Harassment of Agriculturists

“S. Ambika Devi entered into a tripartite agreement with M/s. Nandan Biomatrix Ltd. and its franchisee M/s. Herbz India. She purchased 750 kilograms of wet musli at the rate of Rs. 400/- per kilogram. M/s. Nandan Biomatrix Ltd was to buy back the produce at a minimum price of Rs. 1,000/- per kilogram.   It […]

Read more "Harassment of Agriculturists"

Article No. 800: The Revival of Ray XL / Disjunctive, Conjunctive II

“Reliance has been placed on Sri Nasiruddin v. State Transport Appellate Tribunal, (1975)  2 SCC 671. The word ‘or’ was given grammatical meaning. It was held that the word ‘or’ cannot be read as ‘and’. They should be considered in an ordinary sense. If two different interpretations are possible, the Court will adopt that which […]

Read more "Article No. 800: The Revival of Ray XL / Disjunctive, Conjunctive II"

Generalia Specialibus Non Derogant

“The maxim is quite well-known. The rule flowing from the maxim ‘generalia specialibus non derogant’ has been i) considered in Hari Shankar Jain, (1978) 4 SCC 16 and ii) explained in Mary Seward v. Owner of “Vera Cruz”, (1884) 10 AC 59, 68. “Where there are general words in a later legislation capable of reasonable […]

Read more "Generalia Specialibus Non Derogant"

Per Incuriam III

Five Judges in Dr. Shah Faesal v. Union of India, [Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1099 of 2019] have decided the following. “The rule of per incuriam means a Judgment passed in ignorance of a relevant statute or any other binding authority [See, Young v. Bristol Aeroplane Co. Ltd., 1944 KB 718 (CA)]. The view that […]

Read more "Per Incuriam III"

May & Shall

“It is not quite accurate to say that the word ‘may’, by itself, acquires the meaning of ‘must’ or ‘shall’ sometimes.” – Dharti Dhan, (1977) 2 SCC 166. “It is not to be taken that once the word ‘may’ is used, it per se would be directory. In other words, it is not merely the […]

Read more "May & Shall"