of Facts

Harsh measures needed to deal with suppression of facts. All India EPF Staff Federation v. Union of India, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 431

Such litigants have no place in Court - Supreme Court imposes Rs. 10 lakh fine on litigant company for suppression of facts. Shristi Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited v. Avishek Gupta, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 767

Temple

Supreme Court dismisses Guru Manicka Prabhu temple head's claim over Chennai's Arulmighu Kamakala Kameshwarar temple property. Siddaraja Manicka Prabhu Temple v. Idol of Arulmighu Kamakala Kameshwarar Temple, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 697 : AIR 2024 SC 4417

Tenancy

Heritable Tenancy Rights – West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1997 - The High Court erred in interpreting the 1997 Act as having retrospective application to heritable tenancy rights originating before its enactment. The court ruled that in the absence of clear and unambiguous language in the 1997 Act demonstrating legislative intent for retrospective effect, the appellants' tenancy, inherited in 1970, remains intact. Consequently, the tenancy did not terminate in 2006. The impugned orders of the Single Judge and Division Bench are set aside, and the appeals are allowed. Rajesh Mitra @ Rajesh Kumar Mitra v. Karnani Properties Ltd., 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 790

Town Planning and Urban Development

Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 (Gujarat); Section 52 – Allotment of land in question – The plaintiffs, being well aware of the fact that Final Plot allotted to them under the second varied Town Planning Scheme was of lesser area, accepted the same without any protest and without agitating a right to a larger area in the light of the initial allotment – Held, having accepted the plot allotted to them upon variation of the scheme without demur or protest, the plaintiffs cannot now seek to reopen the negligence and delay, if any, on the part of the Corporation prior to such variation. (Para 34 & 39) Mrugendra Indravadan Mehta v. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 369 : AIR 2024 SC 3026

Town Planning and Urban Development Act, 1976 (Gujarat); Section 52 – Compensation paid for land is challenged to be inadequate – Held, the conduct of the plaintiffs in depositing the compensation amount thereafter, imply receipt of the compensation amount for the shortfall area in allotted land. This further, foreclosed their right, to either challenge the allotment of a plot of lesser area or to seek more compensation. Further held, the voluntary act of depositing the compensation amount to the trial court precludes them from contending, that the said compensation was never paid to them. (Para 36 & 39) Mrugendra Indravadan Mehta v. Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 369 : AIR 2024 SC 3026

University

Validity and interpretation of Regulation 10(f)(iii) of the University Grants Commission (UGC) Regulations, 2018, concerning the counting of past teaching experience for the direct recruitment of Assistant Professors. - Whether Regulation 10(f)(iii) is ultra vires the UGC Act, 1956, or constitutional rights - Whether the High Court erred in reading down Regulation 10(f)(iii) without a challenge to its vires - Validity of shortlisting criteria based on teaching experience under Tables 3A and 3B of the 2018 Regulations. Held, Regulation 10(f)(iii) is not ultra vires the UGC Act or constitutional rights. The regulation is consistent with the enabling legislation and policy objectives of the UGC. The High Court erred in reading down Regulation 10(f)(iii) without finding it ultra vires. Courts cannot rewrite subordinate legislation or discard its provisions without a valid challenge based on legislative competence or conflict with constitutional rights. The Court upheld the shortlisting mechanism based on teaching experience and academic scores as rational and consistent with the 2018 Regulations. It emphasized that teaching experience contributes to the quality of candidates and aligns with UGC's policy to ensure merit-based recruitment. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order, affirming the validity of the UGC Regulations, 2018. It restored the criteria for shortlisting candidates based on teaching experience and academic merit, emphasizing the regulatory framework's intent to prioritize experienced and qualified candidates. Appeals allowed. The writ petitions challenging Regulation 10(f)(iii) were dismissed, and the High Court's decision was overturned. Allahabad University v. Geetanjali Tiwari, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 1012

Revaluation - The appellant filed a suit against the University seeking compensation of Rs. 10 Lakhs for reevaluating copies of subjects not applied for, resulting in a reduction of total marks. The trial court granted damages of Rs. 4 Lakhs, but the High Court set aside the judgment. The Supreme Court, upon examination, found the High Court's observations untenable and restored the damages awarded by the trial court. Vyjyanti Mehra v. Himachal Pradesh University, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 51

Virtual Hearing

Litigants should be allowed to appear virtually if the court thinks their presence is required. Basudha Chakraborty v. Neeta Chakraborty, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 401

Will

Genuineness of Will – On grounds of alleged ill-health of the testator – From the evidence recorded, the testator was found to be in good senses and capable of understanding his welfare to take correct decisions. The testator was conscious of the fact that he had a wife and a minor child whose interest had been taken care of by leaving part of the property for them. The Will was not surrounded by suspicious circumstances. Further, it cannot be concluded that the testator was not in a position to make a 'Will'. (Para 13) Thangam v. Navamani Ammal, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 188 : AIR 2024 SC 1324 : (2024) 4 SCC 247

