Legal News & Views

In a recent judgement, the Hon'ble Orissa High Court in the matter of CHANDANESWAR ENTERPRISES LTD. VERSUS INDUSTRIAL PROMOTION & INVESTMENT CORPORATION OF ORISSA LTD., addressed the issue of forfeiture of earnest money. The fact was that the Corporation had auctioned some properties for which the petitioner appeared as the highest bidder and as per agreement deposited an EMD of Rs. 1 lacs. However, the Corporation as well as the petitioner laid down certain conditions which were not acceptable to either party. Under the circumstances, the sale did not go through and the Corporation forfeited the EMD and came out with further advertisements for sale/auction of the properties. On each occasion the petitioner remained the highest bidder. Finally, the Corporation decided to accept the petitioner as the highest bidder but refused to adjust the forfeited EMD with the new offer. On petitioner appealing before the hon'ble court, the court opined that:- 5. The sole point tha...

In a recent judgment in CHARANJIT PAL JINDAL vs L.N. METALICS, it was held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that when a company is accused/implicated in dishonour of cheques under Section 138/141 of the NI Act, the company must be impleaded first and only then can the directors or authorised persons of the company be impleaded.

Interestingly it appears that among other issues a particular point name mutation in land related matters keep on coming up before the various court of laws and while some aspect of it has been decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court as early as 1996, the same issue keeps on getting decided incorrectly. Case 1 H. LAKSHMAIAH REDDY & ORS. VS L. VENKATESH REDDY, Civil Appeal Nos. 3725-3726 of 2015 [Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos. 3377-3378 of 2011]-Decided on 17-4-2015.  Held: The assumption on the part of the High Court that as a result of the mututation, 1st defendant divested himself of the title and possession of half share in suit property is wrong. The mutation entries do not convey or extinguish any title and those entries are relevant only for the purpose of collection of land revenue. The observations of this Court in Balwant Singh's case (supra) are relevant and are extracted below :          ...

In a recent judgment in  SURINDER SINGH vs PIARA SINGH, while deciding on various issues related to a disputed will, the Hon'ble court held that :- 1) When attesting witnesses not found that, it becomes incumbent upon the propounder of the Will to prove two facts (i) that the attestation of one attesting witness atleast was in his handwriting; and (ii) that the signatures of the executant is in his handwriting. 2) A Will is not a document which can be admitted in evidence without complying with the provisions specifically stipulated for proving the same.

In a judgment, a bench comprising of VM Kanade and CB Colabawalla, JJ  has ruled that a widow, even after she has remarried, has the rights over her former husband's properties. In the present case, the petition was filed by a man against his former sister-in-law who had claimed the right over her deceased husband’s properties after she married another man. The brother of the deceased relied  on the provisions of the  Hindu Widows' Re-marriage Act, 1856, which stated the limited right and interest which a widow had in her deceased husband’s property would cease to exist if she remarries without express permission, and the next heirs of her deceased husband, or other persons entitled to the property, shall thereupon succeed to the same. The Court ruled that provisions of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 would prevail over the repealed Hindu Widows' Remarriage Act, 1856. There was no provision in the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 which was pari materia with section 2 of the ...

The Kerala High Court on Thursday refused permission to the Travancore Devaswom Board to construct a Convention Centre near Shanghumugham Beach. According to TDB, the land was situated very close to Sanghumugham beach and the international airport. Considering the commercial importance of the locality, the board had decided to construct a convention center. The Court observed that the primary purpose of the Devaswom Boards was to put those lands to use in connection with the activities of the temple and religious, spiritual, cultural and other aspects which are intricately connected with the activities of the temple. Any activity of the Devaswom Boards, which are merely the statutory guardians of devaswom lands, to put such property to commercial use should be restricted to the bare minimum and which is indispensable in the context of any particular locality or temple. It has also to be done only by ensuring that any such investment generates appropriate income. Article referred:...

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission has dismissed an appeal by Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Ltd (HPCL) against an order by a lower body that imposed heavy damages on the company after faulty fixation of gas-tube led to an explosion at the premises of a customer. HPCL and its gas agency were told to pay Rs 2.25 lakh in damages and Rs 25,000 in terms of compensation to V Venkateshwar Reddy, a resident of Kurnool in Andhra Pradesh, though both of them tried to shift the responsibility for the accident from themselves. Both HPCL and the gas agency argued that the explosion was not caused by any fault of theirs. The gas agency said the pipe was fixed at 10.30 a.m. and the explosion occured after almost 15 hours. So, it said, the fault could not have been in how the repair was carried out. HPCL, on its part, said it had a pre-existing agreement with its gas agency that the gas agency’s actions were as ‘principal’ and not as an agent of HPCL. As a result, the agency...