Section 106 of The Indian Evidence Act

Section 106 constitutes an exception to Section 101 of The Indian Evidence Act, 1872. Shambu Nath Mehra v. State of Ajmer, (1956) 1 SCR 199 has stood the test of time. Thus, Section 106 will apply to those cases where prosecution has succeeded in establishing facts from which a reasonable inference can be drawn regarding […]

Condonation of Delay IX: 44

Appellate Tribunal has no jurisdiction at all to condone delays exceeding 15 days from the period of 30 days, as contemplated under Section 61(2) of The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. It cannot be said, Learned Appellate Tribunal committed any error in not condoning a delay of 44 days. Unless Parliament has carved out […]

Section 9 of The Arbitration Act

Section 9 as originally enacted, has been renumbered as Section 9(1). 2015 Amendment Act has also incorporated Sub-Section (2) and Sub-Section (3). Section 9(1), as amended, enables a party to an Arbitration Agreement to apply to a Court for interim measures of protection before or during Arbitral Proceedings, or at any time after an Arbitral […]

Heard & Finally Decided

The meaning of the phrase “heard and finally decided” was considered in Krishan Lal v. State of J&K, (1994) 4 SCC 422 where it was held, matter must have been heard on merits to have been “heard and finally decided”. Erach Boman Khavar v. Tukaram Shridhar Bhat, (2013) 15 SCC 655 has held, res judicata […]

Section 34(2A) of The Arbitration Act II

Ssangyong Engineering, (2019) 15 SCC 131 has in clear terms delineated the limited area for judicial interference, taking into account amendments brought about by 2015 Amendment Act. As has been held in Ssangyong Engineering, mere contravention of substantive law as elucidated in Associate Builders v. Delhi Development Authority, (2015) 3 SCC 49 is no longer […]

Fraudulent Employment – Faustian Bargain

We endorse Justice Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud’s opinion in Chairman and Managing Director, Food Corporation of India v. Jagdish Balram Bahira, (2017) 8 SCC 670 where Court has noted responsibility of Courts to guard against fraudulent employment. The workmen here, having hoodwinked a Government Undertaking in a fraudulent manner, must be prevented from enjoying fruits of […]

Judgment

‘Judgment’ means a judicial opinion which tells the story of the case; what the case is about; how Court is resolving the case and why. A ‘Judgment’ should be coherent, systematic and logically organized. It should enable the reader to trace the fact to a logical conclusion on the basis of legal principles. Many times […]

Backdrop of Dominant Purpose I

Philips India Limited v. Labour Court, Madras, (1985) 3 SCC 103; Balasinor Nagrik Cooperative Bank Limited v. Babubhai Shankerlal Pandya, (1987) 1 SCC 606; Mohan Kumar Singhania v. Union of India, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 594; Sultana Begum v. Prem Chand Jain, (1997) 1 SCC 373; Jagdish Singh v. Lt. Governor, Delhi, (1997) 4 SCC […]

Unauthorized Constructions / The Revival of Ray LXX

Chief Justice A.N. Ray, speaking for a Two-Judge Bench of this Court, in K. Ramadas Shenoy v. Chief Officer, Town Municipal Council, (1974) 2 SCC 506 observed, Municipality functions for public benefit and when it “acts in excess of the powers conferred by the Act or abuses those powers then in those cases it is […]

The Doctrine of Basic Structure II

I do not think there is any serious contestation. Constitution of Kenya, 2010 has a Basic Structure. Constitution of Kenya (Amendment) Bill, 2020 violates certain components of our Constitution’s Basic Structure. [Mr. Justice D.K. Musinga, President of Court of Appeal] Constitutions, like human beings, are never perfect. Judges were agreed, Indian Constitution has a Basic […]

Relation to State

Constitution Bench of this Court in Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao, (1990) 3 SCC 130 had an occasion to examine, whether Scheduled Castes in relation to a particular State would be entitled to benefits or concessions allowed to Scheduled Castes in matters of education/employment in another State. Court observed, if such a contention is to be […]

Blood of Human Origin II

Majority of a Constitution Bench in Raghav Prapanna Tripathi v. State Of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1963 SC 74 held, it would be far-fetched to conclude from mere presence of blood-stained earth that that earth was stained with human blood and that human blood was of victims. Also see, Two-Judge Benches in Kansa Behera v. State […]

Registered Instruments of Tenancy

Harshad Govardhan Sondagar v. International Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd., (2014) 6 SCC 1 has categorically held, if the tenancy claim is for any term exceeding one year, the tenancy can be made only by a registered instrument. Three-Judge Bench of this Court in Bajarang Shyamsunder Agarwal v. Central Bank of India, (2019) 9 SCC 94 […]

Binding Precedent

Umabai v. Nilkanth Dhondiba Chavan, (2005) 6 SCC 243 and Tulsi v. Chandrika Prasad, (2006) 8 SCC 322 were not brought to notice of this Court in Vanchalabai Raghunath Ithape v. Shankarrao Baburao Bhilare, (2013) 7 SCC 173. In absence of consideration, we find Vanchalabai Raghunath Ithape will not lay down a binding precedent. – […]

Section 48 of The Arbitration Act

In Emkay Global Financial Services Ltd. v. Girdhar Sondhi, (2018) 9 SCC 49 a question arose under the pari materia provision contained in Section 34 as to what the expression ‘proof’ means therein. After referring to a number of High Court Judgments, and Section 34, in which the expression “furnishes proof” is now substituted by […]

Monstrosity of Winnability II

The nation continues to wait, and is losing patience. A political party can always give a reason, a candidate with criminal antecedents is found to be more suitable than a person who does not have criminal antecedents. If the political party is of the prima facie opinion, a candidate has been falsely implicated, it can […]

Contempt Jurisdiction VIII

“Babu Ram Gupta v. Sudhir Bhasin, (1980) 3 SCC 47 was clarified and held in part to be obiter by a Three-Member Bench in Rama Narang v. Ramesh Narang, (2006) 11 SCC 114. Rama Narang pointed out, distinction between two categories of cases covered by Section 2(b) of The Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 – (i) wilful disobedience to a […]

Red Herrings

Recently, Hon’ble Justice Prathiba M. Singh of Delhi High Court in Sulphur Mills Limited v. Dharmaj Crop Guard Limited, [CS(COMM) 1225/2018 & CC(COMM) 9/2019] said, to argue on basis of submissions made before Commissioner of Customs, there is no novelty or inventive step in Indian Patent Number 282429, would lead to an anomalous situation and […]

Emergency Arbitrators

Court has referred to party autonomy as being one pillar for Arbitration [Antrix Corporation Ltd. v. Devas Multimedia Pvt. Ltd., (2014) 11 SCC 560; Bharat Aluminium Co. v. Kaiser Aluminium Technical Services Inc., (2016) 4 SCC 126; Centrotrade Minerals & Metal Inc. v. Hindustan Copper Ltd., (2017) 2 SCC 228; PASL Wind Solutions Pvt. Ltd. […]

Article 136 and Criminal Appeals IV

The confirmation of Death Sentence by High Court was under challenge in Masalti v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1965 SC 202. Chief Justice Gajendragadkar, speaking for a Four Judge Bench, observed: “It may be conceded, if a point of fact which plainly arises on record, or a point of law which is relevant and […]

The Last Word

A Diversion for Lawyers and Others