SC held that Act reintroduced provisions earlier struck down, violating judicial independence and constitutional principles. It restored earlier service conditions and protected prior appointments.
The Supreme Court held that assignment of a decree for specific performance does not create any present right or title in immovable property. Therefore, such assignment deeds do not require registration under Section 17(1)(e) of the Registration Act.
The Court held that when multiple authorities are required to communicate an EC, the appeal limitation period begins from the earliest communication. Subsequent notifications cannot extend the period, emphasizing timely action by aggrieved parties.
The Court held that cost directions based on earlier guidelines cannot be enforced as binding precedent. It set aside the imposed costs since the complainant sought no further payment and the appellant could not comply.
This case addressed the scope of judicial interference under the Arbitration Act regarding the interest awarded in a commercial dispute. The Court found no perversity in the Arbitrator’s decision to award the contractual 24% rate, rejecting the borrower’s claims under the outdated Usurious Loans Act, 1918. The ruling emphasizes that the Arbitration Act framework overrides State usury laws for NBFC lending and bars courts from reopening contractual rates.
SC found that issuing tax notices for periods before takeover violated the ruling that all non-included claims are extinguished upon approval of the resolution plan. The recovery proceedings were set aside.
The apex court removed the cost imposed to the State Legal Services Authority after parties settled a cheque dishonour dispute. The ruling confirms that prior Article 142-based cost schemes cannot mandate payment in every case. Takeaway: each settlement must be evaluated on its own merits, not by automatic precedent.
The Supreme Court scheduled final hearing to determine if a trust working for a particular community can claim income tax exemption under Sections 11 and 12.
The Court held that exclusion clause 5 could not justify repudiation of the boiler explosion claim. The insurer cannot rely on post-accident discovery of latent defects to deny a valid claim under a properly issued policy.
A postmaster who misappropriated public money was removed despite later repaying the amounts. The High Court’s order reinstating him was overturned for exceeding the scope of judicial review. The ruling highlights that integrity and adherence to rules are critical in public service.
