Legal News & Views

The state consumer commission recently ordered the Bank of Baroda to pay compensation of Rs 3 lakh to a former employee for refusing to pay its contribution towards his provident fund. The commission also directed the bank to pay P Unnikrishnan Rs 1.33 lakh of the provident fund amount due to him. Unnikrishnan filed the appeal in the Maharashtra State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission in 2005 after a district forum, while directing the bank to pay interest on the provident fund, rejected his plea with respect to the contribution of the bank towards the provident fund. In his appeal, the complainant said that he was an employee of the bank and his services were terminated. His provident fund as far as his contribution was concerned was given by the bank, but it was delayed. The officials refused to disburse the contribution of the bank towards his provident fund. Unnikrishnan filed a complaint for interest on the amount which was given late by the bank. He also sought the co

Madras High Court Bench has ruled that if the pay revision for an employee who died in a mishap comes into effect from the date when that person was alive, then adoption of revised salary for arriving at compensation cannot be said to be illegal. The addition of 30 per cent towards future prospects was also correct as the deceased, in this case a professor, was 46 years old when he died. "If the age is between 40 and 50, addition of income for future prospects should be 30 per cent. The trial court is correct in fixing the compensation," Justices V Ramasubramanian and V M Velumani said. Prof. Ramaswamy died in a road mishap on July 10 2006. The tribunal took into account that though the Professor's last drawn pay was Rs 29,320, the Sixth Pay Commission's recommendations were implemented from Jan 1 2006. It then fixed his last drawn salary as Rs 49,710 and arrived at a compensation of Rs 58,89,652. The New India Assurance company assailed the finding, saying t

A district consumer forum recently directed the Oriental Insurance Company Limited to pay the over Rs 2 lakh spent by a Mulund resident, Arvind Thakkar, to bring back the dead body of his wife, Rashmi, from America. The forum observed that a clause in the insurance said the company would bear the transfer charges of the body, and hence the company could not reject the claim sighting the 'cause of death'. The forum, headed by SS Vyavahare and member SR Sanap, directed the company to pay Thakkar the cost of transferring the body along with 10 per cent interest from the date of filing the complaint till disbursal of the amount. In addition, the insurance company also should pay a compensation of Rs 10,000 for the mental agony it caused to the complainant, as well as Rs 2,500 towards litigation cost. As per the complaint filed by Thakkar through NGO Consumer Welfare Association, he had taken the insurance policy for a period starting from March 22, 2009 to September 17, 2009.

The apex consumer commission has directed an insurance company to pay around Rs one crore claim to three firms, which were insured with it, for their loss caused due to fire in their garments unit in Tripura in 1998. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) asked the Oriental Insurance Company Ltd to pay a total of Rs 98,02,863 as claim to Tripura-based firms Sri Priyaluckshmi Garments, Sri Priyaluckshmi Exports and Sri Priyaluckshmi Apparels. "We direct the opposite parties (insurance company) to pay the complainants (three firms) Rs 98,02,863 (a sum of Rs 74,69,331, Rs 14,25,073 and Rs 9,08,459 respectively)," the bench presided by Justice J M Malik said, adding the amount would be paid with interest from the date of the incident in 1998. The bench, also comprising member S M Kantikar, directed the insurance company to pay a compensation of Rs five lakh to the three firms. The bench passed the order on a complaint jointly filed by the three firms

A court cannot issue non-bailable warrants (NBWs) against defaulters without first adopting other remedies available under law to recover arrears, the Bombay High Court has held while quashing a warrant issued against a man for failing to pay interim maintenance to his estranged wife. The Nagpur bench of the high court was hearing a petition filed by Sachin Bodhale challenging an April 2 order by a magistrate court issuing non-bailable warrant against him fter he failed to pay the maintenance amount to his wife. Sachin’s wife had lodged a complaint against him under the Protection of Women from Domestic Violence (DV) Act. The magistrate had passed an interim order granting monetary relief. Sachin’s lawyer Sudhir Moharir argued that the magistrate while issuing the non bailable warrant was of the view that under section 28 (2) of the DV Act, the court had the power to adopt any procedure to ensure recovery of the maintenance amount. Justice M L Tahaliyani was of the view that the

Can an order dictated in an open court in the presence of lawyers and parties be recalled by judges? The Supreme Court has ruled in the affirmative, holding that even an order which has been pronounced in an open court can be recalled in the interest of justice and that there was no impediment in the law against it. A three-judge bench headed by Justice B S Chuhan has said there is no provision in the law as well as the corresponding rules that restrains a court from changing its order if the one dictated in the open court is subsequently found to be suffering with grave infirmities, either on facts or on law. “A judge’s responsibility is very heavy…particularly in a case where a man’s life and liberty hang upon his decision, nothing can be left to chance or doubt or conjecture. Therefore, one cannot assume that the judge would not have changed his mind before the judgment becomes final,” held the court. According liberty to the judges to change their orders even after dictati

