Lawyer Max

26/05/2026

11/01/2018

No Right To Redemption After Issuance Of Sale Certificate To Auction Purchaser: SC [Read Judgment] | Live Law http://www.livelaw.in/no-right-redemption-issuance-sale-certificate-auction-purchaser-sc-read-judgment/ #.WlQnZzk2R00.

If there remained no subsisting mortgage, it is difficult to fathom what was to be redeemed, the bench observed. The Supreme Court, in Allokam Peddabbayya vs Allahabad Bank, has held that if the right to redeem stood extinguished by operation of law under proviso to Section 60 of the Transfer of Pro...

17/10/2017

Happy Diwali Greetings

25/08/2017

Tamil Nadu's failure to revise syllabus, Centre's error caused NEET crisis: Madras High Court
|
Madras High Court. (File photo)

CHENNAI: The State government’s failure to revise syllabus for the past 10 years, coupled with the Centre’s error in appointing the CBSE instead of a neutral agency to conduct NEET have led to a situation where the State Board students have registered low performance in the national-level test, the Madras High Court observed on Wednesday.

“The Union government should have appointed a neutral agency to conduct NEET, especially when students from various syllabi are writing the exam. The CBSE should not have been given the task of conducting the exam. It is obvious that it would pick questions only from CBSE syllabus,” said Justice N Kirubakaran.

The judge was making an oral observation, while hearing the arguments on a writ petition from Kruthika, an MBBS aspirant. Justice Kirubakaran did not spare the State government either while fixing responsibility. The authorities here, he said, erred in not revising and updating the syllabus in the last 10 years, which was worsened by poor quality of teaching, leading to the conundrum that has affected the lives of thousands of students.

Related Article

Medical admissions: Just five from Tamil Nadu State Board in NEET top 20Soon, books for NEET in Tamil for better resultsA secure seat is no guarantee against heartbreak with the eligibility testAll it takes is a timely rule and some gumptionNEET mess continuesSC asks Tamil Nadu to follow common NEET for medical admissions after Centre refuses to endorse ordinance

There was a likelihood that some of these students, dejected over the ruling of the Supreme Court making NEET mandatory, might take the extreme step, the court cautioned, and asked the government to take all precautionary steps.

Pointing to a news report about the death of a parent who reportedly committed su***de fearing that her daughter would not get a medical seat due to the uncertainty that prevailed on NEET-based counselling, the judge said he could understand the efforts of students, who burnt the midnight oil to score good marks in the board exams. Now, their dreams of getting medical seats have been shattered.

The State government must ensure that such distressed students and their parents do not resort to any extreme step like su***de, by providing proper counselling, the judge said.

In the case on hand, Kruthika had secured 1,184 marks in the board examination with a centum in biology, and 199 and 198 in physics and chemistry, respectively. Despite this, she did not apply for medical counselling due to low mark in NEET.

Now, on coming to know that the Tamil Nadu government had requested the Union government to sanction over 2,000 additional medical seats for the State, Kruthika wanted the court to allow her to participate in the counselling. But much to her dismay, the judge said that he would not do so.

The petitioner also requested for a direction to the State to provide monetary compensation to the affected State Board students, contending they trusted that the State would keep its promise of getting admission to eligible State Board students based on the marks obtained in Plus Two exam.

Refusing to entertain the plea, the judge said he would pass a detailed order on Thursday.

22/08/2017

Live: Triple 'talaq' will not be in operation for six months, says SC: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/live-sc-to-pronounce-verdict-on-triple-talaq/article19538487.ece
On October 16, 2015, the Supreme Court questioned if Muslim personal law practices of marriage and divorce reduce women to mere chattels.

A five-judge Supreme Court Bench, headed by Chief Justice of India J.S. Khehar, on Tuesday will pronounce its judgment on the legality of the Islamic personal law practice of triple 'talaq' and whether it is violative of the fundamental and human rights of gender equality and dignity of Muslim women.

On October 16, 2015, the Supreme Court questioned if Muslim personal law practices of marriage and divorce reduce women to mere chattels. In a rare move, it registered a suo motu public interest litigation (PIL) petition titled ‘In Re: Muslim Women’s Quest for Equality’ to examine if arbitrary divorce, polygamy and nikah halala (where a Muslim divorcee marries a man, divorces him to get re-married to her former husband) violate women's dignity.
Live updates

10.40am: SC bars triple talaq for 6 months. Asks government to bring legislation.

10.30am: The Five Judge Constitution Bench has assembled to pronounce the verdict.

