Search Judgments

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) – Section 7, 35, 61 & IBBI Regulations, 2016 – Regulation 31A, 33, 47A & National Company Law Tribunal Rules, 2016 – Rule 11 – The case involves appeals against the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order dismissing appeals filed by V.S. Palanivel, a shareholder of Sri Lakshmi Hotel Private Limited. The appeals arose from liquidation proceedings under the IBC, challenging the e-auction of the company’s property and related orders. Key issues include the validity of extending the timeline for the auction purchaser to deposit the balance sale consideration due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the alleged undervaluation of the property, and the non-constitution of a Stakeholders Consultation Committee.

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 (MVA) – Section 166 – This judgment addresses whether amounts received under employer-provided group insurance schemes should be deducted from motor accident compensation. The appeals arose from two distinct accidents where victims, P. Visweswar and Celestine Dsouza, died due to negligent driving.

In both cases, Motor Accident Claims Tribunals (MACT) awarded compensation but deducted sums received by claimants from their deceased’s employer’s group insurance.

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 34 – The petitioner contested an arbitral award, claiming a reconstitution deed, which allegedly showed his resignation from a partnership firm (“S J Infra”), was fabricated. The petitioner claimed that blank, signed stamp papers were misused to create the deed. He sought a declaration that the deed was invalid and demanded 50% of the firm’s profits from June 1, 2019, onwards.

The respondents argued the petitioner knowingly signed the deed and was a dormant partner.

The Limitation Act, 1963 Section 22, Article 113 –  The case pertains to an employee (plaintiff) seeking notional increments for his non-employment period from May 1991 to December 1996 and appropriate pay scale fitment from his reinstatement date (December 1996). This claim arose from a High Court order (W.P.No.17225 of 1991) directing his reinstatement with “continuity of service” but without backwages. The defendants (Bank) challenged the trial court’s decree, which granted the plaintiff Rs.10,01,000/-.

The Bank contended that “continuity of service” does not automatically entitle the plaintiff to notional increments, and that the suit was barred by limitation, applying Article 113 of the Limitation Act, 1963, as the claim was allegedly rejected in 2003.

Indian Penal Code (IPC) – Sections 324, 302, 147, 148, 323, 506(2), 120(B), 452, 326 r/w 34; Tamil Nadu Prohibition of Harassment of Woman Act (TNPHW Act) – Section 4 – The case revolves around an incident on March 30, 2015, where Murugan (PW1) and his wife Savithiri were attacked. The prosecution alleged that John Joseph (A1), along with others, assaulted them due to prior enmity stemming from a cow trespassing incident. Savithiri later died, leading to charges under Section 302 IPC. The trial court convicted A1 under Sections 324 and 302 IPC, while acquitting the other accused (A2-A4) due to inconsistencies in the prosecution’s evidence.

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Section 411 & 379 (BNS 2023 Section 303 and 317(2)) – The case revolves around the murder of M. Narsaiah, who was allegedly killed by Moulana due to business rivalry, with the assistance of the appellant. The prosecution alleged that Moulana stole money from the deceased and paid the appellant to dispose of the body. The Trial Court acquitted both accused of murder, destruction of evidence, and theft but convicted them under Section 411 IPC for possessing stolen property.

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Section 37 – This case involves an appeal against a High Court order, which upheld an arbitral award rejecting the appellant’s claims for compensation related to delays in a construction project. The core issue revolves around the enforceability of clause 49.5 of the General Conditions of Contract (GCC), which prevents the contractor from claiming damages for delays caused by the employer, only allowing for extensions of time.

The appellant argued that the arbitral award was against public policy and suffered from patent illegality, as it enforced a clause that allegedly contravenes the Indian Contract Act, 1872. They claimed the delays were attributable to the respondent and sought damages for the financial burden incurred.

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 – This Civil Miscellaneous Appeal was filed by the Transport Corporation against the Motor Accident Claims Tribunal’s order, which awarded compensation to the claimant who suffered severe injuries in an accident involving a Transport Corporation bus. The claimant, a Havildar Clerk in the Military, sustained multiple grievous injuries, including the amputation of his right leg, rendering him permanently disabled. The accident occurred due to the alleged rash and negligent driving of the bus driver.

The Tribunal awarded a total compensation of Rs.

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) – Sections 7, 13(1)(d), 13(1)(e), 13(2); Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 107, 409, 201, 120-B; Bihar Special Courts Act, 2009 (BSCA) – Sections 13, 14, 15, 19 – The State of Bihar challenged a High Court judgment that set aside confiscation proceedings against the spouse of a deceased public servant. The public servant was accused under the PC Act and IPC for amassing disproportionate assets. An Authorised Officer had ordered confiscation of these assets, some held in his wife’s name. The High Court, however, ruled that upon the public servant’s death, the BSCA provided no mechanism to continue such proceedings, thus applying a presumption of innocence and setting aside the confiscation order.

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) – Sections 120B, 302, 364, 384, 355, 201, 143, 147, 148, 149, 34; Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (Cr.P.C) – Section 439 – This case involves an appeal by the State of Karnataka challenging a High Court order that granted bail to several accused individuals in connection with Crime No. 250 of 2024. The crime, registered at Kamakshipalya Police Station, Bengaluru, pertains to the alleged abduction and murder of one Renukaswamy, who was purportedly killed for sending obscene messages to one of the accused.

The prosecution’s case rests on circumstantial evidence, including eyewitness testimonies, forensic reports indicating the presence of the deceased’s blood on items recovered from the accused, and digital evidence suggesting a conspiracy.