1.
Compensation in Motor Accident
Motor Accident claims
Tribunal while determining quantum of compensation payable in a road accident
case must consider not only the pay packet an employee carries home at the end
of the month but also other perks which are beneficial to the members of the
entire family.
Gulab alias Sangeeta & Ors
vs. Shri N. Moiden Kunti, Shri N. Moosa & National Insurance Co. Ltd. (2009)
Vol. 111 (4) Bom. L.R. 1388
2. Construction of Agreement
– Transfer of property – S. 8
A document must be read in
its entirety. When character of a document is in question, although the
heading, thereof would not be conclusive however it plays a significant role.
Intention of the parties must be gathered from the document itself but
therefore circumstances attending thereof would also be relevant. It is
essential that all parts of the deed should be read in their entirety.
C. Cheriathan vs. P.
Narayanan Embranthiri AIR 2009 SC 1502.
3. Contract Act – S. 23
Contracts void where
consideration is unreasonable/against public policy. Bank charging additional
interest for prepayment of loan is not hit by section 23 of the Contract Act.
Mahavir Ice & Cold Storage P.
Ltd. vs. Small Industries Development Bank of India AIR 2009 (NOC) 1218 (Ori.)
4. Conveyance – Stamp Act
Scheme of arrangement,
sanctioned by Court involving transfer of business of going concern is an
instrument and a conveyance within the meaning of Article 23(b) of Schedule
1-B as applicable to State of U.P.
M/s. Hero Motors Ltd vs.
State of UP AIR 2009 Allahabad 93
5. Copyright
“Literary work” includes
computer programme and compilation including computer data bases.
Bharat Matrimony.com P. Ltd.
vs. People Interactive P. Ltd. AIR 2009 Mad 78
6. Effect of Repeal of an
Act – S. 6 of General Clauses Act – Patents Act, 1970
The petitioners challenging
rejection of their application for grant of EMRs (Exclusive Marketing Rights)
prior to the Amending Act (w.e.f 1st January, 2005). The Amending Act (w.e.f.
1st January, 2005) abolishing EMRs. Held that section 6 of the General Clauses
Act saved the application for EMRs which was filed much prior to the coming
into force of the Amending Act of 2005. When a pre-existing right of appeal
continues to exist, by necessary implication the old law which created the
right of appeal also exists to support the continuation of that right and
hence the old right must govern the exercise and enforcement of that right. In
the absence of contrary intention in repealing the enactment, rights under the
old statute are not destroyed.
Glaxo Smithkline Plc. vs.
Controller of Patents & Designs AIR 2009 SC 1147
7. Election
Law prohibits any person who
has been convicted of any offence and sentenced to imprisonment for not less
than two years from contesting the election and such person shall be
disqualified for a further period of six years since his release.
Sanjay Dutt vs. State of
Maharashtra through CBI, Bom (2009) Vol. 111 Bom. LR 2116
8. FERA – PENALTY
When the proprietorship
concern is found guilty and penalty is imposed on it, that penalty should be
presumed to have been imposed on its proprietor and, therefore, no separate
penalty could be imposed on the proprietor:
Ashok Chopra vs. Union of
India & Ors. (2009) Vol. (111) Bom. LR 2215
9. Hindu Law – Hindu
Succession Act – Amendment by the Act of 2005
Daughter to be treated as
coparcener even though the amendment came into force during the pendency of
the Second Appeal by the son against order dismissing partition suit filed by
him.
Mangilal vs. Saligram & Ors.
AIR 2009 (NOC) 1273 (MP)
10. Hindu Law – Joint Hindu
Family
Male head of family died
leaving behind his widow and four daughters – Family would continue to
constitute a ‘Joint Hindu Family’ – Widowed mother would not have to seek
permission of a competent court to alienate joint family property, during the
minority of her daughters. However, alienation of immovable property of a
minor, though permissible, can be questioned in suit for partition on the
ground of whether or not there was a legal necessity.
Smt. Bhagyamma & Ors. vs. Smt.
Ningamma & Anr. AIR 2009 (NOC) 1272 (Kar.)
11. Hindu Law – Widow
inheriting property of her deceased husband
Becomes absolute owner on the
death of her husband and her subsequent re-marriage would not divest her of
the property – she inherits the share of her deceased husband in the joint
family property – Her father-in-law died after her re-marriage – His share
would be inherited by er brother-in-law.
Balitram Dhake vs. Rahubai
Saraswatibai AIR 2009 Bom 57
12. Hindu Succession Act –
Husband, wife and minor son dying simultaneously in an accident
By virtue of section 21 of
the Hindu Succession Act, when two persons died in circumstances rendering it
uncertain to decide as to which one would have survived the other, it is
presumed that the younger survived the other. The younger i.e. the son (who is
presumed to have survived) having no Class-I tier, his maternal grand mother
(being Class-II tier) would be legal representative of the deceased. The fact
that the maternal grand mother had snapped all her ties with the deceased by
publishing a notice in the newspaper would not disinherit statutory heir as
the position would be governed by the statutory provision and such notice in
the newspaper has no legal value.
Raman Khanna & Ors. vs. Sham
Kishore Khanna AIR 2009 H.P. 42
13. Meaning
When a term or expression is
neither defined under an Act or it is to be given a meaning as given in
another Act then it should be given the meaning as understood in ordinary
popular sense.