10.15: The Centre claimed that instant 'talaq' is not fundamental to Islam. It promised to bring a new divorce law for Muslim men in case the court strikes down the three forms of 'talaq' — 'Ahsan, Hasan and Biddat'.

SC to pronounce verdict on legality of triple 'talaq' on August 22

10.00: The Supreme Court’s judgment on the constitutionality of triple talaq may also decide the age-old debate whether personal laws can be brought under the ambit of Article 13 (laws inconsistent with or in derogation of the fundamental rights) of the Constitution.

Article 13 includes in its ambit any “ordinance, order, by-law, rule, regulation, notification and even customs and usages” passed or made by the Legislature or any other “competent authority”. It mandates that any law in force in the country before or after the commencement of Constitution should not violate the fundamental rights of citizens enshrined in Part III.

Triple talaq: Will SC verdict end personal laws’ immunity?

On October 16, 2015, the Supreme Court questioned if Muslim personal law practices of marriage and divorce reduce women to mere chattels.

16/08/2017

SC also directed that a copy of the order shall be forwarded to the Director of all Judicial Academies in the country, so that the judgment could be brought to the notice of all Judicial Officers exercising criminal jurisdiction in the States
The Supreme Court has directed Trial Courts to not grant regular bail to an accused, if he/she has already obtained an interim anticipatory bail by a superior Court and the matter is still pending before the higher Court.

“Once a regular bail is granted by a subordinate Court on the strength of the interim/pre-arrest bail granted by the superior Court, even if the superior Court is to dismiss the plea of anticipatory bail upon fuller consideration of the matter, the regular bail granted by the subordinate Court would continue to hold the field, rendering the ultimate rejection of the pre-arrest bail by the superior Court meaningless,” a Bench comprising Justice Ranjan Gogoi and Justice Navin Sinha explained.

The Bench took note of the “predicament of the subordinate Judge in considering the prayer for regular bail and the impossibility of denial of such bail in the face of the pre-arrest bail granted by a higher forum”. It thereby observed that surrender and bail application by the accused in such cases is “nothing but an abuse of the process of law by the concerned accused”.

The Court was hearing a Special Leave Petition filed by one Ms. Rukmani Mahato, challenging an order passed in December, 2015, wherein the Jharkhand High Court had refused to grant her pre-arrest bail. Subsequent to this order, she was granted pre-arrest bail by the Apex Court in April last year. Thereafter, she had surrendered before the Trial Court, and was released on regular bail.

Livid that regular bail had been granted to Ms. Mahato, in disregard of the pendency of the SLP before it, the Apex Court had then sought an explanation from the Trial Court Judge. On consideration of this explanation, the Court noted that the order was issued by the Judge on a “misconstruction of this Court's order, which misconstruction was a bonafide mistake on the part of the judicial officer”.

It then proceeded to scrutinize the case at hand, a perusal of which revealed that it was regular practice for the accused to surrender before the Trial Court and seek regular bail immediately after the grant of interim pre-arrest bail by higher forums.

“If this is a practice that is prevailing in some of the subordinate Courts in the Country and we have had notice of several such cases, time has come to put the learned subordinate Courts in the country to notice that such a practice must be discontinued and consideration of regular bail applications upon surrender during the pendency of the application for pre-arrest bail before a superior Court must be discouraged,” the Court thereafter observed, directing a copy of the order to be forwarded to the Director of all Judicial Academies in the country, so that the judgment could be brought to the notice of all Judicial Officers exercising criminal jurisdiction in the States.

16/08/2017

*Ad interim injunction - Cannot be passed against unknown persons. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 573 (Delhi)*

*Ad interim injunction - Police aid - Cannot be denied on the ground that wife of defendant filed another suit and obtained ex parte ad interim order. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 418 (Hyderabad)*

*Adverse possession - Plea available to defendant only when he admits ownership of true owner over suit property to the knowledge of true owner. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 311 (S.C.)*

*Co-owner - Non demarcation of suit property - Construction of compound wall, within suit property, to protect suit property from further encroachment - Permission granted, upheld. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 461 (S.C.)*

*Costs - Court can grant relaxation if, non payment of costs are due to circumstances beyond the control of the defaulting party. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 517 (P&H)*

*Court witness - A person can be summoned as a Court witness if he is not already called as a witness. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 306 (Hyderabad)*

*Dishonour of cheque - Conviction - Compromise - On failure to pay the agreed amount, within time granted, accused shall be proceeded with for contempt, in addition to other proceedings, in accordance with law. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 354 (S.C.)*

*Dishonour of cheque - Legal principles applicable to Managing Director are also applicable to Managing partner of a partnership firm. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 299 (Kerala)*

