Code of Civil Procedure - Order XLI Rule 5 - Stay of Execution - Rent Payment - High Court directed appellants to pay Rs. 18000/- per month as rent during the pendency of the second appeals - Appellants argued for lower rent as per lease agreement - High Court justified in directing higher rent based on prevailing market rate to balance interests of both parties during litigation [Paras 1-6].

Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961 - Section 13 - Tenant's Protection - Tenant must deposit or pay rent as required under Section 13 to avail protection against eviction - Legislative intent to ensure regular payment of rent during litigation - Defaulting tenant's defence can be struck out if payment not made - Section 13 intended to balance interests of landlords and tenants by ensuring rent payment while protecting tenant from eviction [Paras 19-31].

Prevailing Market Rate - Rent Calculation - Rent Control Authority's report indicated prevailing market rate - Appellants claimed report was prepared without their input - Court emphasized need for fair market-based rent during litigation to prevent unjust enrichment or undue hardship [Para 32].

Decision - Appeals Dismissed - High Court's order upheld - Appellants directed to pay Rs. 18000/- per month as rent during pendency of appeals - Payment to ensure balance of interests and fair compensation [Paras 33-35].

Motor Vehicles - Taxation - Financier-in-Possession - U.P. Motor Vehicles Taxation Act, 1997 - Financier took possession of vehicle upon default in loan payment - Liability to pay tax - Supreme Court upheld High Court's decision - Financier-in-possession considered "owner" under Section 2(h) of Act 1997 and Section 2(30) of Act 1988 - Tax payable even if vehicle not used, unless exempted under Section 12 - Refund possible if non-use proven and conditions met [Paras 1-12].

Use of Vehicle - Advance Tax - Transport vehicles require tax payment in advance - Operation contingent upon advance tax payment - Refund mechanism exists for non-use - Financier must secure necessary documents to claim refund [Paras 8-10].

Owner Definition - Hire-Purchase Agreements - Financier in possession under such agreements deemed "owner" - Legal obligations include tax payment [Para 8.3].

Decision - Appeal Dismissed - High Court judgment upheld - Financier liable to pay tax as "owner" under possession - Refund claims subject to compliance with Section 12 conditions [Para 12].

Negotiable Instruments Act – Dishonour of Cheque – Authorized Representation – Company filed complaint under Section 138 of NI Act through its General Manager (Accounting) – Requirement for complaint to be filed by the payee satisfied – Authorization by the company and knowledge of the transaction sufficiently demonstrated through affidavits and supporting documents – High Court erred in quashing the complaint on grounds of insufficient authorization and lack of explicit knowledge assertion [Paras 1-15].

Criminal Procedure Code – Section 482 – Inappropriate Invocation – High Court not justified in quashing cognizance order at threshold – Issues regarding authorization and knowledge to be determined during trial – Dismissal of complaint at preliminary stage held unjustified [Paras 17-18].

Decision – Appeal allowed – High Court judgment quashing the complaint set aside – Complaint restored to file of SDJM Jharsuguda – Direction for expeditious trial completion within six months [Para 18].

Income Tax – Deduction under Section 37(1) – Pharmaceutical companies' gifting freebies to doctors is "prohibited by law" and cannot be claimed as a deduction under Section 37(1) – Expenditure incurred by pharmaceutical companies for such freebies is inadmissible under the Income Tax Act – Court emphasizes the principle that no entity should benefit from an action prohibited by law [Paras 17-37].

Public Policy – Relationship between Doctors and Pharmaceutical Companies – Medical practitioners' acceptance of freebies constitutes professional misconduct – Gifting freebies drives up drug prices, adversely impacting public interest – Such activities fall within the scope of actions prohibited by law [Paras 27-28].

Interpretation of Statutes – Statutory Prohibition – Affirmative statutes imply prohibition of all other forms not expressly allowed – Interpretation of Explanation 1 to Section 37(1) should align with legislative intent to disallow deductions for illegal or prohibited activities [Paras 22-24, 35].

Decision – Appeal dismissed – High Court's decision upheld, prohibiting the deduction of expenses incurred on freebies given to doctors by pharmaceutical companies under Section 37(1) [Para 37].

Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Act – Suspension and Removal – Sarpanch suspended under Section 38(1) pending inquiry into allegations of misconduct and criminal proceedings – Suspension based on prima facie case of "disgraceful conduct" established through preliminary inquiry – Distinction between suspension due to criminal proceedings and suspension pending inquiry emphasized – Suspension order's ambiguous wording acknowledged but found to substantiate suspension under Section 38(1) [Paras 2-9].

Administrative Law – Political Rivalry – Suspension in politically charged contexts requires cautious judicial scrutiny – Principles of service jurisprudence inapplicable – Necessity for expedited resolution of inquiries to prevent misuse of suspension powers – Directions issued for concluding inquiry within specified timeframe – Suspension to continue only until the completion of the inquiry by the specified date [Paras 10-12].

