AIR JUNE 2023

1.              Advocate Act (25 of 1961)­–S. 34–Grievances of members of Bar–Supreme Court reiterated that no member of the Bar can o on strike and/or abstain from Court working–However, any member of the Bar having genuine grievance regarding procedural changes in filing/listing of the matters etc. can make a representation which would be considered by some forum so that strikes can be avoided.  SC 2088. District bar Association Deheradun v. Inshwar Shandilya and others AIR 2023 SUPREME COURT 2088 : AIR Online 2023 SC 288. 

2.              Sec. 17–Appeal–Writ petition challenging e-auction notice issued pursuant to action initiated by Bank in exercise of powers under S. 13 (4) –Against any steps taken by Bank under S. 17 approach DRT–High Court erred in entertaining writ petition since statutory alliterative remedy was available.  SC 2359 (A) G. Vikram Kumar v. State Bank of Hyderabad and others AIR 2023 SUPREME COURT 2359: air Online 2023 SC 376.

3.              S. 25–Transfer petition – Filed by wife seeking transfer of divorce case ­ wife was permanent resident o Canada and was working there on well paid job – Husband was doctor by profession and was residing in Mangaluru with his old aged parents – No child was born from wedlock to be taken care of – Wife could attend hearing of case and could also seek exemption from appearance whenever required – Divorce petition, not transferred.  SC 2106. Delma Lubna Coelho v. Edmond Clint Fernandes AIR 2023 SUPREME COURT 2106 : AIROnline 2023 SC 294. 

4.               O.1, R.10–Proper parties–Suit for pre-emption–Vendor i.e., owner of suit land who had allegedly not given any notice of sale to plaintiff u/S. 19 of Pre-emption Act and against whom right to pre-empt sale is claimed whould be a proper party for compete and final adjudication. SC 2074 (C) Jhabbar Singh (Deceased) Through Legal Heris and others v. Jagtar Singh S/o-Darshan Singh AIR 2023 SUPREME COURT 2074: AIROnline 2023 SC 302. 

5.              O.7, R.11–Rejection of plaint–On ground of existence of arbitration clause in agreement–suit for cancellation of development agreement and delivery of possession–Arbitration clause in development agreement providing that if issue concenrning cancellation is not mutually resolved, same must be referred to arbitration–Rejection of plaint by directing to refer dispute to arbitration proper. AIR 2020 SC 4047, followed.  SC 2185 M/s. Asian Avenues Pvt. Ltd. V. Syed Shoukat Hussain AIR 2023 SUPREME COURT 2185: AIR Online 2023 SC 324. 

6.              O.9, R.13–Ex parte decree–Setting aside of–Notice was issued to husband at his parental home vide registered post, which was returned with acknowledgement as ‘not claimed’–Said endorsement cannot be treated as ‘refused’ in absence of supporting facts–Wife knew that husband and his parents seldom resided at parental home and he was working elsewhere–Despite that she gave address of his parental home–husband did not deliberately avoid issuance of service of summons–Reason for non-appearance of husband in divorce proceedings and delay in filing application for setting aside ex parte decree, bona fide and unintentional–Ex parte decree, set aside. Chh 88 (A) Abhijeet Roy v. Swapna Sarkar AIR 2023 CHHATTISGARH 88: AIR Online 2023 CHH 226. 

7.              O.20, R.18–Suit for partition–Partition, when becomes complete–Once the decision on the property to be divided and on the mode of partition is taken by the Revenue Officer u/S. 118, the joint status of the parties would stand severed on the date of such decision, subject to the decision in appeal–Further proceedings to draw an instrument of partition would be only an executor or ministerial work. SC 2074 (A).  Jhabbar Singh (deceased) Through Legal Heirs and others v. Jagtar Singh S/o. Darshan Singh AIR 2023 SUPREME COURT 2074: AIR Online 2023 SC 302.

8.              O.41, R. 27– Production of additional evidence–Refusal–Validity–Suit for specific performance–Documents sought to be produced as additional evidence were not new or which were not within notice of plaintiff–Further, plaintiff did not specify relevancy of documents sought to be produced–order of trial Court refusing to permit production of additional evidence, proper–Interference under Revisional jurisdiction, unwarranted.   P&H 89.  Viveshwar Kumar Alias Vishyeshwar Kumar v. Shiv Kumar and another AIR 2023 PUNJAB AND HARYANA 89: AIR Online 2023 P & H 363.  

9.              Art. 16–Officers appointed to same post in cadre–Difference in pay scales based on educational qualifications–Classification based upon educational qualification is not violative of Arts. 14, 16–State may fix different scales of pay for officers appointed to the same cadre, on the basis of educational qualifications possessed by them.  AIR 2019 SC 4755, Followed. State of Gujarat and Ors. Etc. v. Dr. P.A. Bhatt and Ors. Etc. AIR 2023 SUPRME COURT 2164 : AIR Online 2023 SC 338. 

10.           S. 235(2)–Sentence­–Opportunity of hearing–Offence of murder and grievous hurt–Accused persons acquitted by trial Court were convicted by High Court in appeal–Appellate Court was bound under the law to hear them on quantum of sentence in accordance with mandate of S. 235(2) of CrPC before pronouncing any sentence against them. SC 2102 (B). Fedrick Cutinha v. State of Karnataka AIR 2023 SUPREME COURT 2102 : AIR Online 2023 SC 282.

11.           S. 43 (3)–Fresh electricity connection–Denial of–Ground of non-payment of dues of erstwhile owner of premises–Transferee cannot be held liable for dues of erstwhile owner unless there is statutory rule for holding subsequent purchaser liable–Dues were not in name of petitioners, who had no nexus with erstwhile owner–Urja Vikas Nigam cannot compel petitioners to pay dues of erstwhile consumer for obtaining fresh electrical connection–Electrical connection cannot be refused to petitioners–Directions to provide electrical connections to petitioners; AirOnline 1995 SC 892, AIR 2010 SC 3835, Followed. Jha 90. Shivam Builders and Developmers v. Jharkhand Urja Vikas Nigam Limited and others AIR 2023 JHARKHAND 90 : AIR Online 2023 JHA 119.

12.           S. 138–Testimony of witness­ if testimony of witness is not challenged by way of cross examination, same is taken to be accepted. Kar 172. Ramya alias Rashmi v. J. Raghunanda AIR 2023 KARNATAKA 172 : AIROnline 2023 KAR 99.

13.           Words and Phrases–Material facts–‘Material facts’ include those particulars which if established would give petitioner relief asked for–They must be such facts as would afford basis for allegations made in election petition and would constitute ‘cause of action’ –‘Material facts’ would include positive statement of facts as also positive statement of negative fact. SC 2366 (C). Kanimozhi Karunanidhi v. A. Santhana Kumar and others AIR 2023 SUPREME COURT 2366 : AIR Online 2023 SC 368.