Sahayata & Sahayata

Summary: In the case Chattar Singh Matharoo vs. Ashwani Mudgil (CS (OS) No. 576/06), dated September 16, 2015, the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi addressed the issue of proving a Will when it is part of a series of documents related to the transfer of property title. The Court, referring to the earlier judgment in Ramesh Chand vs. Suresh Chand & Anr. (2012 (188) DLT 538), observed in paragraph 6 of the judgment that when a Will is among several documents executed to transfer the title of a suit property, it does not need to be classically proved as required in succession cases under the Indian Succession Act. This observation highlights that the proof of a Will in the context of property disputes, where it is one of several documents, is distinct from the stringent requirements typically applied in cases involving the succession of property. The Court recognized that in property disputes, the broader context of document execution and the transfer process takes precedence over the cl...

In the case Kahkashan Kausar @ Sonam & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Ors. , the Supreme Court of India, on February 8, 2021, quashed the FIR filed against the in-laws of the complainant under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), including Section 498A, which pertains to cruelty against a woman by her husband or his relatives. The judgment, delivered by Justices S. Abdul Nazeer and Krishna Murari, addressed the growing concern over the misuse of Section 498A IPC, particularly the tendency to implicate distant relatives of the husband with general and non-specific allegations in matrimonial disputes. The Court observed that the incorporation of Section 498A IPC was intended to protect women from cruelty within marriage; however, it has increasingly been misused as a tool to settle personal scores. In this case, the allegations made against the in-laws were found to be general, vague, and lacking specificity. The Court emphasized that subjecting the accused to a...

In cases where a person issues multiple cheques that subsequently bounce, the court can legally try a single complaint covering all those cheques. This position is supported by the case  Tiruchandur Murugan Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd. vs. Madan Lal Ram Kumar Cotton and General Merchants  [2001 (1) KLJ 360]. In this case, it was held that a single complaint can be filed in respect of more than one dishonored cheque issued by the same drawer. The rationale behind this decision is based on the principle of judicial efficiency and convenience. Since the issue of dishonor arises from a common transaction or course of dealing between the parties, the court allows the complaints to be consolidated and tried together. This avoids multiplicity of litigation and expedites the legal process. This ruling simplifies the procedural aspect for complainants, who can address multiple cheque dishonor incidents under a unified legal action rather than filing separate complaints for each cheque.

In a cheque bounce scenario, when the bank returns a cheque with the remark “Refer to Drawer,” it signifies that the cheque has been dishonored. Typically, this happens because the drawer’s (the person who issued the cheque) account does not have sufficient funds to cover the cheque amount. Since banks are legally bound by confidentiality under banking secrecy laws, they avoid directly stating the reason for the dishonor (like "insufficient funds") and instead use this more neutral phrase. The phrase “Refer to Drawer” essentially directs the payee (the person in whose favor the cheque was drawn) to contact the drawer for clarification or resolution of the issue. In many cases, the underlying reason is insufficient funds in the drawer’s account, which is a violation that can be prosecuted under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments (NI) Act, 1881. Legal Implications: Section 138 of the NI Act:  If a cheque bounces due to insufficient funds, the payee can initiate legal pro...

Dashrathbhai Trikambhai Patel vs. Hitesh Mahendrabhai Patel & Anr. Court : Supreme Court of India Citation : Criminal Appeal No. 1497 of 2022 Date of Judgment : October 11, 2022 Judges : Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J., and Hima Kohli, J. Legal Context : Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act). Key Facts : The appellant, Dashrathbhai Trikambhai Patel, issued a statutory notice under Section 138 of the NI Act to the respondent, alleging the dishonour of a cheque worth ₹20 lakhs, issued by the respondent to discharge a debt. The respondent admitted to making part payments towards the debt before the cheque was encashed but denied that the full amount was due when the cheque was presented. Legal Issues : Whether a dishonoured cheque, which does not represent the full enforceable debt at the time of encashment due to part payments, can attract liability under Section 138 of the NI Act. Whether a notice under Section 138 demanding the full cheque amount, without ac...

Supreme Court Upholds Discretion of Calcutta High Court Division Bench in Allowing Late Filing of Written Statement by Respondent Summary: In the case of PIC Departmentals Pvt. Ltd. vs. Sreeleathers Pvt. Ltd. , the Supreme Court dismissed an appeal challenging the judgment of the Calcutta High Court's Division Bench, which had allowed the respondent, Sreeleathers Pvt. Ltd., to file a written statement in a suit that had been pending since 1999. The controversy arose when the respondent's signboard allegedly obstructed a hoarding put up by the appellant, leading to a long-standing legal battle. The main issue before the Supreme Court was whether the Division Bench of the High Court was correct in permitting the late filing of the written statement, despite procedural rules and an earlier judgment from the High Court disallowing such delays. The Court, however, emphasized that procedural rules should not overshadow substantive justice. Given the confusion caused by the High Court...

