{"id":177414,"date":"2017-12-26T13:53:29","date_gmt":"2017-12-26T08:23:29","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=177414"},"modified":"2017-12-26T13:53:29","modified_gmt":"2017-12-26T08:23:29","slug":"2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/","title":{"rendered":"2017 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2017 Part 4"},"content":{"rendered":"

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 S. 8 \u2014 Reference to arbitration in pending suit \u2014 Application under S. 8 of 1996 Arbitration Act \u2014 Maintainability:<\/strong> The Delhi Rent Act, which deals with the cases relating to rent and eviction, is a special Act. Though it contains a provision (Section 3) by virtue of which the provisions of the said Act do not apply to certain premises, but that does not mean that the Arbitration Act, ipso facto, would be applicable to such premises conferring jurisdiction on the arbitrator to decide the eviction\/rent disputes. In such a situation, the rights of the parties and the demised premises would be governed by the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 and the civil suit would be triable by the civil court and not by the arbitrator. In other words, though by virtue of Section 3 of the Delhi Rent Act, the provisions of the said Act are not applicable to certain premises but no sooner the exemption is withdrawn or ceased to have its application to a particular premises, that Act becomes applicable to such premises. In this view of the matter, it cannot be contended that the provisions of the Arbitration Act would, therefore, apply to such premises. [Himangni Enterprises v. Kamaljeet Singh Ahluwalia,\u00a0(2017) 10 SCC 706<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitution of India \u2014 Arts. 25, 26, 14, 17, 21, 38, 51-A(e) and 290-A \u2014 Sabarimala Temple:<\/strong> Matter regarding practice of not permitting women of age group of 10 to 50 yrs to enter or offer prayer in Sabarimala Temple, that is, women after menarche up to menopause on grounds: (a) that deity in Sabarimala Temple is a Naisthik Brahmachari, a Yogi, whose celibacy and austerity should not be affected by women of such age group, and (b) that worshippers visit temple after observing penance for 41 days and usually ladies of such age group will not be physically capable of observing \u201cvratham\u201d for 41 days due to biological factor of menstruation, referred to a larger Bench, five issues also formulated. [Indian Young Lawyers Assn. v. State of Kerala,\u00a0(2017) 10 SCC 689<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Income Tax Act, 1961 \u2014 S. 115-O (as inserted by Finance Act, 1997) \u2014 Dividend declared, distributed or paid by a tea company, engaged in the business of growing green tea leaves in its tea gardens and manufacturing black tea out of the same \u2014 Taxability of:<\/strong> Levy of \u201cadditional income tax\u201d under section 115-O, IT Act on \u201cdividend\u201d justified as \u201cdividend\u201d is income and tax thereon can be levied under Entry 82 of List I. [Union of India v. Tata Tea Co. Ltd.,\u00a0(2017) 10 SCC 764<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Land Acquisition Act, 1894 \u2014 S. 3(a) r\/w S. 49:<\/strong> Acquisition of mere building\/portion of a building, without the underlying land is possible and valid, even when the Government itself is the owner of the underlying land. [State of Maharashtra v. Reliance Industries Ltd.,\u00a0(2017) 10 SCC 713<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act, 1999 (30 of 1999) (as extended to NCT of Delhi) \u2014 Ss. 2(1)(d) & (1)(e), 1(2) and 3 \u2014 \u201cOrganised crime\u201d \u2014 \u201cContinuing unlawful activity\u201d defined in S. 2(1)(d) for constituting offence as to \u2014 Requisites of:<\/strong> Invoking doctrine of territorial\u00a0nexus in this case of organized crime and adopting construction in favour of advancement of object of statute concerned i.e. MCOCA, it was held that expression \u201ccompetent court\u201d in S. 2(1)(d) of MCOCA is not restricted to courts in Delhi alone. Perusal of chargesheets filed in competent courts in other State (i.e. State of U.P.) which were relied on by prosecution to prove commission of organised crime established clear nexus between those charge-sheets and State of NCT of Delhi where prosecution was launched under MCOCA. Hence it was held that those chargesheets could be taken into account for purpose of constituting \u201ccontinuing unlawful activity\u201d to prosecute accused persons under MCOCA at Delhi. Such prosecution could not be said to be invalid on ground of extra-territoriality. [State (NCT of Delhi) v. Brijesh Singh], 2017) 10 SCC 779<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Prisons, Prisoners and Probation of Offenders \u2014 Prison\/Jail Reforms \u2014 Unnatural deaths in prisons:<\/strong> Directions issued for measures to be taken to prevent unnatural deaths in prisons, as far as possible and for proper implementation of Modern Prison Manual, 2016 and other guidelines and rules of Central Government and International Bodies. Suggestion was also given for establishment of open jails and use of phone and video confrencing for communication with family and lawyers. [Re-Inhuman Conditions In 1382 Prisons, In re,\u00a0(2017) 10 SCC 658<\/a>]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 S. 8 \u2014 Reference to arbitration in pending suit \u2014 Application under S. 8 of 1996 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":91,"featured_media":102451,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,16],"tags":[26884,11411],"class_list":["post-177414","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-supremecourtcases","tag-cases-reported","tag-supreme-court-cases"],"yoast_head":"\n2017 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2017 Part 4 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"2017 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2017 Part 4\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 S. 8 \u2014 Reference to arbitration in pending suit \u2014 Application under S. 8 of 1996\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2017-12-26T08:23:29+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/\",\"name\":\"2017 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2017 Part 4 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2017-12-26T08:23:29+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"2017 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2017 Part 4\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\",\"name\":\"Saba\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Saba\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"2017 