(1)
PUNATSANGCHHU-1 HYDROELECTRIC PROJECT AUTHORITY BHUTAN …..Appellant Vs.
LARSEN & TOUBRO LIMITED …..Respondent D.D
22/02/2021
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 – Appointment of arbitrator – Contract Agreement executed for construction works on the Punatsangchhu-I Hydro-electric Project in Bhutan – High Court held that Clause 67(ii) of the Agreement did not imply cessation of the 1996 Act upon enactment of the Bhutan Act – The Bhutan Act 2013 does not make the 1996 Act inapplicable – Arb...
(2)
AMITABHA DASGUPTA …..Appellant Vs.
UNITED BANK OF INDIA AND OTHERS …..Respondent D.D
19/02/2021
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Banking Law – Lockers – Banks’ Liability – Banks are responsible for ensuring the safety of lockers and cannot disclaim liability for the loss of locker contents. The bank must exercise due diligence in maintaining and operating locker systems, including using modern technology to safeguard against unauthorized access [Paras 1-15].
Duty of Care – Consumer Protectio...
(3)
TATA MOTORS LIMITED …..Appellant Vs.
ANTONIO PAULO VAZ AND ANOTHER …..Respondent D.D
18/02/2021
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Consumer Protection – Delivery of Old Car – Liability of Manufacturer – The dealer sold a 2009 model car, which had been used, as a new 2011 model – Absence of dealer during proceedings led to finding of deficiency on its part – No evidence of manufacturer's direct involvement or knowledge of the dealer's misrepresentation – Relationship between manufact...
(4)
U.A. BASHEER THROUGH G.P.A. HOLDER …..Appellant Vs.
STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANOTHER …..Respondent D.D
17/02/2021
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Repeal Act, 1999 – Section 3 and Section 4 – Determination of Possession – Proceedings for excess land under the Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act, 1976, are liable to abate if possession of the land has not been taken by the State Government before the Repeal Act came into force – The appellant claims possession of the land through...
(5)
UNITECH LIMITED AND OTHERS …..Appellant Vs.
TELANGANA STATE INDUSTRIAL INFRASTRUCTURE CORPORATION (TSIIC) AND OTHERS …..Respondent D.D
17/02/2021
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Arbitration Clause – Writ Jurisdiction – The presence of an arbitration clause does not bar the jurisdiction of the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution to ensure fairness and prevent arbitrary state actions – The court can inquire whether the state or its instrumentalities acted arbitrarily, violating Article 14 – The arbitration clause within a contract is not...
(6)
THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR GENERAL …..Appellant Vs.
M.C. SUBRAMANIAM AND OTHERS …..Respondent D.D
17/02/2021
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Court Fees – Refund – Settlement of disputes outside court – Section 69A of Tamil Nadu Court Fees and Suit Valuation Act, 1955 and Section 89 of CPC – Court fees to be refunded even for private settlements without court intervention – Narrow interpretation of the provisions would lead to unjust outcomes – Equitable and purposive interpretation required to encour...
(7)
COMPACK ENTERPRISES INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED …..Appellant Vs.
BEANT SINGH …..Respondent D.D
17/02/2021
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Consent Decree – Mesne Profits – Correction of Typographical Error – Appeal against the High Court's order held that the mesne profits payable are to be increased by 10% every year – The Trial Court awards a 10% increase only on each alternate year i.e. 01.04.2011, 01.04.2013, 01.04.2015, and so on – The original terms of the license agreement between parties also...
(8)
NARAYAN SITARAMJI BADWAIK (DEAD) THROUGH LRS. …..Appellant Vs.
BISARAM AND OTHERS …..Respondent D.D
17/02/2021
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Civil Procedure – High Court's Power in Second Appeals – Section 100 CPC – Section 103 CPC – High Court's duty to either remand the matter or decide issues of fact when lower appellate courts have failed to properly determine them – High Court erred in mechanically upholding trial court judgment without proper assessment of evidence – Case remanded for f...
(9)
KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK PRIVATE LIMITED …..Appellant Vs.
AMBUJ A. KASLIWAL AND OTHERS …..Respondent D.D
16/02/2021
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Pre-deposit Requirement – Waiver – Recovery of Debts Act – The High Court does not have the power to waive the pre-deposit requirement under Section 21 in its entirety – The provision mandates a pre-deposit of fifty percent of the debt due, which can be reduced to not less than twenty-five percent for reasons recorded in writing – The High Court’s order of total...