The Supreme Court rejected the High Courts view that nomination alone guarantees absolute entitlement. It emphasized that beneficiaries must follow succession law, splitting the GPF 50% each between eligible family members.
The Court held that both salary and farm income must be considered, increasing the deceased’s monthly income to ₹8,000. ignoring legitimate income sources leads to undervalued compensation.
The Court held that strict documentary proof of salary is not mandatory and adopted a reasonable income figure. liberal standards apply when determining earnings for young accident victims.
The Court held that the deceased’s income had been wrongly computed at ₹84,000 and reassessed it at ₹1,00,000 based on available evidence. The ruling increased the compensation and reaffirmed principles for fair assessment in motor accident claims.
Courts held that allegations of large-scale fraudulent ITC require factual adjudication and are unsuitable for writ jurisdiction, directing the petitioner to pursue the statutory appeal. The Supreme Court refused intervention but extended time to file the appeal.
State Bank of India Vs Pallabh Bhowmick & Ors (Supreme Court of India) In this case, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s finding that a series of online transactions carried out on 18.10.2021 from the customer’s bank account were entirely unauthorized and fraudulent, and that no negligence on the part of the account holder […]
The Court ruled that Section 148 notices issued by the local Assessing Officer, following orders under Section 148A(d), are legally valid. It rejected arguments that such notices must be issued facelessly under the 2022 Scheme. This establishes that notice issuance and faceless assessment are distinct processes.
The Court held that intercepted calls and investigation records did not establish demand or acceptance of illegal gratification. It affirmed that no material linked the accused to the alleged conspiracy, upholding the quashing of charges.
The Court ruled that the High Court erred in terminating the case at the pre-trial stage. It held that allegations of disproportionate assets require examination at trial and restored the prosecution.
The Court upheld the refusal to discharge the accused, citing material suggesting grave suspicion of involvement in a conspiracy. It held that the allegations warranted full trial scrutiny.
