Important Supreme Court judgement 26th Sep 2019

25th September 2019 Important Supreme Court judgement

1. Krishnamurthy S. Setlur v. O.V. Narasimha Setty

The plea of adverse possession can be used both as an offence and as a defence i.e. both as sword and as a shield.

Case Number : C.A. No. 6111 / 2009 26-09-2019
Petitioner’s Advocate : Rajeev Singh
Respondent’s Advocate : Abhijit Sengupta
Bench : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aniruddha Bose
Judgment By : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta

2. Md. Abrar v. Meghalaya Board of Wakf

The Waqfs Act, 1995 – The Indian Succession Act, 1925 – Section 25 – Lineal Consanguinity – Whether a person from the waqif’s family line could succeed to the vacant post of joint mutawalli after the death of any of the two original joint mutawallis ?

Case Number : C.A. No. 4025 / 2010 26-09-2019
Petitioner’s Advocate : Mukesh K. Giri
Bench : Hon’ble Mr. Justice N.V. Ramana, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi
Judgment By : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

3. Director of Elementary Education, Odisha Director v. Sri Pramod Kumar Sahoo

Education Law – The Trained Matric Teacher is the one who has been trained for the purposes of teaching. In the absence of such training, the respondent cannot be said to be a Trained Matric Teacher entitled to the pay scale meant for such teachers. The classification based upon educational qualification for grant of higher pay scale to a trained person or a person possessing higher qualification is a valid classification.

Case Number C.A. No. 7577 / 2019 26-09-2019
Petitioner’s Advocate : Shibashish Misra
Bench : Hon’ble Mr. Justice L. Nageswara Rao, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta
Judgment By : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta

4. Leeladhar v. Vijay Kumar

The Specific Relief Act, 1963 – Section 20(2)(c) – Discretion as to decreeing specific performance – To take benefit of clause (c) of sub-­section (2) of Section 20 of the Specific Relief Act, the defendant in a suit for specific performance must show that he entered into the contract under the circumstances which though rendering the contract voidable,make it inequitable.

Case Number : C.A. No. 7282 / 2009 26-09-2019
Petitioner’s Advocate : Prashant Chaudhary
Respondent’s Advocate : P.K. Jain
Bench : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Aniruddha Bose
Judgment By : Hon’ble Mr. Justice Deepak Gupta