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
