March - 2012

  • Adultery: Criminal offence of adultery cannot be registered against woman, and whenever it is registered against woman, it is liable to be quashed on this ground alone. W Kalyani v. State of Andhra Pradesh, (Supreme Court).

  • Caste certificate: Genuineness of claim of caste certificate is not required to be tested only against the documentary evidence but also on the basis of affinity test, which would include the anthropological and ethnological traits, etc. Further held, greater reliance shall be placed on pre-Independence documents as they furnish a greater degree of probative value, and the affinity test may be used to corroborate the documentary evidence. Anand v. Committee for Scrutiny & Verification of Tribe Claims, (Supreme Court).
  • Constitutional validity: As there is reasonable nexus between the cess imposed and purpose for which such cess would be utilised under the Building and Other Construction Workers' Welfare Cess Act, 1996, therefore, in light of quid-pro-quo being established such cess is in nature of fee. Accordingly held that Parliament is constitutionally empowered to frame law on this issue. Dewan Chand Builders and Contractors v. Union of Indiai, (Supreme Court).
  • Consumer forum: Authorised agents: Provision has been made under the Consumer Protection Rules, 1987 permitting the consumers to appear in person or through authorised agents who may or may not be advocates. Further held, that such permission for authorised agents before consumer forums cannot be said to be in contravention of the Advocates Act, 1961. C Venkatachalam v. Ajitkumar C Shah, (Supreme Court).
  • Education: When the rules provided for minimum marks to be secured in individual subject as well as cut-off marks on the basis of aggregate marks, then merely because a candidate has secured marks higher then cut-off marks but has failed to secure the minimum marks in the individual subjects, then, such classification cannot be said to be arbitrary and illegal. Sanchit Bansal v. Joint Admission Board, (Supreme Court).
  • First Information Report: When there are different and conflicting versions of the same incident, then it would be permissible in law to have multiple first information reports being lodged with the police authorities. Shivshankar Singh v. State of Bihar, (Supreme Court).
  • Land acquisition: Even when the land is acquired for certain public purpose, then on completion of purpose of acquisition the government is not obliged to return the land to the original owners. Further held, that since after acquisition of land it vests in the State government free from all encumbrances, acquired land can be used for alternate government purposes. Leelawati v. State of Haryana, (Supreme Court).
  • Mode of appropriation: When the decretal amount is deposited in the Court, then in absence of agreement to the contrary between the parties, the amount so deposited would be adjusted towards interest and thereafter on principal amount. Leela Hotels Limited v. Housing and Urban Development Corporation, (Supreme Court) (3J).
  • Minority institution: There are two tests for determination of an institution to be a minority institution under Article 30 of Constitution of India: (a) Intention at the time of foundation that the institution is being established for benefits of the minority, (b) The benefits which would be extended to the majority community when the funds are received from them would not be relevant to determine the status of the institution. T Varghese George v. Kora K George, (Supreme Court).
  • Professional ethics: Legal profession is a noble profession and is not a business or trade. Person practising law has to practise in a spirit of honesty and not in the spirit of mischief-making or money-getting. Accordingly, when the advocate made an attempt to purchase the property which was involved in litigation, wherein, he was representing one of the parties, then, it amounts to unethical conduct. Further held, in such circumstances punishment of suspension of licence to practise for period of three months would meet the objective of deterrence and correction. Dhanraj Singh Choudhary v. Nathulal Vishwakarma, (Supreme Court).
  • Sale-agreement: Any transfer of property - whether complete or partial takes place only through registered sale-deed. Deprecating the practice of executing general power-of-attorney sales, power-of-attorney, will transfers when the testators are alive, it was held that not a single component of transfer of property takes place through execution of such instruments. Suraj Lamp & Industries (P) Limited v. State of Haryana, (Supreme Court)(3J).
  • Securities and frauds: Intention of the legislation is that best offers shall be provided to the Special Court constituted under Special Courts (Trial of Offences relating to transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 for sale of the seized shares, and there shall be compliance with principles of natural justice while affording effective opportunity of hearing to all concerned. Further held, serious efforts including of extension of time shall be provided for purposes of securing best offers. Ashwin S Mehta v. Union of India, (Supreme Court).

Archive >>