Matrimonial Law – Permanent Alimony – Appeal and Modification – The Family Court dissolved the marriage between the appellant and the respondent, directing the appellant to pay ₹14,00,000/- as permanent alimony. On appeal (MATA No. 64 of 2018), the High Court reduced the alimony to ₹10,00,000/-, with a direction for payment within four months. Failing timely payment, the amount was to carry 6% interest from the date of filing the appeal. The appellant’s special leave petition to the Supreme Court was dismissed. Payment was made post-dismissal. The court held that pursuing legal remedies in the Supreme Court does not constitute willful default, acknowledging immediate compliance post-dismissal [Paras 1-9].

Execution and Satisfaction of Order – The High Court recorded the execution, discharge, and satisfaction of its order dated 9th February 2023, noting the appellant’s bona fide in pursuing the special leave petition and immediate payment post-dismissal. Directed the Executing Court to dispose of Civil Execution Case No. 11 of 2018 accordingly [Para 8-9].

Decision: Appeal disposed of. Execution and satisfaction of order recorded. Directions issued for disposal of Civil Execution Case No. 11 of 2018.
 

Criminal Law – Conviction Reversed: Appeal challenges the conviction and sentence imposed by the Sessions Court based on conflicting dying declarations of the deceased. High Court observed material contradictions between the two declarations, leading to acquittal due to lack of reliable and consistent evidence [Paras 14-25].

Dying Declarations – Inconsistencies: Two dying declarations recorded; the first before the police (Ex.P/6) and the second before the Magistrate (Ex.D/10). Significant discrepancies between these declarations regarding identities of the assailants and incident circumstances undermined the reliability of the prosecution’s case [Paras 15-18].

Witness Testimony – Reliability: Sole eyewitness, Naseeb Kaur (PW.3), provided statements containing contradictions deemed unreliable. Court stressed need for independent corroborative evidence to support conviction, which was absent [Paras 19-20].

Judicial Precedents on Dying Declarations: Court cited several precedents emphasizing need for consistency in multiple dying declarations and preference for declarations recorded by a Magistrate over those by police officers, especially when material contradictions are present [Paras 18.1-18.3].

Decision: Appeal allowed, conviction and sentence passed by Sessions Judge quashed. Appellant acquitted of charges under Sections 302/34 and 447 IPC. Bail bonds discharged [Paras 24-25].
 

Building Permits – Unauthorized Construction – Petitioners constructed a building on a parking area originally designated under a valid permit – Panchayat cancelled the permit upon discovering the misuse – Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions ordered partial occupancy, which was contested – High Court held the construction illegal and upheld the Panchayat’s cancellation – Petitioners directed to either demolish the unauthorized construction or provide an equivalent parking area [Paras 1-11].

Jurisdiction and Powers – Local Self Government – Tribunal’s Order – Tribunal directed partial occupancy and numbering of building despite unauthorized construction – High Court found Tribunal’s order erroneous as it conflicted with established legal provisions – Emphasized necessity of compliance with original permit conditions and due process in construction approvals [Paras 4-9].

Property Rights and Dispute Resolution – Pending Civil Suit – Noted that a civil suit for partition was ongoing between the parties – Highlighted the importance of resolving proprietary rights through civil court – Interim relief granted to petitioners to avoid building disuse, allowing conditional numbering and occupancy subject to final civil court decision [Paras 5-10].

Decision: Writ Petitions Partly Allowed – High Court set aside Tribunal’s partial occupancy order – Upheld Panchayat’s permit cancellation – Directed Panchayat to number remaining rooms temporarily – Petitioners to bear expenses – Final occupancy subject to civil court decision in ongoing partition suit.

Arbitration – Non-Signatory Bound by Arbitration Clause – Appellant, a purchaser of property from vendors bound by an arbitration agreement, contended that it was not bound by the arbitration clause as it was not a signatory. The court held that a non-signatory, claiming through or under a party to the arbitration agreement, is bound by the arbitration clause. The court applied the principle established in the Cox and Kings case, interpreting Section 8 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 [Paras 1-18].

Lis Pendens – Application to Arbitration Proceedings – The court held that the doctrine of lis pendens applies to proceedings under Section 9 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. Thus, any transfer of property during such proceedings is subject to the outcome of the arbitration [Paras 19-24].

Interim Measures – Arbitration and Conciliation Act – The court modified the interim restraint order to remain in force for 45 days from the date of receipt of notice from the Arbitral Tribunal or until any interim measures are passed by the Tribunal, whichever is earlier [Paras 25-38].

Decision – Appeal allowed in part – Held – The interim measure dated 15.04.2024, in A.A.No.15002/2024 before V Additional District Judge Bengaluru Rural, shall remain in force for 45 days from the date of receipt of notice issued by the Arbitral Tribunal on the parties to the proceeding before the Arbitral Tribunal or till any interim measures/orders passed by the Arbitral Tribunal on an application by either of the parties, whichever is earlier. All contentions on merit, including whether the arbitration clause is binding on the appellant, are kept open to be decided by the Tribunal.

Sanction for Prosecution – Retrospective application of amended Section 19 of the PC Act – Court held the amendment to Section 19(1) of the PC Act, which requires sanction to prosecute retired public servants, applies prospectively from the date of cognizance of the offence, not from the date of offence or FIR – Refusal of sanction by the Secretary, Industries Department, was set aside due to non-application of mind and misappreciation of evidence – Direction to re-examine sanction request [Paras 8-14, 20-23, 27-35].

