Today’s Legal Updates

Wednesday, 20th April 2022




Article – 295    Succession to property, assets, rights, liabilities and obligations in other cases.

  1. (1) As from the commencement of this Constitution—
    • (a) all property and assets which immediately before such commencement were vested in any Indian State corresponding to a State specified in Part B of the First Schedule shall vest in the Union, if the purposes for which such property and assets were held immediately before such commencement will thereafter be purposes of the Union relating to any of the matters enumerated in the Union List.
    • (b) all rights, liabilities and obligations of the Government of any Indian State corresponding to a State specified in Part B of the First Schedule, whether arising out of any contract or otherwise, shall be the rights, liabilities and obligations of the Government of India, if the purposes for which such rights were acquired or liabilities or obligations were incurred
      before such commencement will thereafter be purposes of the Government of India relating to any of the matters enumerated in the Union List, subject to any agreement entered into in that behalf by the Government of India with the Government of that State.
  2. (2) Subject as aforesaid, the Government of each State specified in Part B of the First Schedule shall, as from the commencement of this Constitution, be the successor of the Government of the corresponding Indian State as regards all property and assets and all rights, liabilities and obligations, whether arising out of any contract or otherwise, other than those referred to in clause (1).

Today’s Legal Updates :-

  1. On Wednesday the Supreme Court ordered status quo on the demolition drive currently ongoing in the riot hit area of north Delhi’s Jahangirpuri.
  2. On Wednesday morning the Delhi High Court said that it would hear a matter pertaining to the demolition drive that is taking place in the capital’s Jahangirpuri, days after communal clashes broke out in the area.
  3. A public interest litigation has been filed before the Bombay High Court seeking initiation of contempt of court proceedings against Maharashtra Chief Minister Uddhav Thackeray, Shiv Sena Member of Parliament Sanjay Raut, Maharashtra Home Minister Dilip Walse Patil and publisher of publisher of Saamana (Marathi newspaper published by Shiv Sena), Vivek Kadam.  (Indian Bar Association v. Sanjay Raut & Ors.)
  4. Victims of the Malegaon blast case of 2008 have written to Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court Dipankar Datta requesting for an extension of the tenure of Special Judge PR Sitre till the completion of the trial in the case.
  5. Last Week the Indore Bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court observed that live-in relationships were leading to rising incidents of sexual offences by promoting promiscuity and lascivious behaviour. (Abhishek v State of Madhya Pradesh)
  6. On Wednesday the Delhi High Court issued notice to the Central government on a public interest litigation (PIL) petition filed by BJP leader advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay challenging the constitutional validity of the provisions of Waqf Act of 1995.  (Ashwini Upadhyay v Union of India and Ors)
  7. On Wednesday the Calcutta High Court asked the Central and State governments to take note of corruption in the medical field in the form of hospitals or allied healthcare industries providing commissions or freebies to doctors for referring patients to them. (Peerless Hospitex Hospital and Research Center Limited v. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-1, Kolkata)
  8. On Wednesday the demolition drive by the North Delhi Municipal Corporation in the riot hit Jahangirpuri of Delhi has not been stopped yet despite status quo order by Supreme Court, Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave told Chief Justice of India (CJI) NV Ramana.
  9. On Wednesday the Chhattisgarh High Court held that if a spouse levels extra marital affair allegations on his or her partner without any proof, it would amount to cruelty.
  10. On Wednesday the Delhi High Court has sought a status report from the Central government on the steps it has taken to meet its international obligations and commitments on the issue of climate change.  (Rohit Madan v Union of India and Ors)
  11. On Tuesday the Supreme Court held that any debate or discussion on a public platform such as a television (TV) channel touching on criminal cases which are in the domain of courts would amount to direct interference in administration of criminal justice.  (Venkatesh @ Chandra v State of Karnataka)
  12. On Wednesday the Punjab & Haryana High Court refused to entertain a transfer petition filed by the wife in a matrimonial dispute, stating that the plea was nothing but sweet revenge by her to prevent the husband from seeking his rights. (Rinky Rani v Daljit Kumar)
  13. On Tuesday the Supreme Court deprecated the practice of courts pronouncing only the operative portion of the judgment without releasing a reasoned judgment.  (Indrajeet Yadav v. Santosh Singh and Another)
  14. On Tuesday the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) at Delhi, while applying the rule of estoppel, rejected a petition under Section 7 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) filed by Piramal Capital, which took over Dewan Housing Finance Limited (DHFL) in 2021.  (Dewan Housing Finance Limited v. Nayati Healthcare and Research NCR Pvt Limited)
    • Thus, now, by virtue of this petition under section 7 of code, it cannot be allowed to say that the said transaction was valid being loan in nature. The petitioner cannot be allowed to blow hot & cold by taking contradictory and inconsistent stands with a malafide intention to take undue advantage to secure an order of initiation of CIR proceedings against the corporate debtor herein.
    • The Tribunal framed the following questions of law:-
      • Whether the present petition has been filed by duly Authorised officer of DHFL and he is entitled to pursue the same on behalf of PHCFL as well?
      • Whether the petitioner bank actually extended the loan facility to the respondent corporate debtor?
      • Whether the petitioner bank is entitled to trigger CIR proceedings on the basis of default in repayment of the amount involved herein?
    • In the matter in hand, the power of attorney stood terminated on initiation of CIR proceedings, hence, the Power of Attorney also stand terminated on triggering of CIR proceedings.
