{"id":268672,"date":"2022-06-18T17:00:54","date_gmt":"2022-06-18T11:30:54","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=268672"},"modified":"2022-06-18T16:17:21","modified_gmt":"2022-06-18T10:47:21","slug":"2022-scc-vol-5-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/","title":{"rendered":"2022 SCC Vol. 5 Part 2"},"content":{"rendered":"

Civil Procedure Code, 1908<\/a> \u2014 Or. 41 Rr. 4<\/a> & 33<\/a>, Ss. 96<\/a>, 100<\/a> and Or. 20 R. 18<\/a> \u2014 Partition suit \u2014 Appeal \u2014 Non-appealing plaintiffs:<\/strong> Some of plaintiffs whose claim was denied by trial court and who had not challenged same by way of appeal before first appellate court, held, are entitled to relief in second appeal. In a partition suit, all parties stand on the same pedestal and every party is a plaintiff as well as a defendant. Position of plaintiff and defendant can be interchangeable. Trial court could grant relief even to non-appealing plaintiffs and make an adverse order against all defendants and in favour of all plaintiffs. Merely because trial court had not granted relief in favour of some of plaintiffs, would not come in the way in High Court allowing their claim. [Azgar Barid<\/i> v. Mazambi<\/i>, (2022) 5 SCC 334<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitution of India<\/a> \u2014 Art. 226<\/a> \u2014 Maintainability of writ petition \u2014 Proceedings under SARFAESI Act<\/a>:<\/strong> If proceedings are initiated under the SARFAESI Act and\/or any proposed action is to be taken and the borrower is aggrieved by any of the actions of the private bank\/bank\/ARC, borrower has to avail the remedy under the SARFAESI Act<\/a> and no writ petition would lie and\/or is maintainable and\/or entertainable. [Phoenix ARC (P) Ltd.<\/i> v. Vishwa Bharati Vidya Mandir<\/i>, (2022) 5 SCC 345<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitution of India<\/a> \u2014 Arts. 32<\/a> and 226<\/a> \u2014 Issue as to legislative competence \u2014 Maintainability:<\/strong> Matter already standing determined by a Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court. [M.C. Mehta<\/i> v. Union of India<\/i>, (2022) 5 SCC 291<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitution of India<\/a> \u2014 Sch. VII List I Entry 84<\/a> and List II Entry 51<\/a>:<\/strong> State Legislature, held, has no legislative competence to levy tax on waste liquor after distillation which is not suitable for human consumption. [State of Orissa<\/i> v. Utkal Distilleries Ltd.<\/i>, (2022) 5 SCC 326<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973<\/a> \u2014 S. 190(1)(b)<\/a> r\/w Ss. 173<\/a>, 193<\/a> & 319<\/a> and Ss. 161<\/a> & 164<\/a> \u2014 Taking cognizance of offence on basis of police report \u2014 Protest petition:<\/strong> Even after process has been issued against some accused on one date, held, process can still be issued by the Magistrate against some other person against whom there is some material on record, but whose name is not included as accused in the charge-sheet. Lastly, Magistrate or court need not wait till stage of S. 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a> to exercise such power. [Nahar Singh<\/i> v. State of U.P.<\/i>, (2022) 5 SCC 295<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Foreword to a book:<\/strong> A foreword to the book \u201cCompetition Law\u201d by Cyril Shroff. Foreword to competition law by Cyril Shroff, (2022) 5 SCC (J-25)<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Foreword to a book:<\/strong> A foreword to the book \u201cCriminal Law and Criminal Justice: An Introduction to the Writings by Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah, Foreword to Criminal Law and Criminal Justice: An Introduction to the Writings by Justice M.N. Venkatachaliah, (2022) 5 SCC (J-22)<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Foreword to a book:<\/strong> A foreword to the book \u201cTransgenders and the Law\u201d by Justice A.K. Sikri. Foreword to transgenders and the law by Justice A.K. Sikri, (2022) 5 SCC (J-28)<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Government Contracts and Tenders \u2014 Formation of Government Contract \u2014 Modes of entering into a Government Contract \u2014 Public Auction\/Tender \u2014 Award\/Non-award of contract \u2014 Judicial review:<\/strong> Author of the tender document, reiterated, is taken to be the best person to understand and appreciate its requirements. Thus, if the interpretation of such author is manifestly in consonance with the language of the tender document or subserving the purchase of the tender, the Court would prefer to keep restraint. Further, the technical evaluation or comparison by the Court is impermissible. Thus, even if the interpretation given to the tender document by the person inviting offers is not as such acceptable to the constitutional court, that, by itself, would not be a reason for interfering with the interpretation given, so long as such interpretation is not arbitrary or whimsical. [Agmatel India (P) Ltd.<\/i> v. Resoursys Telecom<\/i>], (2022) 5 SCC 362<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board Act, 2006<\/a> \u2014 S. 16<\/a> \u2014 Noti. dt. 12-7-2010:<\/strong> Directions regarding adjudication of pending and new applications by Board i.e. post S. 16<\/a> coming into force, issued. [Petroleum & Natural Gas Regulatory Board<\/i> v. Indraprastha Gas Ltd.