*Dishonour of cheque - Managing Director or Joint Managing Director - In charge and responsible - Specific averment not required as they by virtue of their office are in charge and responsible for conduct of business of company. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 299 (Kerala)*

*Dishonour of cheque - Security cheque - Merely because cheque is issued as a security is no ground to exonerate the penal liability. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 407 (Allahabad)*

*Dishonour of cheque - Stop payment - Burden of proving that cheque had not been issued for any debt or liability is on accused and that stop payment has not been asked because of insufficiency of funds. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 407 (Allahabad)*

*Divorce - Exemption to file divorce petition within one year of marriage - A case of exceptional hardship to husband - Exemption granted. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 442 (Uttarakhand)*

*Divorce - Irretrievable breakdown of marriage - May be supplementary to any other substantive grounds but same not a standalone ground. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 335 (Hyderabad)*

*Divorce - Solitary instance of threat to commit su***de in hot talks with husband - By no stretch of imagination can be termed and treated as cruelty sufficient to annul marriage. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 488 (Rajasthan)*

*Divorce by mutual consent - Factum of solemnization of marriage and that consent is not obtained by force, fraud or undue influence - Not ascertained before passing decree - Impugned decree set aside - Matter remitted back for decision afresh. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 474 (Jharkhand)*

*Ex parte decree - Single application can be filed to condone delay and to set aside ex parte decree, where grounds for seeking both such reliefs are same. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 375 (Hyderabad)*

*Ex parte decree - Setting aside - Self induced and self serving misconception in the mind of defendant as regards date of hearing of suit - Not a ground for recalling of ex parte decree. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 341 (Calcutta)*

*Ex parte interim injunction - Non compliance of provision of O.39.R.3(a) CPC as directed - Second application filed and Court granted interim injunction for the second time - Held, second application is not maintainable. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 478 (Karnataka)*

*Ex*****on - Decree for specific performance - Property not identified definitely - Executing Court to take such steps as may be necessary for fixing identity of property. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 404 (P&H)*

*Ex*****on - Third party objections - Proper enquiry needs to be conducted and same cannot be summarily disposed of. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 469 (Hyderabad)*

*Interlocutory proceedings - Findings recorded therein - Do not in any manner affect and come in the way of disposal of suit on merits. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 395 (S.C.)*

*Law applicable to appeals applies to revision as well - No decree can be reversed or substantially varied in appeal on account of mis-joinder or non-joinder of parties. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 381 (S.C.)*

*Maintenance - Decree of restitution of conjugal rights in favour of husband - Not a bar to grant maintenance. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 446 (Allahabad)*

*Maintenance - Default in payment - Court can enforce order of maintenance or interim maintenance only as provided u/s 125(3) Cr.P.C. and not by striking off contentions of husband. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 439 (Kerala)*

*Maintenance - Merely because wife is capable of earning is not a sufficient reason to reduce maintenance. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 346 (S.C.)*

*Maintenance pendente lite - Claim by husband - Can be treated only in exceptional cases. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 365 (Kerala)*

*Maintenance pendente lite - Claim by husband - Idleness of husband - No evidence adduced to show that in spite of efforts husband could not get any employment - Not entitled to maintenance pendente lite. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 365 (Kerala)*

*Maintenance u/s 125 Cr.P.C. - Territorial jurisdiction is determined on date of filing of application - Even if wife resides at a place temporarily on the date of filing of application, concerned Court within whose territorial jurisdiction she is residing, can entertain such application. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 523 (Orissa)*

*Marriage - Girl aged 14 years and boy aged above 18 years - Till the minor child attains the age of majority, parties are merely contracting parties and not husband and wife. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 490 (Gujarat)*

*Marriage - In contravention of S.5 of Hindu Marriage Act - Marriage is null and void - It does not require any order of Court to say that marriage is null and void - To get a declaration to that effect is optional. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 533 (Bombay)*

*Material alteration - Alteration in date so as to bring suit within period of limitation - It is a material alteration - It renders the document void. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 328 (Madras)*

*Mohammadan Law - Does not recognize adoption. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 311 (S.C.)*

*Notice - Relationship of landlord and tenant not established - Question of terminating tenancy by proper service of notice u/s 106 of the Act is of no significance. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 397 (Rajasthan)*

*Partition - Partial partition - Not impermissible in all events. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 425 (H.P.)*

*Passage - Mere recital in the sale deed cannot establish existence of passage - Recital in the sale deed has to be corroborated from other cogent, convincing and reliable evidence. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 568 (P&H)*