    • The expression ‘debt due’ would obviously refer to debts that are ‘due and payable’ under law and not the amount, which was disbursed fraudulently and collusively with ulterior motive.
  15. On Wednesday the Delhi High Court expressed its displeasure over vacancies in several posts of statutory bodies that have been tasked with ensuring the welfare of persons with disabilities.  (Sanjay Verma and Anr v Union of India and Ors)
    • ACJ Sanghi said, What is the reluctance? Why aren’t vacancies being filled? How will these bodies functions? All these are statutory organisations, if they are not allowed to run what will happen? We want you to specifically tell us this.
  16. On Wednesday the Supreme Court sought the response of the Central government in a plea challenging the constitutional validity of levying Goods and Services Tax (GST) on rental payments. (Myrayash Hotels Pvt. Ltd. v. Union of India and ors.)
  17. On Tuesday the Kerala High Court observed that intense media scrutiny on cases and publishing of leaked information and half truths about ongoing trials impede the faith of the public in the justice-delivery system.  (TN Suraj v State of Kerala)
    • the order said, Publication of leaks from the investigation agencies and to level allegations against individuals based on such leaks are not protected by the freedom of press under Article 19 (a) of the Constitution and it cannot be a defense that what was telecast was the allegation based on the prima facie findings of an investigating agency or worse on the basis of suspicions of Investigating agency. As far as criminal trial is concerned, any reporting beyond the factual statement of what has transpired in a court room can be curbed in a given case.
    • Media cannot usurp the jurisdiction of the courts which alone has the constitutional authority to decide the guilt/innocence of a person or decide on the content, quality or the width of any right available to any citizen/accused/suspect. The rule of law, a basic feature of our Constitution grants every accused a right to ensure that he is tried in accordance with the procedure laid down by the criminal laws on the basis of the evidence let in the trial and without the court trying the case being influenced by a parallel trial by media or by commits and discussions by the media in regard to matters which are sub judice.
    • the Court opined, In a trial by media which apart from adversely affecting the rights of an accused for a fair trial has immense power to influence public opinion….This loss of faith in justice delivery system is aggravated when the judge, not the judgment itself is subjected to media criticism. In such cases, trial by media results in denigration of the justice delivery system which without doubt, is the very foundation of the rule of law in any democratic set up.
    • the Court said, Considering the nature of the contents of the publication/telecast in Exts. P8 to P11 and that those materials had not been established in any legal proceedings, there cannot be any justification for permitting such publications. Thus viewed, I have no hesitation to hold that the instant case warrants the extreme step of passing directions against the 6th respondent to prevent such publications in future.
  18. On Wednesday the Supreme Court issued notice to State of Kerala on the bail plea by Pulsar Suni, the prime accused in the 2017 actress abduction and sexual assault case in which Malayalam cine actor Dileep is an accused.  (Suni NS vs State of Kerala)
  19. On Tuesday the Supreme Court held that a High Court cannot set aside a well-reasoned order only on grounds of sympathy and sentiments, especially in cases involving misconduct by public servants. (Union of India v. M. Duraiswamy)
  20. On Wednesday the Delhi High Court sought the response of the Delhi government and the Director General (Prisons) on a public interest litigation (PIL) petition seeking appointment of medical officers, yoga teachers, vocational counselors, welfare officers and other staff in Delhi’s jails.  (Amit Sahni v Government of NCT of Delhi and Anr)
    • the Court said, We direct the respondents to file a status report with respect to the number of sanctioned strength of various posts which have been set out as well as the number of vacancies filled and which remain unfilled. Respondents are also directed to disclose the reason for these vacancies and what steps have been initiated for filling up the posts. We direct them to initially initiate the process of filling up vacancies and to expedite the process wherever it is underway and pending. The status report be filed within six weeks.
  21. On Tuesday the Supreme Court appointed Senior Advocate Aman Sinha as amicus curiae in a plea challenging the mandatory requirement of class XI certificate for eligibility in the counselling process for undergraduate courses of National Eligibility cum Test (NEET UG). (Srishti Nayak and ors. v. Union of India and ors.)
  22. On Wednesday the Delhi High Court asked counsel representing the Central government to come with instructions in a plea seeking details under the Right to Information (RTI) Act about meetings of the Selection Committee for choosing the Chairperson and members of the Lokpal.  (Anjali Bhardwaj v. Union of India)
    • the plea stated, The disclosure of information that forms the basis of the decisions of the Selection Committee is in the interest of the public at large since the public has a right to know the basis on which the chairperson and members of the Lokpal are selected.
    • The Hon’ble Supreme Court has given various directions to ensure transparency in the process of shortlisting and selection of functionaries of independent statutory bodies like the Information Commissions and the Central Vigilance Commission to prevent the appointment process being undermined behind a cloak of secrecy. Transparency in the selection process, which safeguards against arbitrariness in appointments, is key to ensure the proper functioning of institutions especially those entrusted with the task of looking into cases of corruption including against senior government functionaries.
  23. On Wednesday the Supreme Court has held that a deed of gift with regard to the ancestral property of Hindu Undivided executed ‘out of love and affection’ does not come within the scope of the term ‘pious purpose’.  (KC Laxmana vs KC Chandrappa Gowda)

Legal Prudent Fraternity