Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1953 on personal bars to relief in specific performance of contract.
Constitution of India — Sch. X and Art. 145(3) — Power of Speaker/Deputy Speaker to initiate disqualification proceedings, when proceedings for removal
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment dating back to the year 1952 on specific performance of contract.
Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302 and 201 — Circumstantial evidence — Last seen theory and recovery of weapon: In this case,
Advocates — Senior Advocates — Designation of: Guidelines issued by Supreme Court in Indira Jaising, (2017) 9 SCC 766 for greater objectivity
The principle governing the evidence in civil cases is that there should be a preponderance of the events which should be proved unlike in criminal matters, where the evidence have to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, the burden of proof is on the party which will suffer if such evidence is not proved.
by Vasanth Rajasekaran*
Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 67
Sections 20-A and 41(ha) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 expresses the legislative intent to not grant injunctions relating to infrastructure projects where delay may be caused by such an injunction. Thus, the role of Courts in this exercise is to interfere to the minimum extent so that public work projects are not impeded or stalled.
by Dormaan Jamshid Dalal†
Supreme Court said that as per proviso to Section 49 of the Registration Act, 1908 an unregistered document affecting immovable property may be received as evidence of a contract in a suit for specific performance under Chapter-II of the Specific Relief Act, 1877, or as evidence of any collateral transaction not required to be effected by registered instrument, subject to Section 17(1A) of the Registration Act.
The Supreme Court was unimpressed with the explanation given by the plaintiff for the delay of 853 days that he initially fell sick with Jaundice and was later confined to house with High Blood Pressure, Diabetes and other diseases. The petition had extension of time to deposit the balance sale consideration of Rs. 15,00,000/-.
While Justice Shah stated that the Kerala High Court has erred in interfering with the judgment of Trial Court of passing a decree for specific performance; Justice Nagarathna affirmed the Judgment of the High Court.
Madras High Court: In an intra-Court appeal filed against the order of the single judge, whereby, the judge allowed the
by Kingshuk Banerjee† and Arnav Mohanty††
Cite as: 2022 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 70
Supreme Court: In a suit for specific performance the Division Bench of Indira Banerjee* and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ., explained the
Advocates Act, 1961 — S. 16 — Procedure for designation of Senior Advocates: Clarification of Guidelines prescribed for Supreme Court
Punjab and Haryana High Court: Sudhir Mittal, J. dismissed the revision petition filed by the petitioners (in this case the judgment-debtors) against
Uttaranchal High Court: Emphasizing on the purpose and object of Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Division bench of
by Priyal Parikh*