All the partners of a company cannot be made accused in a criminal case arising out of a defective product unless there is specific allegation in the complaint regarding responsibility of each of the partners in the conduct of business, the Kerala high court has held. The ruling by Justice K Ramakrishnan came after considering a petition filed by Mukesh Bhagubhai Patel, Miteshbhai Jeshingbhai Patel, and Gargiben Atulbhai Patel, who are partners of Ahmedabad-based Indica Laboratories. In the petition filed in the high court, they had challenged the case against them on the file of Karunagappally judicial first class magistrate court naming them as the third, fifth, and sixth accused, respectively. The case was registered on a complaint filed by Kollam drugs inspector alleging sale of a substandard drug, thereby violating provisions of Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940. Appearing for the petitioners, advocate V V Raja argued that they are only sleeping partners and they have nothing

If a student meets with a road accident and becomes permanently disabled, his/her potential future earnings must be taken into consideration by the Motor Accident Claims Tribunals and High Courts in order to award a just compensation. This was ruled by the Supreme Court while ordering a compensation of Rs. 30.93 lakh to a girl who lost both legs in an accident in 2005 when she was 16 years old. A Bench of Justices Gyan Sudha Misra (since retired) and V. Gopala Gowda said, “Having regard to the undisputed fact that there has been inflation of money in the country since the occurrence of the accident, the same has to be taken into account by the tribunal. The fact that the appellant [in this case] was a brilliant student at the time of the accident should also be taken into consideration while awarding the compensation to her. Thus, the claimant-appellant, V. Mekala, is entitled to a total amount of Rs. 30.93 lakh as compensation with an interest at 9 per cent per annum.” The appell

A person taken to custody under preventive detention without trial cannot be kept in continuous confinement as it curtails his liberty and civil rights, the Supreme Court has said. "Normally, a person who is detained under the provisions of the Act is without facing trial which in other words amounts to curtailment of his liberties and denial of civil rights. In such cases, whether continuous detention of such person is necessary or not, is to be assessed and reviewed from time to time," a bench of justices Ranjana Prakash Desai (since retired) and N V Ramana said. Taking into consideration these factors, the Legislature has specifically provided the mechanism 'Advisory Board' to review the detention of a person. The court's ruling came while setting aside the detention order of a person under the Andhra Pradesh Prevention of Dangerous Activities of Bootleggers, Dacoits, Drug Offenders, Goondas, Immoral Traffic Offenders and Land Grabbers Act, 1986. The b

The Madras High Court has made it clear that the moment property is given in favour of a Hindu woman, she becomes the absolute owner despite the restrictions and limitations contained in the settlement deed. Justice S Vimala delivered the judgment while dismissing an appeal filed by Jayalakshmi Ammal, second wife of one Dharmarajapillai, against the order of Cuddalore District Court in favour of the sale of property by first wife Swarnathammal to Kaliaperumal. Jayalakshmi Ammal contended that the power conferred under the settlement was only a limited one and not absolute. Rejecting the contention,the judge said the express language used in the settlement deed interpreted in the light of Section 14 of the Hindu Succession Act, would lead to the conclusion that what was conferred was only an absolute one and not a limited estate. "Therefore the first wife has got every right to dispose the property and the sale is valid. Therefore purchaser of the property is succeeded and

RBI/2013-14/581 DBOD.No.Leg.BC.108/09.07.005/2013-14 May 6, 2014 All Scheduled Commercial Banks (excluding RRBs) Dear Sir/Madam, Opening of Bank Accounts in the Names of Minors Please refer to our  circular DBOD.No.Leg.BC.158/C.90(H)-76 dated December 29, 1976  wherein banks were advised to allow minors’ accounts (fixed and savings deposit accounts) with mothers as guardians to be opened subject to safeguards in allowing operations in such accounts by ensuring that the minors’ accounts opened with guardian are not allowed to be overdrawn and that these always remain in credit. Also, please refer to our  circular DBOD.No.Leg.BC.19/C.90(H)-89 dated September 8, 1989 extending the facility, of allowing opening of minors’ account with mothers as guardian, to Recurring Deposits. 2. Further, with a view to promote the objective of financial inclusion and also to bring uniformity among banks in opening and operating minors’ accounts, banks are advised as under: A savings /fixe

