LT March-2015
LT March-2015
petitions. The Supreme Court accepted the appeals, set The respondents herein had filed the criminal
aside the judgement and order passed by the High miscellaneous petition before the High Court seeking
Court. The interim order granted on 2.9.2013 by the cancellation of bail on grounds that the bail was
Supreme Court granting bail to the accused-petitioners obtained by the petitioners herein by gross
were ordered to continue till the disposal of case No. misrepresentation of facts, misleading the Court and
126 of 2012 corresponding case no. 182 of 2012. indulging in fraud. Thus, the petition challenged the
The operative part of the judgement read as under : legality of the grant of bail and required the bail order
to be set aside on ground of it being perverse in law.
An order for release on bail under proviso (a) to Section
167(2) is not an order on merits but an order-on-default The circumstances brought on record did not reflect any
situation where the bail was misused by the petitioner-
of the prosecuting agency. Such an order could be
accused. Therefore, the High Court could not have
nullified for special reasons after the defect/default has
been cured. The accused cannot, therefore, claim any entertained the said petition and cancelled the bail on
grounds on it being perverse in law.
special right to remain on bail. If the investigation
TTTTTTT
reveals that the accused has committed a serious offence
and charge-sheet is filed, the bail granted under Since, no express provision for review of order granting
bail exists under the Code, the High Court becomes
proviso(a) to Section 167(2) could be cancelled on an
functus officio and Section 362 of the Code applies
failed to appreciate that the Will dated 18.5.1995 executed When the counter-claim filed by the defendants is
by Jeth Ram, the father of defendant Nos. 12 to 14, was adjudicated and dismissed, finality is attached to it as
alive at the time of adjudication of the earlier suit and far as the controversy in respect of the claim put forth
hence, the said Will could not have taken aid of during by the defendants is concerned. Nothing in that regard
his lifetime. The aforesaid analysis persuaded the learned survives as far as the said defendants are concerned.
Single Judge to set aside the order passed by the learned When an opinion is expressed holding that the counter-
trial Judge. However, the Single Judge observed that it claim is barred by principles of Order 2, Rule 2 C.P.C.,
would be open to the plaintiff to raise all pleas against it indubitably adjudicates the controversy as regards the
the counter-claim. substantive right of the defendants who had lodged the
Against the judgement of the High Court special leave counter-claim. It cannot be regarded as an ancillary or
petition was filed. The Supreme Court accepted the incidental finding recorded in the suit.
appeal, set aside the order of the High Court mainly on TTTTTTT
the ground that revision was not maintainable, liberty There may be situations where an order can get the
was granted to the respondents to prefer an appeal status of a decree. A Court may draw up a formal decree
before the appropriate forum as required under law. or may not, but if by virtue of the order of the Court, the
rights have finally been adjudicated, irrefutably it would
The operative part of the judgement read as under : assume the status of a decree. As is evincible, in the case
A counter-claim preferred by the defendant in a suit is at hand, the counter-claim which is in the nature of a
in the nature of a cross-suit and by a statutory command cross-suit has been dismissed. Nothing else survives for
even if the suit is dismissed, counter-claim shall remain the defendants who had filed the counter-claim.
alive for adjudication. As per Rule 6A(2) the court is Therefore, we have no hesitation in holding that the
required to pronounce a final judgement in the same order passed by the learned trial Judge has the status
suit both on the original claim and also on the of a decree and the challenge to the same has to be
counterclaim. The seminal purpose is to avoid piece- made before the appropriate forum where appeal could
—JOHN T. NOLAN
—ROBERT TOWNSEND
Lacs) as punitive damages with this Mere proof of "unfair trade practice"is not enough for
Commission. Out of the said deposited claim or award of relief unless causing of loss is also
amount, a sum of Rs. 5 lacs (rupees five lacs) established which in the present case has not been
shall be paid to the petitioner-complainant and established.
rest of the amount shall be credited to the TTTTTTT
"Consumer Welfare Fund" of the Central Neither there is any averment in the complaint about
Government to be utilized for the benefit and the suffering of punitive damages by the other
protection of the interests of the consumers consumers nor the appellant was aware that any such
generally. We also award a sum of Rs. 50,000/ claim is to be met by it. Normally, punitive damages are
- (Rupees fifty thousand) in favour of the awarded against a conscious wrong doing unrelated to
complainant to meet his cost of litigation the actual loss suffered. Such a claim has to be specially
before the three consumer fora. The liability pleaded. The respondent complainant was satisfied with
to pay and deposit the amounts shall be joint the order of the District Forum and did not approach
and several on the respondents. We grant six the State Commission.
weeks to the respondents to comply with the TTTTTTT
directions given herein above. The National Commission has gone much beyond its
jurisdiction in awarding the relief which was neither
Against the order of the National Commission appeals
sought in the complaint nor before the State
were filed in the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court
Commission. We are thus, of the view that to this extent
accepted the appeals, the order of the National
the order of the National Commission cannot be
Commission to the extent of award of punitive damages
sustained. The said order is contrary to principles of fair
was set aside.
procedure and natural justice. We also make it clear that
this order will not stand in the way of any aggrieved
The operative part of the judgement read as under : party raising a claim before an appropriate forum in
What survives for consideration is the submission of
accordance with law.
learned senior counsel for the appellant, that there was
TTTTTTT
no claim before the National Commission for the
Reference : Supreme Court. General Motors (India)
punitive damages nor the appellant had an opportunity
Private Limited v. Ashok Ramnik Lal Tolat & Anr., civil
to meet such claim and that part of the order needs to
appeal nos. 8072-8073 of 2009 (from the Judgement and
be set aside.
