service matter= All these eleven persons, who were engaged by one K.D.S. College (respondent No.8 in these proceedings) situate within the jurisdiction of P.S. Gogari, District Khagaria, Bihar, wanted regularisation of their services and payment of salary based on such regularisation.=The crucial question is if their initial appointment by the Managing Committee was in consonance with Article 14 of the Constitution of India by open advertisement and competitive merit selection. On account of various interpretations by more than one Bench of M.L. Kesari (supra) reference was made to the Full Bench. We have already noticed from the order refusing regularization dated 13.08.2003 that the appointment of the Appellants on daily wage was not in consonance with the law.

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2356 OF 2018 UPENDRA SINGH .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS STATE OF BIHAR AND OTHERS .....RESPONDENT(S) J U D G…

service matter = a practicing Advocate of Rajasthan High Court, questioning the Notification dated 12.05.2017 appointing respondent Nos.2 and 3 as Additional Judges of Rajasthan High Court. = It is a matter of common knowledge that most of the judicial officers get a chance for elevation when only few years’ service is left. Thus, when unduly long time is taken, even this lesser tenure gets further reduced. It also gives rise to the situation like the present one. Equally, members of the Bar, whose names are recommended for elevation to the High Court, undergo hardships of a different kind. It is unjust that the fate of such persons remains in limbo for indefinite periods and gives rise to unnecessary conjectural debates. = It leads to unpleasant situations which can be avoided. It is, therefore, in the interest of all the stakeholders, including the judiciary, that definite timelines are drawn for each stage of the process, so that process of appointment is accomplished within a time bound manner. We need not say more. It is more so, to keep hope and aspiration of litigants alive and to fulfil the commitment of providing a speedy justice the process of appointment of Judges of the High Court needs more expedition at the hands of all who have to discharge the constitutional obligation entrusted by the Constitution of India.

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL ORIGINAL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION (C) NO.835 OF 2017 SUNIL SAMDARIA ... PETITIONER VERSUS UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF LAW AND JUSTICE AND OTHERS         ... RESPONDENTS J U D G M E N T ASHOK BHUSHAN, J. This   writ   petition   under   Article   32   of   the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner,…

corporate laws – M.V. Act – Insurance laws – personal expenditure was fixed from 1/3 to 1/2 as dependents are majors= The deduction made for personal expenses at 1/3 is very low keeping in view the fact that the claimants are his two major sons and two grand­daughters. – We feel that 50% deduction is called for and if this factor is taken into consideration then the loss of dependency is Rs.1,82,250/­ and if multiplier of 5 is used, the compensation works out to Rs.9,11,250/­.

1 ‘NON­REPORTABLE’ IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION SPECIAL LEAVE PETITON (C) NO(S).13931 OF 2017 NEW INDIA ASSURANCE CO. LTD.       …. Petitioner (s) Versus VINISH…

Erroneous findings are liable to be set aside = We fail to understand how the High Court could come to this conclusion. In the written statement the defendant had denied the averments made in Para 2 of the plaint. The defendant had denied that he had received Rs.92,000/­ as earnest money. There was no admission by him of any of the allegations. The reasoning given by the High Court is specious and cannot stand scrutiny. The High Court did not discuss the evidence at all and erred in setting aside the concurrent findings of both the Courts.

1 ‘NON­REPORTABLE’ IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 2435  OF 2018 (@SLP (C) NO(S).34464 OF 2016) DALIP SINGH        …. Appellant(s) Versus…

corporate laws – tax laws- Rajasthan Sales Tax Act, 1994, – when sale price reduced – assessee is entitled for refund of excess sale tax paid = refund of the sales tax paid on the excess sale amount i.e. Rs.37/­. The case of the assessee was that he had paid tax on the provisional price of Rs.682/­ per cylinder. After the price had been reduced to Rs.645/­, he was only entitled to Rs.645/­. The oil companies had taken refund of the amount of Rs.37/­ and, therefore the tax paid on the excess amount be refunded to him. The assessee also urged that this amount of Rs.37 should not be counted in its total turnover. = though the assessee may have received Rs.682/­ per cylinder, it was under a legal obligation only to receive that price which was fixed by the MoP & NG. This price could have been higher than Rs.682/­ per cylinder, in which event the assessee would have had to collect and deposit with the Rajasthan Sales Tax Department sales tax on the excess amount. However, since the price of the cylinder has been reduced, the assessee cannot charge more than the price fixed, is bound to refund the excess amount collected and is therefore legally entitled to get refund of the tax paid on the excess amount. – In view of the above discussion, we allow the appeals, set aside the judgment of the High Court and direct that the assessee shall be refunded the amount of sales tax paid on the excess amount. The order of the Deputy Commissioner is restored. The assessee shall be entitled to interest at the rate of 9% per annum on the amount payable to it from the date of the order of the Deputy Commissioner till payment of the amount.

