2016 SCC Vol. 6 July 14, 2016 Part 3

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 31(7)(a) and (b) — Compound interest: Amount awarded under S. 31(7)(a) whether with interest or without interest, constitutes a “sum” for which the award is made. Thus, computation of amount has to be done by executing court on such basis. [Hyder Consulting (UK) Ltd. v. State of Orissa, (2016) 6 SCC 362]

Constitution of India — Arts. 14 and 32 — Allocation of State largesse — Judicial review — Delinking of radio spectrum allocation from licence and migration of existing licences — Validity: Government policy decision of 2012 allowing migration of existing licences to new telecom service i.e. from UASL to UL (unified licence) and from ISP to UL regime was taken after thorough examination of pros and cons. Held, policy decision concerned is neither arbitrary, nor discriminatory, nor based on irrelevant consideration and favouritism, nor mala fide, nor against statutory provisions, as alleged by petitioner. [Centre for Public Interest Litigation v. Union of India, (2016) 6 SCC 408]

Family and Personal Laws — Succession and Inheritance — Generally: Modes of succession to property, are only two: (1) by will, or (2) intestate succession. Statutory nomination of a person to an interest in property such as in a flat in a cooperative housing society or interest in insurance policy only bind the cooperative society and insurer, respectively but not the other heirs/successors. Title to such property has to be established as per law. [Indrani Wahi v. Registrar of Coop. Societies, (2016) 6 SCC 440]

International Law — Extradition: Extradition Treaty, 1898 between India and Chile, is existing and binding in terms of S. 2(d) of Extradition Act, 1962. [Marie-Emmanuelle, Verhoeven v. Union of India, (2016) 6 SCC 456]

Labour Law — Reinstatement/Back Wages/Arrears — Compensation in lieu of reinstatement: As the appellant workman had worked for about 14 yrs he was awarded Rs 2.5 lakhs as compensation in lieu of reinstatement and back wages. [Tota Ram v. Belliss India (P) Ltd., (2016) 6 SCC 406]

Securities and Exchange Board of India Act, 1992 — Ss. 12-A, 15-HA, 15-J and 24 — Manipulative/Fraudulent practice by stockbrokers: In the absence of direct proof, the courts are not helpless and it is the judicial duty to take note of the immediate and proximate facts and circumstances surrounding the events on which the charges/allegations are founded and to reach what would appear to the court to be a reasonable conclusion therefrom. Further, the test would always be as to what inferential process a reasonable/prudent man would adopt to arrive at a conclusion. [SEBI v. Kishore R. Ajmera, (2016) 6 SCC 368]

U.P. Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Rules, 1952 — Rr. 285-A to 285-G and 285-L — Auction-sale of property for recovery of arrears due to State (ESI dues) as arrears of land revenue: As there was non-deposit of purchase price in compliance with mandatory Rr. 285-D to 285-G and also as per auction notice and non-compliance with auction procedure prescribed under Rr. 285-A to 285-C by competent authority, auction-sale is invalid. However, direction issued under R. 285-L for refund of money deposited by purchaser with interest @ 5% p.a. to appellant purchaser. [Nirmal Singh v. Bhatia Safe Works, (2016) 6 SCC 397]

Join the discussion

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

fifteen − nine =