Words and Phrases

"Perverse" - Meaning of the Expression "Perverse" - Definition and Scope of - A "perverse" order is one that consciously violates pleadings and established legal principles. It is defined as being against the weight of evidence, or contrary to the evidence entirely (Moffett v. Gough (1878) 1 LR 1r 331; Godfrey v. Godfrey 106 NW 814). Ramakant Ambalal Choksi v. Harish Ambalal Choksi, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 939

"Perverse" - Dictionary Interpretations - Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary: Deliberately behaving in a way deemed wrong, unreasonable, or unacceptable. Longman Dictionary: Deliberately deviating from what is normal and reasonable. The New Oxford Dictionary of English: A verdict against the weight of evidence or judicial direction on a legal point. New Webster's Dictionary: Purposely deviating from accepted behavior; stubborn or wicked. Stroud's Judicial Dictionary: A verdict not only against the weight of evidence but altogether contrary to it. Ramakant Ambalal Choksi v. Harish Ambalal Choksi, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 939

"Perverse" - Judicial Interpretation of Perversity - A perverse finding arises from a complete misreading of evidence, reliance on conjectures, or baseless surmises (Damodar Lal v. Sohan Devi, (2016) 3 SCC 78). The "reasonable man" test applies: If a conclusion on the facts is plausible to a reasonable person, it is not perverse. If it is implausible or unsupported by evidence, it qualifies as perverse. Exclusions from Perversity: Merely inadequate evidence or a different interpretation of evidence does not constitute perversity. This judgment clarifies that a finding is perverse when it is not grounded in evidence or rational interpretation, deviates from accepted judicial principles, or results from arbitrary reasoning. Ramakant Ambalal Choksi v. Harish Ambalal Choksi, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 939

When the words 'barbaric' and 'brutal' are used simultaneously they are not to take the character of synonyms, but to take distinctive meanings. (Para 10) Bhaggi @ Bhagirath @ Naran v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 87 : AIR 2024 SC 938

Writ Petition

Findings of the court have to be based on the pleadings and the evidence produced before it by the parties. It is well-nigh impermissible for the writ court to conjecture and surmise and make out a third case, not pleaded by the parties, based on arguments advanced in the course of hearing. Allahabad University v. Geetanjali Tiwari, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 1012

Writ Petition – Validity of clause 4.8.1 of the NEET UG-2023 Information Brochure – Classification has no nexus to the object sought – Clause 4.8 of the Information Brochure provides an exception/relaxation for claiming seat in the Maharashtra State quota to Children of employees of Government of India or its Undertaking who have passed SSC and/or HSC or equivalent examination from the recognized institutions situated outside the State of Maharashtra. However, this clause imposes a rider that such employee of Government of India or its Undertaking being the parent of the candidate seeking admission in the course under the State quota “must have been transferred from outside the State of Maharashtra at a place of work, located in the State of Maharashtra and also must have reported for duty and must be working as on the last date of document verification at a place located in the State of Maharashtra”. Proviso to Clause 4.8 was relied upon by the respondents while cancelling the admission granted to the appellant in CAP1. Held, the place of posting is not within the control of the employee or the candidate. Thus, the distinction drawn by the clause between two categories of employees in the Government of India services (i) those posted in Maharashtra and (ii) those posted outside Maharashtra has no nexus with the intent and purpose of the guidelines/rules and hence the same deserves to be read down to such extent. The condition creates a stipulation which would be impossible for the candidate or his parent to fulfill. Held, the candidate(s) who are born in Maharashtra and whose parents are also domicile of the State of Maharashtra and are employees of the Government of India or its Undertaking, such candidate(s) would be entitled to a seat under the Maharashtra State quota irrespective of the place of posting of the parent(s) because the place of deployment would not be under the control of the candidate or his parents. (Para 15 & 21) Vansh Prakash Dolas v. Ministry of Education & The Ministry of Health & Family Welfare, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 250 : AIR 2024 SC 1924

Maintainability of Writ Petition – Judicial review is restrained in matters of public tenders – Constitutional courts should exercise caution while interfering in contractual and tender matters, disguised as public interest litigations. The respondent no. 1, being an interested party could not have invoked the jurisdiction of the High Court. The prayer made in writ petition, makes it clear that the real grievance of respondent no 1 is about the grant of contract in favour of another bidder. The High Court committed an error in entertaining the writ petition on behalf of an interested person who sought to convert a judicial review proceeding for enhancing personal gain. (Para 19 & 21) Travancore Devaswom Board v. Ayyappa Spices, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 207 : (2024) 7 SCC 543