Category: Civil
Are Security Deposits Financial Debts Under IBC? SC Explains!
The Court emphasized that the real nature of transactions must be examined to determine whether a debt is financial or operational. The security deposits in this case were deemed to have the commercial effect of borrowing, qualifying them as financial debts (paras 14-18).
Is Compensation for Medical Negligence Adequate? SC Explains!
The Court held that the reduction of compensation by the State Commission and the NCDRC was unjustified, given the recognized deficiencies in post-operative care and the prolonged suffering of the appellant. The original award by the District Forum was deemed appropriate (paras 14-16).
Do Movie Trailers Create Binding Promises? SC Explains: Yash Raj Films
The Court emphasized that a promotional trailer is an advertisement, intended to allure and entice potential viewers rather than constitute a binding promise regarding the content of the film. The Court further clarified that creative freedom in advertisements for films must be preserved (paras 13-19).
Is a Compromise Decree Valid Despite Delays? SC Explains!
The Court held that the High Court erred in declaring the decree void based on incorrect assumptions about joint ownership and procedural verification of the compromise. The Executing Court’s order dismissing objections was justified (paras 9-10, 14).
Is Hindu Marriage Valid Without Ceremonies? SC Explains!
The Court emphasized that the solemnization of a marriage through the performance of the prescribed rites and ceremonies is crucial under Hindu law. Without these, any registration of marriage is invalid and does not confer marital status (paras 10-14).
Do IBC Offences Go to Special Courts? SC Clarifies!
The Court held that the legislative intent of Section 236(1) of the IBC was to incorporate the provisions of Special Courts from the Companies Act as they existed at the time of the IBC’s enactment, making amendments to the Companies Act post-enactment of the IBC irrelevant for the purposes of IBC (paras 42-44).
Do New Rules Apply to Pending Cases? SC Explains Fair Penalties!
The Court emphasized that the purpose of substituting Rule 19 in 2011 was to reduce the penalties and better administer excise laws. Applying the old penalties to new cases would defeat the purpose of the amendment and disrupt fair administration (paras 32-34).
Can Sessions Courts Handle UAPA Cases? SC Clarifies Jurisdiction!
The Court held that the High Court erred in quashing the proceedings under UAPA, as the Chief Judge, City Sessions Court, Calcutta had the jurisdiction to handle the case until a Special Court was designated by the State Government. The decision by the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate to extend remand beyond 90 days was deemed illegal, but since the accused did not seek default bail, this did not invalidate the entire proceedings (paras 29-30, 37).
Does the 2005 Amendment Ensure Equal Rights to Daughter in Ancestral Property? SC Explains!
The Court held that the High Court was justified in declaring the settlement between the defendants as invalid, and that a valid partition of ancestral property must consider the rights conferred by the 2005 Amendment to the Hindu Succession Act (paras 18-19, 43-44).
The Supreme Court ruled that a review petition under Order 47 Rule 1 of the CPC cannot be used as an appeal and should not revisit issues already decided unless there is a clear error apparent on the face of the record.
Key Judicial Interpretation The Supreme Court ruled that a review petition under Order 47 Rule 1 of the CPC cannot be used as an appeal [more…]