While the above can be treated as a secondary question, one more question which arose before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala in a recent case of R Romi Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Thiruvananthapuram reported in 2014- TOIL-424-HC-KERALA-IT was whether a block assessment can be completed without issuing a notice u/s 143[2] of the Indian Income Tax Act. Briefing down the facts of the case, pursuant to a search U/s 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the assesse was assessed U/s 143(3) of Income Tax Act read with Section 158BC, for the block period of almost ten years commencing from 01.04.1985 to 15.09.1995. Notice under Section 158BC was issued to the Assessee on 25.06.1996. The Assessee filed a NIL return of income and subsequently the AO passed an order U/s 143(3) read with Section 158 BC determining the total undisclosed income at Rs. 9, 55, 380/- and demanding income tax of Rs. 5, 73, 228/-. PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL: On appeal before the Tribunal it was contende

The Pune district consumer disputes redressal forum has directed a private insurance company to pay Rs 15.87 lakh to a customer for deficient service by wrongly repudiating his insurance claim for damage caused by fire to his new car and for causing mental and physical agony. The forum dismissed the complaint against the car manufacturer and the dealer. The complainant, Kishor L Nimhan, had purchased a new Skoda car for Rs 16.44 lakh from Acumen Motors Private Limited, Aundh, in 2006. He got the car insured for Rs 15.62 lakh with the Royal Sundaram Alliance Insurance Company Limited for a period between November 21, 2006, and November 30, 2007, and paid a premium of Rs 61,535 for the same. On June 6, 2007, the car caught fire while it was in a stationary, switched-off mode in the parking place at Nimhan's residence. He had then reported the matter to the police and the car manufacturer as the vehicle was badly damaged. In the ensuing developments, Nimhan sent notices to both S

That October morning in 2009, a vendor at Chennai airport decided to make an extra Rs 75. Five years later, he may be poorer by Rs 50 lakh. Charging a customer double for an energy drink has attracted a strong censure from the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) and a fine of Rs50 lakh for the vendor- Snack Bar, a unit of Saptagiri Restaurant. NCDRC lambasted Snack Bar for having collected Rs150 for a can of Red Bull from Delhi resident D K Chopra, while the retail price was Rs75. It also came down heavily on airport authorities who it said were “working in cahoots” with stall owners to obtain higher rates for licences. The commission directed the stall owner also to pay Rs10,000 to Chopra. Chopra bought the drink at the airport in October 2009. Unhappy over being charged almost double, he issued a legal notice, but the stall-owner did not reply. Chopra then moved the District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum (DCDRF) for a compensation of Rs2 lakh for “harassm

The Central Mumbai consumer dispute redressal forum on Monday directed the Tata Motors and one of its subsidiary firms, M/s Concorde Motors, to pay Rs1.5 lakh compensation to a Santa Cruz-based resident after the two failed to provide him car model that he booked. The forum has directed the two to pay the amount with nine per cent interest rate from 2012. the forum has also directed them to pay an additional amount of Rs10,000 to the complainant towards his litigation cost. On October 31, 2011, Pankaj Mathur had booked a car named Tata Indigo Manza New Aura. Mathur booked the car with special features like the rear demister, tilt adjustable power steering, ab power outlet in the rear cabin by paying a booking amount of Rs50,000. However, at the time of taking delivery on November 14, 2011, he realised that the special features were not installed in the car. The firms then issued an apology letter and offered him a discount of Rs5,000 for their mistake. The firms, in their reply

he Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that minority institutions were outside the ambit of the Right To Education (RTE) Act and they cannot be hence obligated to reserve 25 per cent seats for students from socially and economically weaker sections of the society. The court, however, upheld the constitutional validity of the social welfare legislation enacted with Constitutional amendments which places an obligation on unaided private schools to reserve 25 per cent seats for such wards. A constitution bench led by Chief Justice R M Lodha upheld the validity of Articles 15(5) and 21A, by virtue of which unaided private schools are also obligated to reserve 25 per cent seats for students from weaker sections. It, however, clarified that minority institutions could not be asked to do so since the Act did not operate on them in this respect. The bunch of petitions by the Karnataka-based institutions have contended that a three-judge bench ruling on the validity of the RTE Act did not deal w

The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that a government cannot impose a language, including the mother tongue, as the only medium of instruction for primary education. A five-judge constitution bench held that imposition of a language by the state government affects the fundamental rights of the parents and the children, who are authorised to decide on their mother tongue. “The right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a) of the Constitution includes the freedom of a child to be educated at the primary stage of school in a language of the choice of the child and the state cannot impose controls on such choice just because it thinks that it will be more beneficial for the child if he is taught in the primary stage of school in his mother tongue,” held Justice A K Patnaik, author of the judgment. “We, therefore, hold that a child. or on his behalf his parent or guardian, has a right to freedom of choice with regard to the medium of instruction in which he would like

