Get latest updates on Indian Judiciary and LexisNexis in the fortnightly e-newsletter by Team LexisNexis India. We bring to you in detail the Landmark Judgements from the Supreme Court of India and respective High Courts; Legislations Updates on Central and State Acts; related Legal News and Articles; Upcoming Events and Press Releases by LexisNexis India and Universal Law Publishing and our Newly Released Titles.
Issue 14 • July 2018
1. The Supreme Court of India, in State of Tamil Nadu vs. P.K. Sinha and Another, has held that the subject of water, that is to say, water supplies, irrigation and canals, drainage and embankments, water storage and water power, forms part of Entry 17 of List II of the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution, cannot be the basis to whittle down the efficacy of the Award passed by the Tribunal and as modified by this Court and, in particular, the scheme to ensure smooth, effective and efficient implementation of the Award of the Tribunal, as modified by this Court. [(2018) 5 MLJ 243 : LNINDORD 2018 SC 55]Read more
2. The Supreme Court of India, in Delhi Administration vs. Vidya Gupta, has held that either way, whether the adulterated food is stored for sale, or if such food is stored for making some other food which is sold, such storing is an offence. [(2018) 3 MLJ (Crl) 84 : LNIND 2018 SC 225]Read more
3. The Madras High Court, in Shabeen Zainab vs. District Collector (Chairman, District Committee), Nilgiris District, has held that the powers conferred on the District Collector under Section 3 of The Tamil Nadu Preservation of Private Forest Act includes the powers to rescind, revoke or vary the earlier order passed by him, as indicated in Section 15 of The Tamil Nadu General Clauses Act, 1891. [(2018) 5 MLJ 129 : LNINDORD 2018 MAD 5143]Read more
4. The Madras High Court, in Sayeed vs. State, rep. by Inspector of Police, All Women Police Station, Panruti, had held that the burden of proving the contrary against the statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act shall lie only on the shoulder of the accused. Unless he clear the same by disproving such presumption, the statutory presumption shall always be against such accused. [(2018) 3 MLJ (Crl) 46 : LNINDORD 2018 MAD 5055]Read more
(a) The Supreme Court of India has stayed the order passed by the Madras High Court on ground that although one of the judges, who passed the original judgment was available, he was not in the Bench which considered the review petition leading to the impugned order, which is in violation of the decision of this Court passed in Civil Appeal No.8525 of 2011 titled Malthesh Gudda Pooja vs. State of Karnataka & Ors., reported in LNIND 2011 SC 1115.
(b) The Supreme Court of India has held that every attempt should be made by all the Courts not to disclose the identity of the victim in terms of Section 228-A of Indian Penal Code.
(c) The Supreme Court of India has held that even a stationary vehicle can cause an accident, giving rise to claim under Section 165 of the Motor Vehicles Act.
(d) The Supreme Court of India has held that merely because certain municipal functions are performed By Industrial Development Authority, it can’t be treated as ‘municipality’ to exempt it from payment of income tax.