Law in one Paragraph

S. Kaladevi vs. V.R. Somasundaram & Others [AIR 2010 SC 1654] Evidentiary value of unregistered document required by law to be registered 13. …… K.B. Saha and Sons Private Limited v. Development Consultant Limited, (2008) 8 SCC 564……This Court then culled out the following principles:- 21. From the principles laid down in the various decisions of […]

Dhulabhai and Others vs The State of Madhya Pradesh [AIR 1969 SC 68] Principles governing the ouster of jurisdiction of the Civil Court (1) Where the statute gives a finality to the orders of the special tribunals the Civil Courts jurisdiction must be held to be excluded if there is adequate remedy to do what

Damodar S. Prabhu vs. Sayed Babalal H. [(2010) 5 SCC 663] Can a cheque dishonour case be compounded after conviction? 11. The compounding of the offence at later stages of litigation in cheque bouncing cases has also been held to be permissible in a recent decision of this Court, reported as K.M. Ibrahim v. K.P. Mohammed &

Suraj Lamp and Industries Private Limited vs. State of Haryana & Anr. [(2009) 7 SCC 363] Registration of a document gives notice of execution to the world 18. Registration of a document gives notice to the world that such a document has been executed. Registration provides safety and security to transactions relating to immovable property,

Lakhi Baruah v. Padma Kanta Kalita [(1996) 8 SCC 357] Production of a copy or a certified copy does not raise the presumption under Section 90 16. So far as applicability of presumption arising from Section 90 of the Evidence Act in respect of copy of the old document is concerned, the earliest decision of

All Assam STATFED Karmachari Aikya Manch and Ors. Vs. State of Assam and Ors [(2014) 5 GLR 69] VRS is formulated for the benefit of the employees and the same is in the nature of welfare legislation 14. …. In my opinion the impugned decision of the answering respondents is the result of non-application of

Union of India & Anr. v. Narendra Singh [(2008) 2 SCC 750] If erroneous promotion is given by wrongly interpreting the rules, the employer cannot be prevented from applying the rules rightly 32. It is true that the mistake was of the Department and the respondent was promoted though he was not eligible and qualified.

The State of Orissa v. Madan Gopal Rungta [AIR 1952 SC 12] Grant of final relief as interim relief In The State of Orissa v. Madan Gopal Rungta [AIR 1952 SC 12], a Constitution Bench of the Hon’ble Apex Court clearly spelt out the contours within which interim relief can be granted, and held as

Ramesh Chandra Sharma & Ors. vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. [Civil Appeal No. 8819 of 2022] Under what circumstances can the Court interfere in cases of administrative law-making – Wednesbury principle 42. In the case of Associated Provincial Picture Houses Limited v. Wednesbury Corporation ([1948] 1 KB 22), the King’s Bench Division was

Kishor Ghanshyamsa Paralikar (D) through Lrs. vs. Balaji Mandir Sansthan Mangrul (Nath) & Another [Civil Appeal No. 3794/2022] A court retains control over a suit for specific performance even after passing a decree 11. This section gives to the vendor or the lessor the right to rescission of the contract for the sale or lease