Civil Procedure Code, 1908 — S. 20 — Civil suit — Maintainability — Issue of territorial jurisdiction — Adjudication of, as preliminary issue — Necessity of: The question of territorial jurisdiction should ordinarily be decided at the outset rather than being deferred till all matters are resolved, [Arcadia Shipping Ltd. v. Tata Steel Ltd., (2024) 9 SCC 374]
Constitution of India — Art. 226 — Habeas corpus — Custody of minor child: Propositions of settled law that need to be kept in mind while granting custody of minor child, summarized, [Somprabha Rana v. State of M.P., (2024) 9 SCC 382]
Consumer Protection — Services — Housing and Real Estate: Contractual obligations of deceased developer/builder under a contract based on individual’s skills, competency or other qualifications is not imposable, on legal heirs of developer/promisor. Personal rights/obligations and proprietary rights, distinguished between, [Vinayak Purshottam Dube v. Jayashree Padamkar Bhat, (2024) 9 SCC 398]
Election — Election Petition/Trial — Practice and Procedure for Election Trial — Pleadings and particulars — Contents/Material facts/Full particulars — Subsequent Pleadings/Replication/Rejoinder — Replication — Permissibility: High Court acting as Election Tribunal vested with powers of civil court under CPC, and hence, in exercise of power under Or. 8 R. 9 CPC empowered to grant leave to election petitioner to file replication. However, such leave cannot be granted mechanically and Court must consider averments in election petition, written statement and replication. While considering grant of leave, Court must bear in mind that: (i) replication is not needed to merely traverse facts pleaded in written statement; (ii) replication not a substitute for amendment; and (iii) new cause of action or plea inconsistent with plea in original petition cannot be permitted in replication. Material facts and particulars as to commission of alleged corrupt practice required to be given in election petition and not in replication filed much after expiry of period of limitation for filing election petition, [Noorul Hassan v. Nahakpam Indrajit Singh, (2024) 9 SCC 353]
Income Tax Act, 1961 — S. 206-C(6) r/w Expln. (a)(iii) — Collection of income tax at source from liquor vendors (contractors) in Karnataka — Non-requirement of: Liquor vendors (contractors) who bought vending rights in auction cannot be considered, as “buyer” within the meaning of Expln. (a) to S. 206-C. Law clarified on satisfaction of twin conditions of exclusion from the meaning of “buyer”, [CIT v. Mysore Sales International Ltd., (2024) 9 SCC 415]
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 — Ss. 138, 139 and 118 — Dishonour of cheques — Acquittal of accused — Validity: In absence of evidence not showing enforceable debt or other liability, acquittal in cheque dishonour case, affirmed, [Rajco Steel Enterprises v. Kavita Saraff, (2024) 9 SCC 390]
Penal Code, 1860 — Ss. 302/149 and S. 148 — Unlawful assembly and murder — Liability of appellant — Determination of: Law summarized on principles for conviction on basis of constructive liability under S. 149. Absence of factum of causing injury and mere role of firing from a pistol into the air to frighten the eyewitnesses, when they attempted to save the deceased, held, not enough to exculpate appellant, as all requirements of S. 149 stood satisfied. Hence, his conviction under Ss. 302/149 and S. 148 confirmed, [Nitya Nand v. State of U.P., (2024) 9 SCC 314]
Railways Act, 1989 — S. 106 — Charge on the basis of incorrect chargeable distance notified: Charge levied by Railways on basis of incorrect chargeable distance is illegal charge. Concepts of overcharge and illegal charge, explained and distinguished, [Union of India v. Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd., (2024) 9 SCC 241]
Service Law — Pension — Entitlement to pension — Prerequisites — Compliance — Necessity: Pension is a constitutional right and not bounty, which an employee is entitled on his superannuation. However, pension can be claimed only when it is permissible under relevant rules and scheme — Where employee is covered under Provident Fund scheme and not holding pensionable post, he cannot claim pension, [U.P. Roadways Retired Officials & Officers Assn. v. State of U.P., (2024) 9 SCC 331]
Service Law — Regularisation — Entitlement to regularization: Essence of employment and rights thereof cannot be merely determined by initial terms of appointment when actual course of employment has evolved significantly over time, [Vinod Kumar v. Union of India, (2024) 9 SCC 327]