*Permanent injunction - Relief in part granted as Revenue Authority granted mutation of part of land - Bonafide purchase of entire property by plaintiff - Decree of permanent injunction granted of entire land. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 389 (Tripura)*

*Rebuttal evidence - Plaintiff can lead evidence in rebuttal only on those issues the burden of proof of which is on the defendant. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 314 (P&H)*

*Recovery of money claimed under a contract - Date of final payment is crucial for determination of period of limitation - Claim for additional payment after payment of final bill - Claim entertained and rejected - Limitation to file suit for rejected claim is three years. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 562 (S.C.)*

*Rent & Eviction - Relationship of landlord and tenant - Proof - Basic fact, as to since when tenancy started, conspicuously missing in the plaint - It creates serious doubt about the existence tenancy. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 397 (Rajasthan)*

*Rent and eviction - Bona fide requirement - Order of eviction - Death of landlord during pendency of appeal - L.R's continued the family business - Cannot be relegated for another round of litigation - However, in a given case the bona fide requirement of original landlord and that of surviving legal heirs may vary - Eviction order passed by First Appellate Authority, restored. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 487 (S.C.)*

*Will - Beneficiary attesting will - Document does not become void ipso facto - If any benefit is given to attestor by way of a bequest or by way of an appointment, he would not get any right as that bequest or appointment shall be void in so far as he is concerned. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 378 (Kerala)*

*Will - Ex*****on - Scribe of Will one of the attesting witness - There is no law that he is the best witness and he alone is competent to depose about ex*****on of Will. (2017(3) Civil Court Cases 510 (Madras)*

01/08/2017

http://www.livelaw.in/sc-allows-remarried-woman-continue-job-got-compassionate-appointment-read-order/

50% of her salary should be paid over to her children for their sustenance, the court said. The Supreme Court has upheld a Rajasthan High Court order which, instead of terminating the service of remarried lady who got into service under compassionate employment scheme, had directed that 50% of her s...

31/07/2017

TYPES OF EVIDENCES.

There are different types of evidences under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. These are mentioned below-

1) Oral Evidence

2) Documentary Evidence

3)Primary Evidence

4) Secondary Evidence

5) Real Evidence

6) Hearsay Evidence

7) Judicial Evidence

8) Non- Judicial Evidence

9) Direct Evidence

10) Indirect Evidence or Circumstantial Evidence

These are elaborated below-

1) Oral Evidence– Section 60 of the Indian Evidence Act explains Oral Evidence. Oral Evidences are those evidences which are personally seen or heard by the witness giving them and not heard or told by some one else. All the statements which are permitted by the court or the court expects the witness to make such statements in his presence regarding the truth of the facts, are called as Oral Evidences.

Oral evidences must always be direct. An Evidence is direct when it establishes the main fact in issue.

2) Documentary Evidences – are defined under section 3 of the Act. All those documents which are presented in the court for inspection regarding a case, such documents are known as documentary evidences.

3) Primary Evidence – Section 62of the Indian Evidence Act defines Primary Evidence. Primary evidences are the most superior class of evidences. These are those evidences which are expected by the law and admissible and permissible at the first place. These are those evidences which in any possible condition gives the vital hint in a disputed fact and establishes through documentary evidence on the production of an original document by the court.

4) Secondary Evidences – are defined under section 63 of the Act. These are those evidences which are entertained by the court in the absence of the Primary evidences. Therefore it is known as secondary evidences.

5) Real Evidences – Real evidences are those evidences which are real or material evidences. Real evidence or proof of a fact is brought to the knowledge of the court by an inspection of a physical object rather than by deriving an information by a witness or a document.

6) Hearsay Evidences – Hearsay evidences are the ones which the witness has neither personally seen nor heard, nor has he percieved through his senses, but are those which have come to his knowledge through some other person. These are the most weak category of evidences.

7) Judicial Evidence – Judicial evidences are those which are given before the magistrate in the court. For example- a confession made by the accused before the magistrate in the court is an Judicial Evidence.

8) Non- Judicial Evidence – Any confession made by the accused outside the court and not in front of the magistrate but in the presence of some other person are termed as Non- Judicial evidences.

9) Direct Evidence – Direct evidences are those evidences which establishes a fact. The best example of a direct evidence would be statement or confessions made by the witnesses.

10) Indirect or Circumstantial Evidence – Circumstantial or indirect evidence are the ones which attempts to prove the facts in dispute by providing other facts. Circumstantial evidences are not definite proof. they only provide a general idea as to what occured at the crime scene.(ziblok)
© Copy Right.