1 ‘REPORTABLE’ IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO(S). 2431 OF 2018 (@SLP (C) NO(S).23659 OF 2015) M/s. Universal Cylinders Limited …. Appellant(s) Versus The…

corporate laws – Excise laws – sale of liquor along and in the proximity of highways = the state governments would not be precluded from determining whether the principle which has been laid down by this Court in the order dated 11 July 2017 in Arrive Safe Society (supra) should also apply to areas covered by local selfgoverning bodies and statutory development authorities. We are inclined to allow the state governments to make this determination since it is a question of fact as to whether an area covered by a local self-governing body is proximate to a municipal agglomeration or is sufficiently developed as to warrant the application of the same principle. In deciding as to whether the principle which has been set down in the order dated 11 July 2017 should be extended to a local self-governing body (or statutory development authority) the state governments would take recourse to all relevant circumstances including the nature and extent of development in the area and the object underlying the direction prohibiting the sale of liquor on national and the state highways. The use of the expression ‘municipal areas’ in the order dated 11 July 2017 does not prevent the state governments from making that determination and from taking appropriate decisions consistent with the object of the orders passed by this Court. We leave it open to individual licensees to submit their representations to the competent authorities in the state governments if they are so advised upon which appropriate decisions may be taken by the state governments.

1 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION MA Nos 489-491/2018, 366-368/2018, 392-394/2018, 395-397/2018, 388- 390/2018, 1543-1545/2017, 1546-1548/2017 AND 1549-1551/2017 IN CIVIL APPEAL NOS 12164-12166 OF 2016 THE…

corporate laws – SARFAESI Act= Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited, -vs- M/s. Deccan Chronicle Holdings Limited =Merely because steps are taken under this general law would not mean that remedy under the special statute is foreclosed. = respondent No.1 would be treated as ‘borrower’ within the meaning of Section 2(1)(f) of the SARFAESI Act; the arrangement would be classified as ‘security arrangement’ under Section 2(1) (zb); the agreements created ‘security interest’ under Section 2(1) (zf); and the appellant became ‘secured creditor’ within the meaning of Section 2(1)(zd) of SARFAESI Act.

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 18 OF 2018 INDIABULLS HOUSING FINANCE LIMITED .....APPELLANT(S) VERSUS M/S. DECCAN CHRONICLE HOLDINGS LIMITED AND OTHERS .....RESPONDENT(S)…

corporate laws – Section 5 of the Indian Ports Act, 1908, – notification dated 18th January, 2016, issued under Section 5 of the Indian Ports Act, 1908, by which the State Government of Gujarat expanded the port limits of Hazira port. = can not questioned – it has not been shown to us as to how the impugned notification is contrary to public interest. – the power of the Government to alter the limits of any port under Section 5(1) of the Indian Ports Act must be done only in public interest a commercial port’s limits were altered in public interest because the number of vessels at Hazira port were expected to increase dramatically and it was, therefore, necessary to make adequate facilities not only for anchorage of such vessels, but also for reasons of customs formalities, port conversion, general security etc. We are not, therefore, satisfied that the notification is ultra vires Section 5 of the Indian Ports Act. We have already seen that the Appellants have no ‘right’ to private property in view of the fact that the ownership of the captive jetty that has been constructed and the ownership of reclaimed land is with the GMB/State Government. For this reason also, the notification is intra vires as the alteration in the limits of Hazira Port does not affect any ‘right’ of the Appellants to private property.

REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 2406 OF 2018 (Arising out of SLP (C) No.21364 of 2017) ESSAR BULK TERMINAL LIMITED & ANR.…

whether the order passed by the City Civil Court in exercise of power under Section 9 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, as an Appellate Officer, is in the capacity of a Civil Court or persona designata? – whether the Letters Patent Appeal filed by the contesting respondents before the High Court of Judicature at Bombay against the decision of the learned Single Judge rendered in a writ petition (purportedly filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India), questioning the correctness and validity of the decision of the City Civil Court, Mumbai in Miscellaneous Civil Appeal No.121 of 2011 dated 03.04.2012, which was affirmed by the learned Single Judge, was maintainable.

1 REPORTABLE IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO. 15536 OF 2017 (Arising out of SLP (Civil) No.11348 of 2013) Life Insurance Corporation of India…