Neelam Narayan Bansode vs.
State of Maharashtra & Ors. (2009) Vol. 111 Bom L.R. 1761
14. Negotiable Instruments
Act - Cheque Bouncing – S. 138
Issuance of notice would not,
by itself, give rise to cause of action but communication of notice would.
There is a difference between giving of notice and service of notice. Only on
service of such notice and failure on part of the accused to pay the demanded
amount within 15 days thereafter, commission of an offence completes.
Presumption raised in support of service of notice would depend upon the facts
and circumstances of each case. Presumption has to be raised not in the
hypothesis or surmises but if the foundational facts are laid down therefore.
Only because presumption of service of notice is possible to be raised the
same may not be a ground to hold that he distinction between giving of notice
and service of notice ceases to exist.
Harman Electronics P. Ltd.
vs. National Panasonic India Ltd. AIR 2009 SC 1168
15. Negotiable Instruments
Act – S. 138
By virtue of sec. 139 a
presumption is raised in favour of the complainant that there was a existing
debt/liability for which the cheque was issued. However this presumption is
rebuttable and the accused is not expected to rebut the statutory presumption
by proving his defence beyond reasonable doubt. It is enough if the accused is
able to establish that circumstances exist which enable a prudent man to
suppose that no debt existed.
M/s. Kumar Exports vs. Sharma
Carpets AIR 2009 SC 1518
16. Registration Act
Document of Sale unregistered
and inadequately stamped. Not admissible in evidence even for collateral
purposes.
Avinash Kumar vs. Vijay
Krishna Mishra AIR 2009 SC 1489
17. Registration Act
Document in the nature of
family settlement recognizing pre-existing right in property. Not compulsorily
registrable.
Pullella Lakshminarayana vs.
Maddimsetti Mukteshwara Rao AIR 2009 (NOC) 1672 (AP)
18. Stamp Act
Document whether Conveyance
or Release Deed. Co-owners transferring their share to other co-owners who had
a pre-existing right in the property would not amount to conveyance but would
be release deed.
State of U.P. vs. Dharam Pal
& Anr. AIR 2009 (NOC) 1372 (All)
Note : ‘NOC’ stands for
‘Notes on Cases’
19. Summons to produce
document – Civil Procedure Code, order 16 – Rule 6
Request for summoning
document cannot be rejected on ground that petitioner can very well obtain
copy of document under Right to Information Act. In a Civil Suit, if a party
applies for issuing summons for production of documents under Rule 6 of Order
16 of the CPC the same cannot be rejected by the Court without valid reason.
The Right to Information Act does not in any way curtail powers of Civil Court
under the CPC.
Eldhose vs. Yacob & Ors. AIR
2009 Kerala 104.
20. Tenancy – Bonafide
requirement
Landlord of a property can
maintain action for eviction of tenant from a property exclusively belonging
to him on ground of bonafide requirement even if other properties are also
co-owned by him.
Smt. Zeitumbi Habib Mohamad
vs. Shri Thomas Roberto Gomes (2009) Vol. 111 Bom. L.R. 2108
21. Title of Film ‘Slumdog
Millionaire’ held not offensive or defamatory
The title of the film has to
be judged on the theme of the film and the manner in which it has been
exhibited in the public view. In the said film a slum boy from slums of Mumbai
highlighted
and depicted as Jewel who had
risen to win a fortune.
The title ‘Slumdog
Millionaire’ does not defy any public decency or morality and it is not aimed
at slum dewellers in general and also not defamatory.
Meena Anil Jagtap, Executive
Secretary, Dastak vs. T. Series Super Cassettes Ind. Ltd. AIR 2009 Gujarat 94
22. Validity of Agreement –
Contract Act
– S. 10
All agreement of sale are
bilateral contracts as promises are made by both the vender agreeing to sell
and the purchaser agreeing to purchase. It cannot be said that unless
agreement is signed both by the vender and purchaser it is not a valid
contract. Even an oral agreement to sell is valid. A written agreement signed
by one of the parties, if it evidences such an oral agreement will also be
valid. In the event of breach by vender, it can be specifically enforced by
the purchaser. Thus agreement of sale signed only by vender is valid and
enforceable by purchaser.
Aloka Bose vs. Parmatma Devi
& Ors. AIR 2009 SC 1527
23. Writ Remedy – Article
226 of the Constitution
Existence of an alternative
remedy is not an absolute bar to exercise jurisdiction under Article 226. The
High Court may exercise jurisdiction despite the fact that an alternative
remedy is availability, where the alternative remedy is not an efficacious
one. Furthermore where the lower Court/Authority has acted without
jurisdiction, the High Court shall not refuse to exercise its jurisdiction.
Committee of Management & Anr. vs. Vice- Chancellor & Ors. AIR 2009 SC 1159
24. Writ Remedy – Article
226 of the Constitution
A petition filed under
Article 226/227 can be treated as a petition under Article 226. Merely because
a petition under Article 227 is maintainable against orders passed by Tribunal
exercising judicial functions, it would not exclude the exercise of power by
the High Court under Article 226. Jurisdiction under Article 226 is not
affected by establishment of the Debt Recovery Tribunal under the Recovery of
Debts due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993.
Bhowanipore Gujarati
Education Society & Anr. vs. Kolkata Municipal Corporation & Ors. etc. AIR
2009 Cal 14 (FB)