Order dated 16.12.2008 of the National Consumer
TTTTTTT
Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in Revision
The Act is a piece of social legislation to provide a
Petition No. 3349 of 2006 and 2858 of 2008).
forum to the consumers who are taken for a ride by
—————
4 5
7 8 9
10 11
12
13 14
15
16
17
18
ACROSS DOWN
2. In civil law it means to find for the defender or 1. Any property which is capable of being inherited.
respondent in respect of the claim(s) made by the 3. A judicial prohibition or court order preventing
pursuer. someone from doing something.
4. Letters passing between seller and purchaser setting 5. A formal order made by a court containing its
out terms of agreement of the sale of property. decision.
7. The crime committed by a witness in court 6. The right of a person during his or her life to use and
proceedings by lying on oath or on an affirmation. enjoy property.
8. The legal share of a parent's free moveable estate 9. A formal statement of a witness taken or written by
due on death to the children. another person.
12. To discharge from liability. 10. The widow's legal right of dower in real estate.
15. A written statement in an action setting out the factual 11. When one party to an agreement does not pursue
and legal grounds of action of the pursuer in a civil rights under the agreement even though the other
action. party has not kept to its terms.
16. A civil wrong. 13. The effect or serve to the use, benefit, or advantage
17. To give (final) decree or judgment and authorises an of a person.
extract of the decree or order. 14. A term used to refer to a widow or widower in
18. The appearance of a defender or respondent in civil relation to succession to a deceased's estate.
proceedings.
For answers turn to page no. 154
—SPANISH PROVERS
the residence of the petitioner.. So far as the disturbance created by the police/state
c. Mobile public toilets (two vehicles) have officials/people at large in the appellant's peaceful
been placed by the Rajasthan Municipal living in his house is concerned, in our considered view,
Corporation in the concerned area so that they do result in adversely affecting the appellant's rights
hygiene is maintained in and around the area guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. The
which has been affected by regular RSHRC and the writ Court were, therefore, justified in
demonstration. Further all cautions have been entertaining the complaint under the Act and the writ
taken that the public uses such facilities and petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India
neither police personnel on duty nor the and in consequence justified in giving appropriate
demonstrator may spoil the walls of the directions mentioned above while disposing the
petitioner by urinating. appellant's complaint/writ petition.
TTTTTTT
d. Prior permission as per the Rules are being
given by the office of Deputy Commissioner State was right on their part in not contesting the
of Police, Jaipur (South) to the demonstrators appellant's complaint/writ petition by raising technical/
and District Collector is directed to ensure legal grounds finding the appellant's grievance made
that while giving permission for in his complaint to be genuine and then rightly came
demonstration it may also check that no out with remedial suggestions to deal with the situation
instruments are allowed which may violate arising in the case.
TTTTTTT
the Rules or cause noise pollution.
The Supreme Court accepted the appeal in part. The We have perused the steps suggested by the State in their
counter affidavit and find that if the steps suggested by
impugned orders were modified in as much as
the State are implemented in letter and spirit and further
Aggrieved, the accused filed appeal before the High There is no evidence showing any persistent dowry
Court. Criminal Revision was also filed by PW-4, Joginder demand or the conduct of the appellant subjecting
Singh, father of the deceased for enhancement of Sharanjit Kaur to cruelty or harassment for or in
sentence. The appeal and the revision were disposed of connection with dowry. About twenty days prior to the
by an order dated 11.8.2010 whereby the High Court occurrence, when Sharanjit Kaur went to her father's
dismissed the criminal revision and confirmed the house, she only generally stated about the dowry
conviction of the appellant and Pritam Singh while demand. She had not specifically stated about the
acquitting father-in-law and mother-in-law. demand of dowry by the appellant. In their evidence
Against the judgement of the High Court special leave PWs 4 and 5 have stated that on 25.8.1997, they went
borrowing. There is nothing on record to show that the Reference : Supreme Court. K. Subramani v. K.
prescribed mode was followed. The source claimed by Damodara Naidu, criminal appeal no. 2402 of 2014.
the complainant is savings from his salary and an —————
The relevant consideration to the case is the The alleged past conduct of the appellant in relation
antecedents of the candidate for appointing him to the to the criminal case will not debar or disqualify him for
post of Constable. Adverting to the criminal proceeding the post of the Constable for which he was successfully