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2017 Part 4 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"2017 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2017 Part 4","og_description":"Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 S. 8 \u2014 Reference to arbitration in pending suit \u2014 Application under S. 8 of 1996","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2017-12-26T08:23:29+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Saba","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Saba","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/","name":"2017 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2017 Part 4 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","datePublished":"2017-12-26T08:23:29+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/12\/26\/2017-scc-vol-10-december-21-2017-part-4\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"2017 SCC Vol. 10 December 21, 2017 Part 4"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785","name":"Saba","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Saba"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/01\/scccover-28.1.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":220816,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/14\/himangni-enterprises-v-kamaljeet-singh-ahluwalia-a-critical-review\/","url_meta":{"origin":177414,"position":0},"title":"Himangni Enterprises v. Kamaljeet Singh Ahluwalia: A Critical Review\u00a0","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 14, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"by Dr Anirban Chakraborty\u2020 and Prakhar Agarwal\u2020\u2020","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":240987,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/20\/why-are-landlord-tenant-disputes-under-tp-act-arbitrable-but-those-under-rent-acts-non-arbitrable-vidya-drolia-explainer-by-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":177414,"position":1},"title":"Why are Landlord-tenant disputes under TP Act arbitrable but those under Rent Acts non-arbitrable? [‘Vidya Drolia’ explainer by Supreme Court]","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"December 20, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Three days after the Court overruled the ratio in\u00a0Himangni Enterprises v. Kamaljeet Singh Ahluwalia,\u00a0(2017) 10 SCC 706\u00a0wherein it was held that landlord-tenant disputes governed by the provisions of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882, are not arbitrable as this would be contrary to public policy, the 3-judge bench\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":80071,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/10\/19\/civil-court-will-not-cease-to-have-jurisdiction-to-try-the-suit-of-eviction-if-the-suit-property-came-under-notified-area-during-pendency-of-the-suit\/","url_meta":{"origin":177414,"position":2},"title":"Civil Court will not cease to have jurisdiction to try the suit of eviction if the suit property comes under notified area during pendency of the suit","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"October 19, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Dealing with the question as to whether the Civil Court would cease to have jurisdiction to try the suit of eviction if the suit property came under notified area during pendency of the suit, the Court held that as on the date of the institution of the suit\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":260933,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/02\/01\/2021-scc-vol-9-part-3\/","url_meta":{"origin":177414,"position":3},"title":"2021 SCC Vol. 9 Part 3","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"February 1, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"In Part 3 of Volume 9, read this very interesting decision, where the Election Commission of India (EC) had sought a direction restraining the media from reporting on court proceedings after Madras High Court made certain oral remarks attributing responsibility to the EC for the present surge in the number\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/06\/SCC_Standard.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":219769,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/01\/2019-scc-vol-8-september-21-2019-part-2\/","url_meta":{"origin":177414,"position":4},"title":"2019 SCC Vol. 8 September 21, 2019 Part 2","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 1, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Land Acquisition and Requisition \u2014 Release from Acquisition \u2014 Development charges: Imposition of development charges, in terms of S. 17(1) proviso of 1973 U.P. Act upon release of land from acquisition, would depend on whether development of released land had indeed been carried out or not. Moreover, determination and imposition\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Cases Reported"","block_context":{"text":"Cases Reported","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casesreported\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":62321,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/08\/19\/disputes-relating-to-trust-and-trustees-cannot-be-settled-by-way-of-arbitration-even-if-arbitration-agreement-exists-to-that-effect\/","url_meta":{"origin":177414,"position":5},"title":"Disputes relating to Trust and Trustees cannot be settled by way of arbitration even if arbitration agreement exists to that effect","author":"Sucheta","date":"August 19, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The bench of J. Chelameswar and Abhay Manohar Sapre, JJ, hearing the matter regarding settlement of disputes arising from Trust deeds by way of arbitration, held that the disputes relating to Trust, trustees and beneficiaries arising out of the Trust Deed and the Trust Act, 1882 are not\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Alternate Dispute Resolution"","block_context":{"text":"Alternate Dispute Resolution","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/alternate_dispute_resolution\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/177414","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/91"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=177414"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/177414\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/102451"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=177414"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=177414"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=177414"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}