Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

@legalstudypoint

Kanal geosi va tili: Hindiston, Inglizcha

Toifa: Huquq

Here we'll be providing notes, PDFs and other materials related to the field of law. 👨‍⚖️
For collab, promo and objections, contact @trekmaster

Связанные каналы | Похожие каналы

Kanal geosi va tili

Hindiston, Inglizcha

Toifa

Huquq

Statistika

Saralanganlar

Postlar filtri

O‘chirilganlarni yashirish

Repostlarni yashirish

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

16 Feb, 16:24

Negotiable Instruments Act Notes.pdf

1.4Mb

Landmark Judgements under POSCO Act 2012 .pdf

710.6Kb

the_indian_forest_act,_1927 (4).pdf

872.0Kb

70 0 3

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

14 Feb, 15:51

Know_The_Law_When_Can_Part_Performance_Of_Contract_Be_Allowed_As.pdf

695.8Kb

115 0 2

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 13:59

Obscenity explained IE Feb 13, 2025.pdf

251.9Kb

What does the law say about obsenity?
EXPLAINED

576 0 3

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 13:26

https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/permanent-alimony-interim-maintenance-can-be-granted-even-when-marriage-is-void-under-hindu-marriage-act-supreme-court-283751

Permanent Alimony & Interim Maintenance Can Be Granted Even When Marriage Is Void Under Hindu Marriage Act : Supreme Court

Answering a reference, the Supreme Court today (February 12) ruled

154 0 1

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 13:25

alimony in case of void marriages.pdf

308.4Kb

Permanent Alimony & Interim Maintenance Can Be Granted Even When Marriage Is Void Under Hindu Marriage Act : Supreme Court

456 0 4

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 07:41

Ivan Rathinam Vs Milan Joseph _2025-01-28.pdf

503.7Kb

Supreme Court of India
Date of Judgment:- 28-01-2025
Ivan Rathinam Vs Milan Joseph

Title :- Jurisdiction of Family Court in Legitimacy and Maintenance Disputes

The Supreme Court held that the Family Court lacks jurisdiction to declare legitimacy unless linked to a marital dispute. The Munsiff and Sub-Judge Courts correctly handled the case. The Family Court erred in reviving the Maintenance Petition, as the issue was already settled, violating res judicata. Legitimacy under Section 112 of the Indian Evidence Act stands unless rebutted. The maintenance proceedings were quashed, and the respondent was presumed the legitimate son of Mr. Raju Kurian. The appeal was allowed, and pending applications were disposed of.

126 0 2

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 07:41

CHANDRABHAN_SUDAM_SANAP_Vs_THE_STATE_OF_MAHARASHTRA_2025_01_28.pdf

708.5Kb

Supreme Court of India
Date of Judgment:- 28-01-2025
CHANDRABHAN SUDAM SANAP Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Title :- Supreme Court Acquits Appellant Due to Gaps in Prosecution’s Case

The Supreme Court set aside the Bombay High Court’s judgment and acquitted the appellant, citing inconsistencies in the prosecution’s case. The recovery of key evidence, including a trolley bag and identity card, was found unreliable due to lack of credible witnesses and procedural lapses. The Court noted threats and coercion used against witnesses, undermining their testimonies. It criticized the prosecution for failing to establish a complete chain of circumstantial evidence. Applying the test in Sharad Birdhichand Sarda, the Court found the case failed to meet the standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt. The appellant's conviction was deemed unsafe, leading to acquittal. The Court ordered his immediate release unless required in another case.

99 0 0

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 07:41

CONSTABLE_907_SURENDRA_SINGH_&_ANR_Vs_STATE_OF_UTTARAKHAND_2025.pdf

214.5Kb

Supreme Court of India
Date of Judgment:- 28-01-2025
CONSTABLE 907 SURENDRA SINGH & ANR. Vs STATE OF UTTARAKHAND
Title :- Supreme Court Reaffirms Acquittal, Emphasizing Common Intention in Criminal Liability

The Supreme Court overturned the Uttarakhand High Court’s decision convicting three appellants under Section 34 IPC, restoring their acquittal by the trial court. The Court emphasized that mere presence in the vehicle with the main accused did not establish a shared common intention to commit murder. It reiterated that appellate courts should interfere with acquittals only if the judgment is perverse or ignores material evidence. The prosecution failed to prove pre-planning or a meeting of minds among the accused. The appellants’ acquittal was reaffirmed, and their bail bonds were discharged.

