Family Court Dwarka Delhi (the woman abused man hysterically and then approached him for physical confrontation so man gave her slap)
Landmark Judgment
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that Hon’ble High Courts under the aegis of Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 can be used in three circumstances under which the inherent jurisdiction may be exercised, namely,
1. To give effect to an order under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
2. To prevent abuse of the process of court,
3. To otherwise secure the ends of justice.
Drafted By- Abhijit Mishra
#law #legal #judgment #crpc #supremecourt #highcourt
Landmark Judgment
Hon’ble High Court of Delhi has held that Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is governed by the governed by the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It is further held that the wherever the Domestic Violence Act, 2005 is silent then the proceedings shall be administered through the Sections of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Category/Act- Domestic Violence Act
Citation- Amballur Joseph James v. State of Delhi 2013 SCC OnLine Del 1730
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra
#landmark #landmarkjudgment #law #legal #lawinsider #supremecourt #india #domesticviolence #crpc #criminallaw
Landmark Judgment
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that Motor Claims Tribunal can award compensation of the amount which is justifiably due and payable under Section 168 of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, despite the fact that the claimants might have sought for a lesser amount in the claim petition.
It is held that “ just compensation” is one which is reasonable on the basis of evidence produced on record before the Hon’ble Motor Claims Tribunal.
Category/Act- Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Citation- Ramla Vs National Insurance Company Limited 2019 2 SCC 192
#landmark #landmarkjudgment #law #legal #lawinsider #mact #motorvehicleaccident
Landmark Judgment
Honourable House of Lords, speaking through Lord Diplock has held that Judicial Review is not directed against a decision, but is directed against the “Decision-Making Process”. It is held that the Doctrine of Proportionality, plays a pivotal part of the concept of judicial review, would ensure that even on an aspect which is, otherwise, within the exclusive province of the court.
If the decision of the court even as to sentence is an outrageous defiance of logic, then the sentence would not be immune from correction. Irrationality and perversity are recognised grounds of judicial review.
Category/Act-
Citation- Civil Service Unions v. Minister for the Civil Service (1984) 3 All ER 935
#landmark #landmarkjudgment #law #legal #lawinsider
Landmark Judgment
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that Section 36 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 provides for the deductions that can be claimed in order to calculate taxation. It is held that writing off the debt of the business is allowed as a deduction under Clause (vii) of sub-section (1) of Section 36 subject to the fulfilment of the conditions set forth in sub-section (2) of Section 36 of the IT Act.
Category/Act- Income Tax Act, 1961
Citation- CIT v. Khyati Realtors (P) Ltd. 2022 SCC OnLine SC 1082
#landmark #landmarkjudgment #law #legal #lawinsider #supremecourt #india #incometax
Landmark Judgment
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that the Parliament / State Legislative Bodies are competent to legislate the Laws which have retrospective effect which may impair any vested right acquired under existing laws.
However, the Legislature has to satisfy the contemporary constitutional rights of the effected parties. It is held that the laws have to conform to the dos and don'ts of the Constitution, neither prospective nor retrospective laws can be made so as to contravene fundamental rights.
Category/Act- Constitution of India
Citation- State of Gujarat v. Raman Lal Keshav Lal Soni (1983)
#landmark #landmarkjudgment #law #legal #lawinsider #supremecourt #india #consumerlaw #consumerprotection
Landmark Judgment
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that Central Administrative Tribunal has jurisdiction of Review of its own orders, however such Review Jurisdiction can be invoked only on the limited grounds, such as (i) there is an error apparent on the face of record, (ii) some such documents, which could not be produced at the time of final adjudication despite due diligence, are brought to the notice of the Court with Review Application and (iii) there is some other sufficient reason.
Category/Act-
Citation- State of W.B. v. Kamal Sengupta (2008) 8 SCC 612
#law #legal #landmark #judgment
Landmark Judgment
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that Partners of an Unregistered Partnership Firm are specifically barred to sue other partners and the Partnership firm under the aegis of the Section 69 of the Partnership Act, 1932. It is held that no suits to enforce a right arising from a contract shall be instituted in any Court by or on behalf of any person suing as a partner in a firm against the firm or any person alleged to be or to have been a partner in the firm unless the firm is Registered under the provisions of the Partnership Act.
Category/Act- Partnership Act
Citation- Farooq v. Sandhya Anthraper Kurishingal (2018) 12 SCC 580
#landmark #landmarkjudgment #law #legal #lawinsider #supremecourt #india #evidence
Landmark Judgment
Honourable Supreme Court of India has explained NO MEANS NO in rape cases, as if the woman states in her testimony that she has not given her consent, then the court shall presume that she did not consent in accordance with Section 114-A of the Evidence Act, 1872.
Category/Act- Evidence Act
Citation- XYZ v. State of Gujarat (2019) 10 SCC 337
#landmark #landmarkjudgment #law #legal #lawinsider #supremecourt #india #evidence
Landmark Judgment
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that Hon’ble High Court under Section 397(2) CrPC or 482 CrPC or Article 227 of the Constitution can interfere with an order framing charge of the offense. However, the order of grant stay must be exercised only in an exceptional situation.
Category/Act- CrPC and Constitution.
Citation- Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency v. CBI, (2018) 16 SCC 299
#landmark #landmarkjudgment #law #legal #lawinsider #supremecourt #india
Landmark Judgment
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that the Court of Magistrate can set up a commission under the aegis of Section 284 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for examination of witnesses.
It is held that where the Hon’ble Court is of the prima facie opinion that the witness is necessary for the ends of justice and the attendance of such witness cannot be procured without an amount of delay, expense or inconvenience then the court may issue a commission for examination of the witness. It is held that such commission can be issued for other countries as well.
Category/Act- CrPC
Citation- State of Maharashtra v. Praful B. Desai (Dr) (2003) 4 SCC 601
#landmark #landmarkjudgment #law #legal #lawinsider #supremecourt #india
Landmark Judgment
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that in case of any ambiguity in the interpretation of the penal clause of the law. The Courts must favour the interpretation towards protecting the rights of the accused.
Category/Act-
Citation- Directorate of Revenue Intelligence (2021) 2 SCC 485
#landmark #landmarkjudgment #law #legal #lawinsider #supremecourt #india
Landmark Judgment
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that Police has to initiate investigation as per the provisions laid down in Section 157 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 in a cognizable offence and arrive at the opinion in accordance with Section 169 (Offence is not made out against the accused) or Section 170 (Offence is made out against the accused) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. It is pertinent to note that Police can further investigate only after obtaining leave of the Hon’ble Court of Magistrate under aegis of Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Category/Act- CrPC
Citation- Kunapareddy v/s Kunapareddy Swarna Kumari (2016) 11 SCC 774
#landmark #landmarkjudgment #law #legal #lawinsider #supremecourt #india
Landmark Judgment
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that the Orders passed by the Hon’ble Court of Magistrate under the provisions of Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 are primarily of Civil nature. However the non-compliance of the Orders falls within the Criminal judicature of the Hon’ble Court of Magistrate.
Category/Act- Domestic Violence Act
Citation- Kunapareddy v/s Kunapareddy Swarna Kumari (2016) 11 SCC 774
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra
#landmark #landmarkjudgment #law #legal #lawinsider #supremecourt #india
