2024 INSC January

Bharti Airtel Limited vs Vijaykumar V Iyer 2024 INSC 15 – S 25(2)(a) IBC – Set Off In CIRP

Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 ; Section 25(2)(a)– Rght to claim set-off in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, when the Resolution Professional proceeds in terms of Section 25(2)(a) to take custody and control of all the assets of the corporate debtor.Provisions of statutory set-off in terms of Order VIII Rule 6 of CPC or insolvency …

Bharti Airtel Limited vs Vijaykumar V Iyer 2024 INSC 15 – S 25(2)(a) IBC – Set Off In CIRP Read More »

Perumal Raja @ Perumal vs State 2024 INSC 13 – Ss 27 & 106 Evidence Act

Indian Evidence Act, 1872; Section 25-27 – As soon as an accused or suspected person comes into the hands of a police officer, he is no longer at liberty and is under a check, and is, therefore, in “custody” within the meaning of Sections 25 to 27 of the Evidence Act. It is for this …

Perumal Raja @ Perumal vs State 2024 INSC 13 – Ss 27 & 106 Evidence Act Read More »

Rejendhiran vs Muthaiammal @ Muthayee 2024 INSC 12 – Civil Suit

High Court of Judicature at Madras allowed the Second Appeal filed by the plaintiff and the concurrent judgments of the Trial Court and the Sub-Judge dismissing the suit of the plaintiff were set aside and the suit was decreed – Allowing appeal, Supreme Court held: the impugned judgment cannot be sustained as it not only …

Rejendhiran vs Muthaiammal @ Muthayee 2024 INSC 12 – Civil Suit Read More »

State of NCT of Delhi vs Raj Kumar @ Lovepreet @ Lovely 2024 INSC 11 – S 43D(2)(b) UAPA

Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 ; Section 43 D(2)(b) – The extension for investigation could be granted up to a maximum period of 180 days for the following reasons: Completion of the investigation; Progress in the investigation was explained; and Specific reasons for detention beyond a period of 90 days – In this case, the …

State of NCT of Delhi vs Raj Kumar @ Lovepreet @ Lovely 2024 INSC 11 – S 43D(2)(b) UAPA Read More »

Reliance Life Insurance Company Ltd vs Jaya Wadhwani 2024 INSC 10 – Insurance Law

Insurance – The date of proposal cannot be treated to be the date of policy until and unless on the date of proposal, initial deposit as also the issuance of policy happens on the same date where, for example, the premium is paid in cash then, immediately, the policy could be issued. Merely, tendering a …

Reliance Life Insurance Company Ltd vs Jaya Wadhwani 2024 INSC 10 – Insurance Law Read More »

Brij Narayan Shukla (D) vs Sudesh Kumar Alias Suresh Kumar (D) 2024 INSC 9 – S 100 CPC – Second Appeal- Adverse Possession

Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – The High Court was hearing the Second Appeal under section 100 of Code of Civil Procedure, 19082 and it having reappreciated the findings to disturb findings of fact, committed an error. (Para 9.2) Adverse Possession – The suit of the year 1944 was for the arrears of rent and …

Brij Narayan Shukla (D) vs Sudesh Kumar Alias Suresh Kumar (D) 2024 INSC 9 – S 100 CPC – Second Appeal- Adverse Possession Read More »

Mary Pushpam vs Telvi Curusumary 2024 INSC 8 – Suit For Possession – Doctrine of Merger – Precedents – Judicial Discipline

Civil Suit – Suit for possession has to describe the property in question with accuracy and all details of measurement and boundaries. When this was completely lacking , a suit for possession with respect to such a property would be liable to be dismissed on the ground of its identifiability. (Para 23) Judicial Discipline – …

Mary Pushpam vs Telvi Curusumary 2024 INSC 8 – Suit For Possession – Doctrine of Merger – Precedents – Judicial Discipline Read More »

Radhey Shyam Yadav vs State Of UP 2024 INSC 7 – Service Law

Summary: Appellants were appointed as Assistant Teachers at the Junior High School, Bahorikpur, Maharajganj, District Jaunpur, U.P- From October, 2005, abruptly their salaries were stopped – Writ petition challenging this was dismissed by Allahabad HC – Appeals allowed by Supreme Court with direction that the State shall pay the salaries of the appellants for the …

Radhey Shyam Yadav vs State Of UP 2024 INSC 7 – Service Law Read More »

Neeraj Sharma vs State of Chhattisgarh 2024 INSC 6 – S 364A IPC – S 32 Evidence Act – Injured Eye-Witness

Indian Penal Code, 1860 ; Section 364A – In order to make out an offence under Section 364 A, three conditions must be met: A) There should be a kidnapping or abduction of a person or a person is to be kept in detention after such kidnapping or abduction; B) There is a threat to …

Neeraj Sharma vs State of Chhattisgarh 2024 INSC 6 – S 364A IPC – S 32 Evidence Act – Injured Eye-Witness Read More »