89 0 2

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 07:41

JAGWANT KAUR Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS._2025-01-27.pdf

92.1Kb

Supreme Court of India
Date of Judgment:- 27-01-2025
JAGWANT KAUR Vs UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

Title :- Supreme Court Upholds LPG Distributorship Allotment Amid Land Dispute

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal challenging the allotment of an LPG distributorship in Balachaur. The appellant argued that the selected candidate had offered a disputed land parcel, but the Court found that the land was properly leased and met all requirements. The Corporation verified that two applicants had leased different parcels from the same owner. The Court upheld the acceptance of an alternate land due to shifting claims by the lessor. Citing Mrinmoy Maity v. Chhanda Koley, it affirmed the flexibility in allotment guidelines. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs.

72 0 0

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 07:41

K. SAMBA MOORTHY Vs SANJIV CHADHA & ORS._2025-01-27.pdf

227.6Kb

Supreme Court of India
Date of Judgment:- 27-01-2025
K. SAMBA MOORTHY Vs SANJIV CHADHA & ORS.

Title :- Supreme Court Orders Promotion with Retrospective Effect and Monetary Benefits

The Supreme Court directed the promotion of the appellant to Manager Grade-III from 28.07.2001 with all monetary benefits and 6% interest, as the fundamental defect in the enquiry was not his fault. The Court noted the appellant’s right to seek remedies for denial of further promotions in 2016, 2017, and 2018. It clarified that any such proceedings should not be dismissed on limitation or laches. The respondents were given four weeks to comply. The contempt petition was not pursued. The High Court’s judgment dated 24.08.2023 was set aside. The appeal was partly allowed.

66 0 0

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 07:41

RAMESH_BAGHEL_Vs_STATE_OF_CHHATTISGARH_&_OTHERS_2025_01_27.pdf

703.1Kb

Supreme Court of India
Date of Judgment:- 27-01-2025
RAMESH BAGHEL Vs STATE OF CHHATTISGARH & OTHERS

Title :- Supreme Court Upholds Burial Regulations in Chhattisgarh Dispute

The Supreme Court ruled on a burial dispute, directing the appellant to conduct his father's funeral at the designated Christian burial ground in Karkapal. The Court emphasized the need to follow the Chhattisgarh Gram Panchayat Rules, rejecting claims of an absolute right to burial on private land. The State was instructed to provide logistical and police support to ensure a dignified burial. A split verdict led to consensus under Article 142 for an expedited resolution. The judgment reaffirmed the importance of maintaining public order while respecting religious customs. The State was also directed to identify burial sites for Christians statewide. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.

62 0 0

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 07:41

SOMDATT_BUILDERS_–NCC_–_NECJV_Vs_NATIONAL_HIGHWAYS_AUTHORITY_OF.pdf

347.9Kb

Supreme Court of India
Date of Judgment:- 27-01-2025
SOMDATT BUILDERS –NCC – NEC(JV) Vs NATIONAL HIGHWAYS AUTHORITY OF INDIA & ORS.

Title :- Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Tribunal's Interpretation of BOQ Contracts

The Supreme Court ruled that in contracts with provisional quantities, final payments must align with BOQ rates, even if quantities exceed estimates. It upheld the arbitral tribunal's decision that increased geogrid usage did not constitute a variation requiring renegotiation under Clause 51. The Division Bench's interference was deemed unjustified, as the tribunal’s interpretation was plausible. Courts under Sections 34 and 37 of the Arbitration Act cannot re-evaluate arbitrators' findings unless they violate public policy. The ruling reinforces that arbitrators, especially technical experts, are the final interpreters of contract terms.

73 0 0

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 07:41

HARSHIT_HARISH_JAIN_&_ANR_Vs_THE_STATE_OF_MAHARASHTRA_&_ORS_2025.pdf

386.6Kb

Supreme Court of India
Date of Judgment :- 24-01-2025
HARSHIT HARISH JAIN & ANR. Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ORS.

