Category: Allied Laws

Archive for the ‘Allied Laws’ Category


Rama Nand v. Mulakh Raj & Anr. AIR 2010 (NOC) 921 (P & H)

Transfer of property Act ,1882

S.106: Duration ofn certain lease – Servicing of Notice –Notce sent by registered poat recived back wth report not present -No presumption can be drawn unless something more is proved by cogenet evidence that it was refised. [ Code of Civil procedure ,1908 , Order v , General Clauses Act , 1897 , S 27, Indian Evidence Act ,1872 S.114(f) ]

UOI v. Shiv Raj; AIR 2014 SC 2242

Land Acquisition Act, 1894

S.5A:Hearing of objections- Natural justice – Objective Application of mind to the objections raised – Officer hearing objection should himself decide objections and give report- Successor decides the case without giving a fresh hearing, the order would stand vitiated having been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice. [ S.5C ]

K. Subbarayudu and Ors. v. The Special Deputy Collector (Land Acquisition) (2017) 12 Supreme Court Cases 840

Limitation Act ,1963

S.5: Extension of prescribed period in certain cases – Sufficient cause – Condonation of Delay – Delay of 3671 days – No reason to decline benefit merely due to delay in filing of appeal when in similar cases benefit was derived by similar concerns [ Land Acquisition Act, 1894 ,S. 18, 54]

In Re Cognizance for extension of limitation v .Ors ( 2020) 9 SCC 468; MANU/SC/ 0654/ 2020 (SC) www.itatonline.org

Constitution of India , 1949 . Art.141 :Covid -19 – Extension of limitation period due to Covid-19 Lock down- Service of all notices, summons and exchange of pleadings may be effected by e-mail, FAX, WhatsApp, Telegram, Signal etc in addition to service of the same document by e-mail simultaneously on the same date- The Reserve Bank of India may consider whether the validity period of a cheque under the Negotiable Instruments Act should be extended or not [ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 S.23(4),29A, Banking Regulation Act,1949, S.35A, Commercial Courts Act, 2015 ,S.12A Constitution of India, 1949 , Art 141 , Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881,S.46 Limitation Act 1908 , S.5 ]

S. D. Joshi & Ors v. High Court of Judicature at Bombay & Ors. AIR 2011 SC 848

Constitution of India , 1949
Art. 217(2) : Judicial office- Elevation to High Court – Family Court has all trappings of Court – Therefore is a court – However Judges of Family Court do not hold, Judicial Office- Not eligible to be considered for elevation as High Court Judges . [ Art , 233(2) 236 , Family Courts Act , 1984 , S 3 ]

S.N.D.P Sakhayagam v .Kerala Atmavidya Sangam and ors ( 2017) 8 SCC 835

S.260A :Appeal -High Court – Substantial question of law- High Court in second appeal cannot reverse the concurrent finding of Courts below ,without framing a substantial question of law . [ Civil procedure code 1908 , S.100 ]

Jetu Jacques Taru Lalvani v. Solestrap Industries Ltd. (2006) 3 AIR Bom R 281/ , AIR 2006 (NOC) 780 (Bom)/ 2006 (1) MHLJ 21 (Bom) (HC)

Maharashtra Co -Operative Society Act ,1960

S.41 : Exemption from compulsory registration of Instruments relating to shares and debentures of Society – Gift of shares of Co-op Hsg. Society- Gift of immoveable property -Unregistered declaration of gift of Shares held by a Member of Co-operative Hsg. Society – Property thereunder cannot be said to be validly transferred even though accepted by donee.[ Indian Registration Act ,1908, S.17 , Transfer of property Act , 1882 , S. 53, 123 ]

UOI and Others v. Debts Recovery Tribunal Bar Association and Another (2013) 2 SCC 574.

Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993,

S.3: Establishment of Appellate Tribunal- Infrastructural constraints faced by DRTs and DRATs, in terms of inadequacy of Tribunals, Members/Chairpersons, staff, physical infrastructure, etc. – Suggestions made by Solicitor General and amicus curiae for improving the administration of justice by these Tribunals. – High Court shall keep a watch on functioning of Tribunals: [ S.17, 18 , Constitution of India 1949 , Art , 226 , 227 ]

Ayaaubkhan Noorkhan Pathan v. State of Maharashtra & Ors AIR 2013 SC 58/ (2013) 4 SCC 465

Indian Evidence Act ,1872
S.3 : Natural Justice – Right of cross examination – Is integral part of Natural justice though not provided under the statute – Affidavit of own is not evidence with in meaning of S. 3 of the Evidence Act , 1872 .

Ummer v. Pottengal Subida and Ors. AIR 2018 SUPREME COURT 2025

Limitation Act, 1963
S.5: Appeal – Condonation of delay of 554 days -Mentally disturbed – Prolonged illness and hospitalization – Sufficient for condonation.