Search Judgments

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) – Section 199(2) & 199(6) – Private complaint for defamation against a public officer.

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 499 (Defamation) – Scope of political criticism and dissent.

Constitution of India – Article 19(1)(a) (Freedom of Speech and Expression) – Right to dissent in a democracy; legitimate criticism of government policies vs. defamation.

Indian Penal Code (IPC) – Section 498A and Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) – Section 374(2) read with Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 – Consideration of Probation.

The appellants, convicted under Section 498A IPC for subjecting the deceased (wife of the 2nd appellant and daughter-in-law of the 1st appellant) to cruelty, challenged their conviction and sentence. The High Court upheld the conviction, reducing the 2nd appellant’s sentence. The Supreme Court observed that both the Sessions Court and the High Court failed to consider granting probation to the appellants.

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Order I Rule 10(2) – This case involves appeals against orders of the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, which had quashed the Trial Court’s decision to implead the appellant (original defendant no. 8) as a defendant in a suit for specific performance. The suit, Regular Civil Suit No. 360-A/2007, was originally filed by the respondent No.

Constitution of India Article 345 to 347 – The appeal concerns the use of Urdu on the signboard of the Municipal Council, Patur, alongside Marathi. The appellant, a former council member, objected to the use of Urdu, arguing that Marathi should be the sole language for official purposes, citing the Maharashtra Local Authorities (Official Languages) Act, 2022. The Municipal Council had earlier rejected her objection, asserting that Urdu was used due to its familiarity among council members and residents.

The Collector initially allowed the appellant’s application under Section 308 of the 1965 Act, ordering the exclusive use of Marathi.

Maharashtra Ownership of Flats (Regulation of the Promotion of Construction, Sale, Management and Transfer) Act, 1963 – Section 5/11 – This case involves an appeal against a Bombay High Court judgment that upheld an order for a unilateral deed of assignment in favor of Prakash Apartment Co-operative Housing Society Limited (respondent No.2-Society). The District Deputy Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Mumbai/Competent Authority, had initially dismissed the Society’s application for conveyance due to legal complications, directing them to seek resolution from a Civil Court. The Society filed a fresh application without addressing these complications, which was then approved by the Competent Authority. The appellant, the landowner, challenged this decision, arguing that the second application was barred by res judicata and that the Competent Authority lacked the power to review its initial order.

Registration Act, 1908 – Sections 17(1)(b) & 49(c): A document that purports to create, declare, or transfer an interest in immovable property valued at over Rs. 100 must be compulsorily registered. An unregistered document cannot be admitted as evidence of a transaction affecting such property.

Transfer of Property Act, 1882 – Section 54: A sale of tangible immovable property valued at Rs.

Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) – Moulding of Relief – The concept of moulding of relief allows a court to modify a relief sought, based on the case’s circumstances and established facts. The aim is to serve justice, considering the evolving nature of the case, through flexibility, equitable jurisdiction, and judicial discretion. The moulded relief is an exception, not a matter of course, and should not cause prejudice.

Will- The testator bequeathed properties to the Trust and a few individuals, the court found that the Trust cannot claim the relief of declaration vis-a-vis the Plaint Schedule. The court also found that the testator made an independent disposition in favour of Vinayagamurthy and his children in the Plaint Schedule.

Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Sections 63, 68, 69; Indian Succession Act – Section 63 – Partition Suit – Proof of Will. – The case concerns a partition suit where the defendant presented a Will (Ex.B8) claiming absolute ownership of suit property No.1. The plaintiffs challenged the validity of the Will, asserting it was fabricated. The trial court granted a preliminary decree, dividing suit property No.1 equally among the plaintiffs and the defendant, while dismissing the claim regarding suit property No.2.

• Hindu Law – Marriage & Succession (Pre-1955): For a claim of inheritance or partition of property in a Hindu family before the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, a strict standard of proof is required to establish a legally wedded marital relationship. The presumption of marriage from long-term cohabitation cannot be invoked if the male party had more than one sexual partner.
• Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 101: The burden of proving a claim, particularly a contested marriage, lies on the party asserting it. Descriptions of a person in documents as “beloved woman” (Abhimana Stri) do not denote a legally wedded wife and, in fact, refer to a concubine.
• Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 – Section 16: Section 16 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, which legitimizes children born from void or voidable marriages, does not apply retrospectively. The children born outside of a valid marriage before the Act’s commencement cannot claim a right to partition or inheritance in the ancestral properties.
• Partition Suit – Locus Standi: A partition suit is only maintainable by individuals who have a pre-existing right and share in the property.

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) – Section 138 and 141, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) – Section 482 – This case involves an appeal against a High Court judgment that dismissed petitions seeking to quash criminal proceedings initiated under Section 138 read with Section 141 of the NI Act. The appellants, K.S. Mehta and Basant Kumar Goswami, were non-executive directors of M/s Blue Coast Hotels & Resorts Ltd.

The dispute arose from dishonored cheques issued for repayment of an Inter-Corporate Deposit (ICD).