Application of Central Vigilance Commission Guidelines – Court found that KSCDC, being a public sector undertaking, is bound by the Store Purchase Manual and CVC Guidelines, contrary to findings of the sanctioning authority – Allegations of diversion of funds and irregular awarding of tenders substantiate the need for sanction [Paras 20-21].

Officers of Public Sector Undertakings – Protection under Section 197 Cr.P.C not applicable to officers of public sector undertakings – Such officers cannot claim the requirement of prior sanction for prosecution under Section 197 Cr.P.C, even though they are public servants [Paras 31-33].

Decision: Writ Petition allowed in part – Ext.P3 order declining sanction set aside – Direction to the Secretary, Industries Department, to reconsider CBI’s request for sanction within three months – Proceedings in CC No. 45/2021 on the file of CJM Court, Thiruvananthapuram, stayed until decision on sanction is made – Criminal Miscellaneous Cases dismissed.
 

Criminal Law – Cheating and Criminal Breach of Trust – Petitioners accused of inducing the respondent to supply goods based on false promises and then failing to make full payment – Trial court issued summons based on prima facie evidence – High Court finds no fraudulent or dishonest inducement at the beginning of the transaction, and the disputes are purely civil in nature – Proceedings and order issuing summons quashed [Paras 1-20].

Section 482 Cr.P.C. – Quashing of Proceedings – Court’s inherent power to prevent abuse of process of law – High Court emphasizes the need to distinguish between civil disputes and criminal offences – Summons issued without sufficient grounds for proceeding under criminal law – Order set aside [Paras 5-13].

Commercial Transactions – Civil vs. Criminal Liability – Transactions between parties purely commercial – Non-payment of dues constitutes a civil breach, not a criminal offence – Judicial precedent supports differentiation between breach of contract and criminal acts [Paras 10-12].

Decision – Revision application allowed – Proceedings and order issuing summons quashed – Civil remedies advised for recovery of dues [Paras 14-15].
 

Contempt of Court – Non-implementation of Court Orders – Appellant, a Revenue Officer, was held in contempt for not complying with the order directing reinstatement of the respondent into service – The learned Single Judge sentenced the appellant to six months’ simple imprisonment and imposed a fine of Rs. 2,000 – Appellant’s subsequent compliance with the court order noted – Contempt proceedings against the appellant dropped – Importance of timely compliance and accurate representation in court highlighted [Paras 1-11].

Contempt Proceedings – Compliance and Representation – Court observed that timely and proper compliance with court orders is critical – Appellant’s initial failure to mention compliance in counter affidavit led to adverse judgment – Emphasizes that accurate and prompt reporting of compliance is necessary to avoid contempt charges [Paras 6-11].

Decision – Appeal Allowed – Held – Contempt order against the appellant set aside – No costs – Court underscores the need for meticulous attention by legal counsel in representing compliance to avoid unnecessary contempt proceedings [Paras 10-11].

Criminal Law – Culpable Homicide – Appellant convicted under Section 304(1) IPC for causing the death of Krishna Pada Rajak by stabbing with a spear – Trial court’s judgment upheld by High Court – Evidence included eyewitness testimonies and a dying declaration – Defence’s argument on discrepancies in witness testimonies and the admissibility of the dying declaration rejected – Conviction and sentence of 7 years rigorous imprisonment with a fine of Rs.2000/- affirmed [Paras 1-38].

Dying Declaration – Admissibility – Recorded by treating doctor without formal certification of fitness – Court held that the doctor, being a non-interested witness and the best judge of the patient’s condition, duly recorded the declaration when the victim was in a state to make such a statement – No suspicion found in the declaration’s credibility [Paras 19-30].

Eyewitness Testimony – Reliability – Contradictory evidence from one witness (PW2) did not undermine the consistent and corroborative testimonies of PW1 and PW3 – Both witnesses provided coherent accounts supporting the prosecution’s case – Defence’s argument regarding non-hostility of PW2 dismissed [Paras 15-23].

Medical Evidence – Corroboration – Autopsy and treatment reports matched the account of the assault – Injuries described by doctors supported the testimonies of the eyewitnesses and the dying declaration – Cause of death determined as shock and haemorrhage due to penetrating injuries [Paras 17-20].

Decision: Appeal Dismissed – Conviction and sentence under Section 304(1) IPC upheld – Appellant to serve the remainder of the sentence – Court directed the appellant to surrender within a fortnight if at large, else appropriate steps to be taken by the trial court to secure custody [Paras 33-37].

Disciplinary Proceedings – Judicial Review Limitations – Petitioner contested disciplinary actions resulting in leave without pay – OFDC Service Rules applicable – Judicial review limited to ensuring fair procedure, not reassessment of evidence – Court unable to alter disciplinary penalties unless they shock conscience [Paras 6-16].

Unauthorized Absence – Leave Without Pay – Petitioner’s absence treated as leave without pay – Claimed accrued leave could offset absence – Court held substitution of disciplinary authority’s decision inappropriate – OFDC’s actions deemed proper under applicable service rules [Paras 14-16].

Retirement Benefits – Claim for Dues – Petitioner claimed unpaid retirement benefits due to leave without pay classification – Court acknowledged receipt of retirement benefits by petitioner – Claims for additional benefits not substantiated [Paras 5, 13].

Decision: Writ Petition Dismissed – Punishments by Disciplinary Authority upheld – Court emphasized its limited role in reviewing disciplinary decisions and affirmed penalties imposed [Paras 17-18].