Tamil Nadu tops the suicide chart in the country and 'victims' cite such petty reasons as verbal abuse by teachers or spouses, to serious reasons such as dowry harassment by inlaws or intimidation by creditors. Can everyone named in suicide notes left behind by the victims be treated as 'offenders', prosecuted and jailed for 'abetting' or instigating the suicide? Clarifying all these vital factors in the backdrop of sound legal principles, Justice P Devadass of the Madras high court has said that merely because a person has been named in a suicide note, courts should not immediately jump to the conclusion that he is an offender. Mere abuses or reprimanding someone or casual remark or words stated in a fit of anger could not be termed 'abetment' and people named in the suicide note could not be treated as 'abettors' of suicide, he said. "If a person makes an ordinary joke or a casual remark in routine course of ordinary lie, and then i

In a May Day gift to the working class, the Madras High Court today made it clear that denying any union member entry to the union office inside the workplace premises amounts to denial of Fundamental Right guaranteed under Article 19(1)(a) to (c) of the Constitution and statutory rights guaranteed under the Trade Unions Act. Justice D Hariparanthaman stated this while rejecting the petition of the management of Tamil Nadu Petroproducts Limited Heavy Chemicals Division that allowing entry to P Anburajaaraman, vice-president of the employees union, facing suspension and departmental enquiry, would create disturbance to industrial peace. "The action of the management would amount to unfair labour practice as defined under Section 2(ra) read with clause 1 and 9 of the Fifth Schedule of the Industrial Disputes Act 1947. There is no statutory prohibition of commission of unfair labour practice under Section 25-T of the Industrial Disputes Act,1947," the judge said. The peti

The Supreme Court has ruled that an open offer voluntarily made through a public announcement for purchase of shares of the target company cannot be withdrawn when the offer becomes uneconomical to be performed. Allowing the appeal of the Securities & Exchange Board of India (Sebi) against the order of the Securities Appellate Tribunal (SAT) in the case of Akshya Infrastructure Ltd, the court said permitting such withdrawal "would give a field day to unscrupulous elements in the securities market to make public announcements for acquiring shares in the target company, knowing perfectly well that they can pull out when the prices of shares have been inflated due to the public offer". It added that such speculative practices have been sought to be prevented by Regulation 27 of the Take-over Regulations. The court further stated that SAT had gone wrong in invoking the Issue of Capital and Disclosure Requirement Regulations 2009 in this context. Article referred: http://ww

Magistrate courts across the country should decide on cheque bouncing cases in three months, the Supreme Court has directed. The SC has also directed magistrates to scrutinize cheque bouncing complaints on the day they are lodged, if the documents attached are in order, and issue summons immediately. The Indian Banks' Association had moved the SC seeking directions to magistrates to adopt policy and legislative changes for cheque bouncing cases. The banks had alleged that due to the delay in disposing of such cases, they find it difficult to recover the blocked money. The SC has also observed that summons must be properly addressed and sent by post and email. In appropriate cases, magistrates may take the assistance of police or nearby courts to serve notices. While a short date should be fixed for notice of appearance, if the summons is unserved, immediate follow-up action should be taken, the SC said. The SC has clarified that in the summons, magistrates may indicate tha

Bombay High Court: Acquitting a South African woman of the charges of possessing narcotic substances, a division bench comprising of VK Tahilramani and VL Achilya, JJ observed that Air Intelligence Unit (AIU) had failed to follow the proper procedure of informing the suspect that he/she had the ‘right’ to be searched before a gazetted officer or magistrate. In the present case, the suspect was searched at the airport and a bag of heroin was found from a false bottom in her belongings. Thereafter, she was sentenced to life imprisonment by a special court. The Counsel for the appellant argued that the accused person has a right under Section 50 of the NDPS Act to be searched only before a gazetted officer or a magistrate. The officers have to inform the accused of this right and then carry out the search. Accepting this, the Court noted that informing an accused of his or her right is ‘not an empty formality’. The Court stated that such a requirement of law prescribed under Section 50 c

Supreme Court: The constitutional bench comprising of R.M. Lodha, CJ and A. K. Patnaik, S.J. Mukhopadhaya, Dipak Misra and Fakkir Kalifulla, JJ in reference to the Society for Unaided Private Schools of Rajasthan v. Union of India (2012) 6 SCC 102, held that insertion of Article 21A and Article 15(5) of the Constitution by the Eighty-Sixth (2002) and Ninety-Third (2005) Amendment, respectively, does not alter the Basic Structure of the Constitution and is constitutionally valid in particular reference to private-unaided schools. The Court emphasized upon the failure of Article 15 in achieving the goal of 'equal treatment without discrimination by State' to hold Article 15(5) of the Constitution as a necessary addition and that Article 21A was inserted to give effect to the Directive Principle of State regarding education in Article 45 of the Constitution. The Court then elucidated that the right of private educational institutions under Article 19(1)(g) was not destroyed by ad