<\/i>, (2022) 5 SCC 292<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board Act, 2006<\/a> \u2014 S. 16<\/a> r\/w S. 17<\/a> \u2014 \u201cDeemed authorisation\u201d clause under S. 16 proviso<\/a> \u2014 Scope of \u2014 Deemed authorisation:<\/strong> If one reads S. 16 proviso<\/a> in isolation, the inference undoubtedly would be that every entity which had started laying and building pipelines and networks was the recipient of the deemed authorisation clause i.e. the provision sought to retrospectively regularise activities by all entities, however, such a plain and facial construction is unacceptable. Thus held, S. 16 proviso<\/a> is not unqualified. The \u201cdeemed authorisation\u201d clause is subject to other provisions of Ch. IV and S. 17<\/a> is one such provision under Ch. IV. Further, the scheme of S. 17 intrinsically classifies the two i.e. Central Government authorised entities, and others and the underlying basis for this statutory classification is that only entities which had been cleared or authorised by the Central Government prior to the coming into force of the Act were deemed to have authorisation under the Act, and therefore, had to furnish certain details. As with regard to the others i.e. entities not authorised by the Central Government, fresh applications were necessary which were to be assessed by the Board on a case-by-case basis and in accordance with uniform standards. [Adani Gas Ltd.<\/i> v. Union of India<\/i>, (2022) 5 SCC 210<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Service Law \u2014 Promotion \u2014 Criteria\/Eligibility \u2014 Length of service\/qualifying service \u2014 Time-bound promotion \u2014 Entitlement to:<\/strong> Services rendered by employee on work-charge basis may considered for computing 12 yrs of service for grant of time-bound promotion (TBP). [State of Maharashtra<\/i> v. Madhukar Antu Patil<\/i>, (2022) 5 SCC 322<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Service Law \u2014 Promotion \u2014 Criteria\/Eligibility \u2014 Qualification\/Experience \u2014 Classification based on nature of experience \u2014 Validity of:<\/strong> Policy decision to provide incentive marks for specified work experience inside the State and not for such work experience from some other State due to work pattern peculiarities and socio-economic\/geographical peculiarities of the State, held, not arbitrary. Courts should be slow in interfering with policy matters unless the policy is found to be palpably discriminatory and arbitrary. [Satya Dev Bhagaur<\/i> v. State of Rajasthan<\/i>, (2022) 5 SCC 314<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Service Law \u2014 Regularisation \u2014 Entitlement to regularization:<\/strong> In this case, respondents were appointed on contractual basis for period of 11 months (which was continued from time to time), on fixed salary for temporary project. Their employment was continued based on interim order of High Court. It was held that respondents were appointed on temporary unit which was not regular establishment and posts on which they were appointed and continued to work were not sanctioned posts. Hence, impugned judgment directing State to consider cases of respondents for regularisation sympathetically and if necessary, by creating supernumerary posts, held, unsustainable and without jurisdiction. [State of Gujarat<\/i> v. R.J. Pathan<\/i>, (2022) 5 SCC 394<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Territorial Jurisdiction of Courts in Domestic Arbitration:<\/strong> In this article, issue of territorial jurisdiction of courts in arbitrations in India has been discussed. Territorial Jurisdiction of Courts in Domestic Arbitration: The Saga of seat and venue continues by Arjun Krishnan and Ankur Singh, (2022) 5 SCC (J-1)<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Treatment of Personal guarantors under the Indian insolvency regime:<\/strong> This article seeks to delineate the position of personal guarantors under the Insolvency Code and to discuss the treatment of promoters as personal guarantees under the Indian insolvency regime in light of the judgment in Lalit Kumar Jain, (2021) 9 SCC 321 and other relevant decisions. General principles relating to the treatment of Personal guarantors under the Indian insolvency regime by Sriram Venkatavaradan and Saai Sudharsan Sathiyamoorthy, (2022) 5 SCC (J-8)<\/a>]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 \u2014 Or. 41 Rr. 4 & 33, Ss. 96, 100 and Or. 20 R. 18 \u2014 Partition suit <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":267145,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,16],"tags":[3226,13041,49747,13161,3645,5941,3428,13551],"class_list":["post-268672","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-supremecourtcases","tag-arbitration","tag-cases-reported-in-scc","tag-deemed-authorisation","tag-government-contracts-and-tenders","tag-promotion","tag-service-law","tag-transgenders","tag-writ-petition"],"yoast_head":"\n2022 SCC Vol. 5 Part 2 | 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\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"2022 SCC Vol. 5 Part 2\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Civil Procedure Code, 1908 \u2014 Or. 41 Rr. 4 & 33, Ss. 96, 100 and Or. 20 R. 18 \u2014 Partition suit\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/\" \/>\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=\"2022-06-18T11:30:54+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.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=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 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\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/\",\"name\":\"2022 SCC Vol. 5 Part 2 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2022-06-18T11:30:54+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887,\"caption\":\"SCC Part\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"2022 SCC Vol. 5 Part 2\"}]},{\"@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\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"2022 SCC Vol. 5 Part 2 | 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\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"2022 SCC Vol. 5 Part 2","og_description":"Civil Procedure Code, 1908 \u2014 Or. 41 Rr. 4 & 33, Ss. 96, 100 and Or. 20 R. 18 \u2014 Partition suit","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2022-06-18T11:30:54+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/","name":"2022 SCC Vol. 5 Part 2 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg","datePublished":"2022-06-18T11:30:54+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg","width":1330,"height":887,"caption":"SCC Part"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/06\/18\/2022-scc-vol-5-part-2\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"2022 SCC Vol. 5 Part 2"}]},{"@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\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/05\/NEW-SCC.