Category: Allied Laws

Archive for the ‘Allied Laws’ Category


SRD Nutrients Pvt Ltd v. CCE (2018) 1 Supreme Court Cases 105

Constitution of India 1949
Art .141 :Precedent – Judicial Discipline – Reference to Larger Bench in case of contradicting views. [ Central Excise Act , 1944 ]

Jayant Verma and Ors. v. UOI UOI) and Ors. AIR 2018 SUPREME COURT 1079

Constitution of India 1949
Art .141 : Precedent – Ex-parte judgment without discussion is Per incurium hence not binding. [ Art .14, Banking Regulation Act 1949 , S,21A ]

State of Jharkhand and Ors. v. Lalita Devi Kejriwal and Ors. AIR 2018 JHARKHAND 7

Indian Registration Act, 1908

S.30 :Registration – Documents of sale or transfer of the properties must be registered at the place where the immovable property is situated. [ Bihar Amendment Act 1991 , S.30 , Transfer of Property Act ,1882, S.76 ]

New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Hill Multi purpose Cold Storage P. Ltd. AIR 2016 SC 86

Constitution of India 1949

Art .141 :Precedents – Binding nature -Decision delivered by a Bench of larger strength is binding on any subsequent Bench of lesser or co-equal strength- A Bench of lesser quorum cannot disagree or dissent from the view of the law taken by a Bench of larger quorum – Subject to discretion of the Chief justice to refer the matter to larger Bench or assign the matter to a particular Bench to decide the issue . [ Consumer Protection Act 1986 , S.13(2)(a) ]

Suraj Lamp & Inds. (P) Ltd Thru DIR v. State of Haryana & Anr AIR 2009 SC 3077

Transfer of property Act 1882

S.54: Sale – Power of Attorney – Sale of immovable property through execution of power of attorney sale agreement/general power of attorney/will instead of execution and registration of regular deeds of conveyance deprecated as illegal and irregular – The illegal and irregular process of `Power of Attorney Sales’ spawns several disputes relating to possession and title, and also results in criminal complaints and cross complaints and extra-legal enforcement and forced settlements by land mafia.Therefore request the Solicitor General to appear in the matter and give suggestions on behalf of Union of India. : [Indian Registration Act ,1908 , S.17, 49 ,Power of Attorney Act ,1882 S.2 ]

Thiruvengadam Pillai v Navaneethammal and Anr (2008) 4 SCC 530.

Indian Stamps Act,1899,

S.54: Stamp Papers – Use of old stamp papers i.e., stamp paper purchased more than six months prior to proposed date of execution may certainly be a circumstance that can be used as a piece of evidence to cast doubt on authenticity of agreement but that cannot be clinching evidence to invalidate the agreement. [ S.47, Indian Evidence Act , 1872 , S.45, 73 ]

Principal Secretary, Government of Karnataka and Ors. v. Ragini Narayan and Ors. AIR 2016 SUPREME COURT 4545

Indian Registration Act ,1908 .

S.47: Registered Document – Operates from date of its execution – Not from the date of its Registration [ S.17 ]

There is a clear distinction between ‘retirement of a partner’ and ‘dissolution of a partnership firm’. On retirement of the partner, the reconstituted firm continues and the retiring partner is to be paid his dues in terms of Section 37 of the Partnership Act. In case of dissolution, accounts have to be settled and distributed as per the mode prescribed in Section 48 of the Partnership Act. When the partners agree to dissolve a partnership, it is a case of dissolution and not retirement A partnership firm must have at least two partners. When there are only two partners and one has agreed to retire, then the retirement amounts to dissolution of the firm . Accounts to be settled as it amounts to dissolution of firm . Trial Court was directed to pass the final decree in accordance with law .(CANOS. 6659 -6660 of 2010 dt 26 -5- 2020 ) Guru Nanak Industries v Amar Singh , Through LRS ( SC) www.itatonline.org .

Indian Partnership Act, 1932

S.37 : Rights of outgoing partner in certain cases to share subsequent profits – Retirement – Dissolution -Mode of settlement of accounts – When there are only two partners and one has agreed to retire, then the retirement amounts to dissolution of the firm . [ S.48 ]

South East Asia Marine v Oil India Ltd . AIR 2020 SC 2323; (2020) 5 SCC 164; MANU/SC/0441/2020 (SC. AIR 2020 SC 2323; (2020) 5 SCC 164; MANU/SC/0441/2020 (SC(SC) www.itatonline.prg

Indian Contract Act , 1872 .

S.56 : Agreement to do impossible Act – An agreement to do an impossible Act is void -Doctrine of “Force Majeure” & “Frustration of Contract” – The effect of the doctrine of frustration is that it discharges all the parties from future obligations . [ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 .S 37 ]

Vijay Kurle & Ors AIR 2020 SC 3927; MANU/SC/0413/2020 (SC) www.itatonline .org .

Contempt Court Act , 1971 .
S.5: Fair criticism of judicial act not contempt -Contempt of Court by Advocates- It is obvious that this is a concerted effort to virtually hold the Judiciary to ransom- All three contemnors are sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 3 months each with a fine of Rs. 2000. [Advocate Act .1961 S.7(b) Constitution of India , 1949 Art , 129 142 ]