Title :- Supreme Court Restores Stamp Duty Refund, Quashes CCRA's Unlawful Review

The Supreme Court set aside the Bombay High Court's judgment and ruled in favor of the appellants, holding that their stamp duty refund claim was not time-barred. The Court found that the Chief Controlling Revenue Authority (CCRA) had no statutory power to review its own order and quashed its subsequent recall of the refund. The Court restored the initial refund order dated 08.01.2018 and directed the respondents to refund ₹27,34,500 with 6% interest from that date. Any further delay in payment will attract 12% interest per annum. The appeal was allowed.

87 0 0

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 07:41

M_Venkateswaran_Vs_The_State_rep_by_the_Inspector_of_Police_2025.pdf

3.9Mb

Supreme Court of India
Date of Judgment :- 24-01-2025
M. Venkateswaran Vs The State rep. by the Inspector of Police

Title :- Conviction Upheld, Sentence Modified with ₹3 Lakh Compensation Directive

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of the appellant under Section 498-A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act but modified the sentence to the period already undergone. The Court directed the appellant to pay ₹3,00,000 as compensation to the complainant within four weeks. The amount must be deposited in the Trial Court and disbursed to the complainant after identification. If the appellant fails to comply, the appeal will be treated as dismissed, and he must serve the remaining sentence. The High Court’s judgment was set aside, and bail bonds will be discharged upon payment.

82 0 1

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 07:41

MADHUSHREE_DATTA_Vs_THE_STATE_OF_KARNATAKA_&_ANR_2025_01_24.pdf

241.2Kb

Supreme Court of India
Date of Judgment :- 24-01-2025
MADHUSHREE DATTA Vs THE STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.

Title :- Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Case, Finds No Prima Facie Offence Under IPC Sections 323, 504, 506, and 509

The Supreme Court quashed criminal proceedings against the appellants, finding no prima facie case under Sections 323, 504, 506, and 509 IPC. The Court emphasized that mere allegations of "filthy language" without contextual details or intent to insult modesty do not suffice for prosecution. It noted inconsistencies in the complaint, FIR, and chargesheet, suggesting a deliberate attempt to convert a civil dispute into a criminal case. The Court ruled that allowing proceedings to continue would be an abuse of legal process. The pending labour court dispute remains unaffected by this decision.

79 0 1

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

13 Feb, 07:41

T_RAJAMONI_SO_THASON_DEAD_THROUGH_LRS_Vs_THE_MANAGER,_ORIENTAL_INSURANCE.pdf

220.5Kb

Supreme Court of India
Date of Judgment :- 24-01-2025
T. RAJAMONI S/O THASON DEAD THROUGH LRS.Vs THE MANAGER, ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED AND OTHERS

Title :- Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Mason in Motor Accident Case

The Supreme Court modified the compensation awarded in a motor accident case involving a mason who suffered serious head injuries. The High Court had reduced the compensation by not applying the multiplier method, awarding ₹2,10,000 for loss of income. The Supreme Court found this inadequate and increased it to ₹7,50,000, setting total compensation at ₹12,09,017 with 7.5% interest. The insurer must deposit the balance within six weeks. The Court noted the appellant’s lack of legal representation before the High Court and accounted for his disability and employability. The appeal was allowed in part.

99 0 1

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

10 Feb, 19:29

Syllabus

169 0 0

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

10 Feb, 19:29

Notification-07-02-2025-1.pdf

752.3Kb

Detail notification

138 0 0

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

10 Feb, 19:29

Assam Judicial Service

134 0 0

Judiciary | PCS-J | CLAT | CUET LLM | AIBE

10 Feb, 13:10

Dinesh-Kumar-Mathur-vs-State-Of-M.P.--2025-INSC-16.pdf

420.4Kb

Omi_@_Omkar_Rathore_vs_State_Of_Madhya_Pradesh_2025_INSC_27_1.pdf

214.2Kb

combined rejection3a20325a-e9ac-4147-9751-5ae6d1845b4d.pdf

704.2Kb

Indian Penal Code 1860 - Section 420 - To establish the offence of cheating in inducing the delivery of property, the following ingredients need to be proved: (i) The representation made by the person was false. (ii) The accused had prior knowledge that the representation he made was false. (iii) The accused made false representation with dishonest intention in order to deceive the person to whom it was made. (iv) The act where the accused induced the person to deliver the property or to perform or to abstain from any act which the person would have not done or had otherwise committed.- Referred to in Vijay Kumar Ghai v. State of W.B