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":246394,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/04\/02\/partition-suit\/","url_meta":{"origin":268672,"position":0},"title":"Madras HC | Daughters filed partition suit while disowning their registered release deed. As per S. 92 of Evidence Act, burden to adduce evidence sufficient to exclude written evidence will be on the daughters? Read on","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 2, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court: G. Jayachandran, J., the instant suit was filed with regard to the relief of partition and permanent injunction from alienating or encumbering the suit property. Instant suit was filed for partition by daughters of Late Palanisamy Gounder against his sons was dismissed by the trial court while\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":238437,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/11\/03\/madras-hc-succession-madras-hc-stale-claim-resurrected-for-some-other-reason-court-rejects-claim-to-property-filed-by-husband-and-son-of-alleged-coparcener\/","url_meta":{"origin":268672,"position":1},"title":"[Succession] Madras HC | “Stale claim resurrected for some other reason”: Court rejects claim to property filed by husband and son of alleged co-parcener","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"November 3, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court:\u00a0R. Subramanian, J., dismissed the second appeal filed in regard to suit for partition and granting possession of share to a daughter as coparcener on finding no substantial question of law. In the instant second appeal, plaintiffs are aggrieved by the dismissal of their suit for partition and\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":270881,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/07\/30\/when-does-a-will-becomes-a-suspicious-document-madhya-pradesh-high-court-answers\/","url_meta":{"origin":268672,"position":2},"title":"When does a Will becomes a suspicious document? Madhya Pradesh High Court answers","author":"Editor","date":"July 30, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Madhya Pradesh High Court: Dwarka Dhish Bansal, J., while dismissing a second appeal held that in presence of prior execution of agreement of Gift, the Will becomes a suspicious document. The factual matrix of the case was that the land in question belonged to a deceased-Vindeshwari Prasad. It\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madhya Pradesh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/06\/MicrosoftTeams-image-250.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":240598,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2020\/12\/12\/hp-hc-or-1-r-10-cpc-due-to-subsequent-events-proforma-defendant-had-started-sailing-in-the-plaintiffs-boat-and-had-acquired-interests-common-to-the-plaintiff-transposition-of-parties\/","url_meta":{"origin":268672,"position":3},"title":"HP HC | [Or. 1 R. 10 CPC] Due to subsequent events, proforma defendant had started sailing in the plaintiff\u2019s boat and had acquired interests common to the plaintiff; Transposition of parties upheld","author":"Editor","date":"December 12, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Himachal Pradesh High Court: Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J., while rejecting the present petition, upheld the decision of the trial court as the transposition seemed to have no effect on the nature and scope of the suit or interest of the parties involved. Background An application moved by one Shri Subhash\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\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":146551,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/08\/01\/high-court-is-empowered-to-dismiss-the-first-appeal-at-preliminary-stage-of-hearing-if-it-lacks-merit\/","url_meta":{"origin":268672,"position":4},"title":"High Court is empowered to dismiss the first appeal at preliminary stage of hearing if it lacks merit","author":"Saba","date":"August 1, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"Karnataka High Court: In an appeal under Section 96 CPC, directed against the judgment and decree passed by the II Additional Senior Civil Judge and JMFC, Tumakuru, in O.S. No. 10\/2014, dismissing the suit for partition and separate possession; and cancellation of documents, a two-Judge Bench comprising of Jayant Patel\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":323035,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/05\/27\/dhc-dismisses-application-seeking-inclusion-of-shares-worth-153000000-alienated-by-karta-of-huf-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":268672,"position":5},"title":"\u2018Can only claim partition of assets of HUF as on the date of institution of suit\u2019; Delhi HC dismisses plea seeking amendment of plaint to include alienated shares worth Rs. 15,30,00,000","author":"Editor","date":"May 27, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Delhi High Court said that in a suit for partition and possession, a relief of declaration sought by way of amendment is impermissible as it would change nature of suit.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Delhi High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Delhi-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/268672","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\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=268672"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/268672\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/267145"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=268672"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=268672"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=268672"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}