Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 8 and 11: Application seeking reference to arbitration in pending civil suit is not acceptable when: (i) suit concerns/affects non-signatories to arbitration agreement; and (ii) suit is in respect of matter which falls partly outside the arbitration agreement i.e. substantive relief claimed in suit falls outside the arbitration Clause. Arbitration agreement/clause is not binding on non-signatories. Partial bifurcation of suit, so as to refer a part of suit to arbitration is not permissible. [Gujarat Composite Ltd. v. A Infrastructure Ltd., (2023) 7 SCC 193]
Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — S. 47 and Or. 21: Alteration of terms of decree by executing court is not permissible. [Sanwarlal Agrawal v. Ashok Kumar Kothari, (2023) 7 SCC 307]
Constitution of India — Art. 14: Vague definitions and classification in creation of offence(s) and conferment of unguided power to investigate the same, that too by government order rather than legislation is sufficient for invalidation of the same. [State of T.N. v. R. Thamaraiselvam, (2023) 7 SCC 251]
Courts, Tribunals and Judiciary — Judicial process — Judicial Decision/Judicial function/Judicial reasoning — Judgment: Necessity of structure and clarity in judgment, emphasized. “Incomprehensible” High Court order set aside and matter remitted to High Court for consideration afresh. [SBI v. Ajay Kumar Sood, (2023) 7 SCC 282]
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Ss. 360 and 107 — Benefit of probation under S. 360 — Grant of: Factors to be considered for grant of probation, explained. [Soori v. State of Karnataka, (2023) 7 SCC 257]
Income Tax Act, 1961 — S. 2(15) [as amended by the Finance Act, 2011 (w.e.f. 1-4-2012) and the Finance Act, 2015 (w.e.f. 1-4-2016)]: Conditions for exemption vis-à-vis charitable purpose of advancement of any other object of general public utility (GPU), explained. Applicability of judgment dt. 19-10-2022, Ahmedabad UDA, (2023) 4 SCC 561, clarified. [CIT v. Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority, (2023) 7 SCC 249]
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Ss. 25(2)(a) & (g), 29, 18(1)(a) & (g), 3(27) and 5(10) — Rights and interests created in the facts of the case, in favour of corporate debtor partaking the character of ownership rights over immovable property: Entitlement of resolution professional to take control of assets owned by third party in possession of corporate debtor held under contractual arrangements, determined. Meaning, explanation and relevance of the terms “property” and “assets”, explained. Difference in powers/duties of resolution professional (RP) under S. 25 and interim resolution professional (IRP) under S. 18, illustrated. S. 18 Expln. is not applicable to RP acting under S. 25. Principles clarified relating to jurisdiction of NCLT/NCLAT in such cases to grant orders protecting possession of the corporate debtor at instance of RP. [Victory Iron Works Ltd. v. Jitendra Lohia, (2023) 7 SCC 227]
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Ss. 30 and 31: Modification/Alteration of resolution plan post its approval by adjudicating authority is not permissible. SREI Multiple Asset Investment Trust [Vision India Fund v. Deccan Chronicle Marketeers, (2023) 7 SCC 295]
Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302 and 376 — Rape and murder of minor: Modification of sentence of life imprisonment for entire biological life of convict, without any benefit of remission, to reduced fixed term sentence, when warranted, explained. [Kashi Nath Singh v. State of Jharkhand, (2023) 7 SCC 317]
Service Tax — Taxable Services — Works contract services: Leviability of service tax, explained. [Commr. of Customs, Excise & Service Tax v. Interarch Building Products (P) Ltd., (2023) 7 SCC 259]
Trade Marks Act, 1999 — S. 28: Ownership, and, perpetual right to use over trademark, distinguished between. [SREI Multiple Asset Investment Trust Vision India Fund v. Deccan Chronicle Marketeers, (2023) 7 SCC 295]
