Rojer Mathew, SLP (Civil) 15804/2017

Issues of Tribunals: Unresolved. 07.05.2018 “The functioning of Tribunals is required to be reviewed on the test of speedy and inexpensive quality justice. L. Chandra Kumar, (1997) 3 SCC 261 noted that various Tribunals have not evolved up to the expectations which is self-evident and widely acknowledged. Drastic measures were required to elevate the standards. […]

Read more "Rojer Mathew, SLP (Civil) 15804/2017"

Masterly Concubinage II

“Unlike matrimonial proceedings where strict proof of marriage is essential, in the proceedings under Section 125 CrPC, such strict standard of proof is not necessary as it is summary in nature meant to prevent vagrancy. When the parties live together as husband and wife, there is a presumption that they are legally married couple for […]

Read more "Masterly Concubinage II"

The Advanced Age of Sushil Ansal

On March 05, 2014 Hon’ble Justice Thakur, not yet the CJI, spoke of the ‘chalta hai attitude’ that often costs the society dearly in man-made tragedies [See, (2014) 6 SCC 173]. The price of Sushil Ansal’s ‘chalta hai attitude’ was pegged at Rs. 30 Crores [See, (2015) 10 SCC 359]. That is merely 18 Crores […]

Read more "The Advanced Age of Sushil Ansal"

Referred to Larger Bench XII: Doctrine of Relation Back in Admissions

My Lord, Can grant of monetary compensation be considered as the sole and adequate remedy for a student who has been deprived of admission, despite he or she being meritorious, vigilant and diligent, because of lapses committed either by the counselling authority or the administrating authority intrinsically connected with the process of admission? “It is […]

Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XII: Doctrine of Relation Back in Admissions"

Referred to Larger Bench XI: Statutory Appeals to Supreme Court

My Lord, Is it permissible and advisable to provide Statutory Appeals directly to the Supreme Court, from Orders of Tribunals, on issues not affecting National or Public Interest? “In an Article by Shri T.R. Andhyarujina [Former Solicitor General of India], ‘Restoring the Character and Stature of the Supreme Court of India’, the Learned Author states… […]

Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XI: Statutory Appeals to Supreme Court"

The Doctrine of Mutuality I

My Lord, What is the Doctrine of Mutuality? “The said Doctrine is predicated on the principle enunciated in Styles v. New York Life Insurance Company, (1889) 2 TC 460, 471 (HL) by Lord Watson in the following words: “When a number of individuals agree to contribute funds for a common purpose, such as the payment […]

Read more "The Doctrine of Mutuality I"

Referred to Larger Bench IX: Atiabari Tea, (1961) 1 SCR 809 and Automobile Transport, (1963) 1 SCR 491

In Keshav Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT, (1965) 2 SCR 908 a Constitution Bench enacted circumstances in which a Reference to a Larger Bench would lie. It was held that in revisiting and revising its earlier decision, the SC should ask itself whether in the interest of the public good or for any other valid and […]

Read more "Referred to Larger Bench IX: Atiabari Tea, (1961) 1 SCR 809 and Automobile Transport, (1963) 1 SCR 491"

Referred to Larger Bench VIII: Sections 3 & 4, The Central Excise Act, 1944

“Two Coordinate Benches (Three Judges)” have taken what would appear to be contrary views with regard to purport and effect and the interconnection between Section 3 and 4 of The Central Excise Act, 1944. The First Coordinate Bench in Union of India v. Bombay Tyre International Ltd., (1984) 1 SCC 467 comprised of Hon’ble Judges […]

Read more "Referred to Larger Bench VIII: Sections 3 & 4, The Central Excise Act, 1944"

Referred to Larger Bench VII: Chapter III-A, The Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961

In Ranjit Narayan Haksar v. Surendra Verma, 1995 MPLJ 21 a Division Bench of High Court of Madhya Pradesh held that an employee, retired from its service to Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, was entitled to maintain an Eviction Petition under Chapter III-A of The Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961. In a Special […]

Read more "Referred to Larger Bench VII: Chapter III-A, The Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961"

Referred to Larger Bench VI: Section 11AB, The Central Excise Act, 1944

CCE v. SKF India, (2009) 13 SCC 461 & CCE v. International Auto, (2010) 2 SCC 672 – two cases with “almost identical” factual scenarios – fortuitously decided by the same Bench, do not [perhaps] correctly interpret the provisions of Section 11AB of The Central Excise Act, 1944 and “require a re-look”.  What is the effect of […]

Read more "Referred to Larger Bench VI: Section 11AB, The Central Excise Act, 1944"

Uphaar: The Gift of Freedom

In appropriate cases, seemingly large amounts of compensation are justified. It is settled, inflation should be considered by while deciding the quantum of compensation. In (2014) 6 SCC 173, Hon’ble Justice T.S. Thakur spoke of the “cynical Chalta Hai Attitude that more often than not costs the society dearly in man-made tragedies”. The price of Mr. Sushil Ansal’s […]

Read more "Uphaar: The Gift of Freedom"

Referred to Larger Bench V: Maintainability of Review Petitions

Doctrine of Merger ≠ Universal/Unlimited Application. Aggrieved by an Order of a High Court, one files a Special Leave Petition, against the Impugned Order, before the Supreme Court. Outset Dismissal of the Special Leave Petition, leads to a Review Petition, against the same Impugned Order, before the High Court. Exercise of Article 136, Two Steps: […]

Read more "Referred to Larger Bench V: Maintainability of Review Petitions"

Masterly Concubinage I

The Yajnavalkya Smriti classifies concubines into two types: (1) Avaruddha and (2) Bhujasya. An Avaruddha Stree operates under an injunction to stay at the master’s home whereas a Bhujasya is not kept in the house but elsewhere. There is some protection for an Avaruddha Stree in modern India. There is a presumption in favor of […]

Read more "Masterly Concubinage I"