Decision – Appeal disposed of – Respondents directed to conclude inquiry by April 30, 2022 – Suspension to remain effective only until April 30, 2022 – Proceedings to be conducted based on material presented and not influenced by criminal proceedings standards [Paras 12-14].

Consumer Protection – Definition of Consumer – Appellant a stock-broker, availed overdraft facility from the respondent bank for his business transactions – Overdraft facility deemed to be for 'commercial purpose' – Services availed not exclusively for earning livelihood by means of self-employment – National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission's decision upheld – Appeal dismissed [Paras 20-21, 46-47].

Consumer Protection Act – Legislative Intent – Protection aimed at individual consumers and not business entities engaging in commercial transactions – Explanation to Section 2(1)(d) excludes commercial purposes unless for self-employment to earn livelihood – Court reiterates narrow interpretation of 'consumer' to maintain legislative intent [Paras 22-31, 35-36, 42-45].

Commercial Purpose – Services availed by businesses – Services utilized for expanding business profits fall under commercial transactions – Transaction between stock-broker and bank classified as 'business to business' relationship, thus not covered under Consumer Protection Act [Paras 33-34, 46-47].

Decision – Appeal dismissed – National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission's decision affirmed – Appellant not entitled to consumer protection for availing services for commercial purposes [Paras 48-49].

Constitutional Law – Scheduled Tribes – Notification by State of Bihar recognizing Lohar community as Scheduled Tribes quashed – Previous Supreme Court judgments consistently held Lohars as Other Backward Classes (OBC) and not Scheduled Tribes – Notification issued without basis and contrary to authoritative English version of Presidential Order under Article 342 – Notification declared illegal and arbitrary [Paras 12-13, 22-25, 28].

Fundamental Rights – Right to Liberty – Violation – Petitioners wrongfully prosecuted under SC/ST Act based on unconstitutional notification – Court emphasizes that violation of Article 14 and Article 21 warrants relief under Article 32 – State directed to pay compensation for wrongful imprisonment and costs imposed [Paras 7, 9, 26-27, 29-31].

Judicial Review – Power of Supreme Court under Article 32 – Delay in filing writ petition not sufficient to deny relief when Fundamental Rights violated – Article 32 petition entertained due to serious constitutional issues and wrongful prosecution under invalid notification [Paras 9-11].

Decision – Writ Petition allowed – Impugned notification quashed – State directed to pay costs of Rs. 5,00,000 to petitioners within one month – Clarification that 'Lohara' community remains recognized as Scheduled Tribes, while 'Lohar' community does not [Paras 29-31].

Insurance Law – Non-ATM Transaction Requirement – Appellant's claim under "Cardsure Package Policy" rejected due to failure to meet non-ATM transaction condition – Bank did not furnish policy terms to account holder – Insurance terms must be communicated to policy beneficiaries – Claim valid as special conditions were not communicated – Judgment of NCDRC set aside and District Forum's order restored – Compensation of Rs. 5 lakhs with 9% interest per annum awarded [Paras 3-15].

Consumer Protection – Communication of Insurance Policy Terms – Terms of insurance cover must be communicated to account holder beneficiaries – Bank failed to establish that terms were communicated – Insurer's repudiation of claim wrongful due to non-communication of policy conditions – Insurer may seek remedy against the bank [Paras 10-14].

Deficiency of Service – Insurer's wrongful repudiation due to bank's failure to communicate policy terms – Consumer entitled to relief under Consumer Protection Act – Insurer directed to compensate consumer with Rs. 5 lakhs and interest [Paras 12-15].

Decision – Appeals allowed – NCDRC judgment set aside – District Forum's award of Rs. 5 lakhs with interest at 9% per annum and Rs. 20,000 for compensation and costs restored – Payment to be made within one month [Paras 15-16].

Securities Law – Disclosure of Investigation Report – Right to Disclosure – SEBI’s investigation report under Regulation 9 of the PFUTP Regulations must be disclosed to the person against whom a show cause notice is issued – Report is not merely an internal document but forms the basis for SEBI’s action under Regulations 11 and 12 – Non-disclosure of relevant information could render punitive order void if prejudice is proven [Paras 1-25, 27].

Natural Justice – Principles of Fairness – Right to Fair Hearing – Disclosure of investigative material is essential for ensuring a fair trial and upholding transparency in judicial and quasi-judicial proceedings – Material used against an individual must be disclosed to allow for adequate defense – Partial non-disclosure permissible if it involves third-party confidential information or affects market stability, but specific reasons must be recorded [Paras 22-24, 28, 33-36].

Regulatory Framework – SEBI’s Duties and Powers – SEBI must balance its regulatory duties with principles of natural justice – While protecting market integrity and third-party interests, SEBI is obligated to provide access to material evidence forming the basis of allegations against an individual – Distinction between internal deliberations and material directly influencing punitive decisions [Paras 15-21].

Decision – Appeals allowed – High Court judgment set aside – SEBI directed to provide relevant portions of the investigation report pertaining to the appellant while withholding sections containing third-party confidential information or impacting market stability with recorded reasons [Paras 27-30, 37].