The terms "identical" and "distinct" in the context of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) refer to the nature of the cause of action in a legal suit. Understanding these terms is crucial in determining whether subsequent suits are barred under Order II Rule 2 of the CPC. Identical Cause of Action: A cause of action is considered "identical" if the facts and circumstances that give rise to the plaintiff's right to sue are the same in both the original and subsequent suits. This means that the claim in the subsequent suit should have been included in the original suit as it arises from the same transaction or occurrence. Example: If a tenant fails to pay rent and also continues to occupy the premises unlawfully, and the landlord files a suit for recovery of rent without including a claim for possession, both claims arise from the same cause of action — the tenant's breach of tenancy terms. Hence, the cause of action is identical. Distinct Cause of Ac...

The Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950 enacted? a) 1945 b) 1950 c) 1960 d) 1970 What does "excise duty" mean under the Rajasthan Excise Act, 1950? a) A tax on imports b) A tax on exports c) A duty on excisable articles manufactured or produced in Rajasthan d) A duty on services Which section of the Act defines "beer"? a) Section 2(1) b) Section 2(2) c) Section 2(4) d) Section 2(6) What is the maximum punishment for unlawful import, export, transport, manufacture, or possession of excisable articles under the Act? a) 3 months imprisonment and fine b) 1 year imprisonment and fine c) 3 years imprisonment and fine d) 5 years imprisonment and fine Which authority is empowered to declare what shall be deemed to be "liquor" under the Act? a) Central Government b) State Government c) District Magistrate d) Excise Commissioner Licensing and Regulation Who is responsible for granting licences for the manufacture, sale, or possession of excisable articles under the Rajasthan...

General Provisions of the Act In which year was The Probation of Offenders Act enacted? a) 1947 b) 1958 c) 1960 d) 1975 The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, extends to which parts of India? a) The whole of India b) Only Union Territories c) Only to rural areas d) Only to urban areas Under which section does the Act provide for the release of offenders after due admonition? a) Section 2 b) Section 3 c) Section 4 d) Section 5 Which section of the Act allows the court to release certain offenders on probation of good conduct? a) Section 3 b) Section 4 c) Section 5 d) Section 6 The term "probation officer" is defined in which section of The Probation of Offenders Act, 1958? a) Section 2 b) Section 4 c) Section 8 d) Section 10 Specific Provisions and Applications Which section of the Act restricts imprisonment for offenders under twenty-one years of age? a) Section 4 b) Section 6 c) Section 8 d) Section 10 Under Section 4 of the Act, what is the maximum period for which an offend...

General Questions on the Act The Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act was enacted in which year? a) 1978 b) 1989 c) 1999 d) 2001 The Act is applicable to which regions? a) Only to the Scheduled Areas b) The whole of India c) Only to rural areas d) Only to urban areas Which chapter of the Act deals with the offences of atrocities? a) Chapter I b) Chapter II c) Chapter III d) Chapter IV What is the minimum punishment prescribed under the Act for offences committed under Section 3? a) Three months b) Six months c) One year d) Five years Which section of the Act prescribes the punishment for public servants who willfully neglect their duties? a) Section 4 b) Section 3 c) Section 10 d) Section 18 Specific Offences and Penalties For which of the following acts is a person punishable under the Act? a) Forcibly dispossessing a member of a Scheduled Caste from his land b) Forcing a member of a Scheduled Caste to eat or drink obnoxious substances c) Both a and...

 which year was The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act enacted? a) 2000 b) 2010 c) 2015 d) 2020 The Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, extends to which parts of India? a) The whole of India b) Only Union Territories c) Only to rural areas d) Only to urban areas Under which section does the Act provide for the constitution of the Juvenile Justice Board? a) Section 4 b) Section 5 c) Section 6 d) Section 7 Which section of the Act defines the term "child in conflict with law"? a) Section 2(11) b) Section 2(12) c) Section 2(13) d) Section 2(14) Which chapter of the Act deals with the procedure in relation to children in conflict with law? a) Chapter III b) Chapter IV c) Chapter V d) Chapter VI Juvenile Justice Board and Procedures What is the minimum experience required for a social worker to be a member of the Juvenile Justice Board? a) 3 years b) 5 years c) 7 years d) 10 years Under which section can a child in conflict...

Introduction: Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) was enacted to protect married women from cruelty by their husbands or relatives. However, over the years, there has been a growing concern about its misuse, leading to numerous landmark rulings by the Supreme Court. In 2024, several significant judgments were delivered, which further clarified the application of this provision. 1. Misuse of Section 498A and Call for Legislative Reform: In a notable ruling, the Supreme Court urged the legislature to revisit the provisions related to Section 498A in the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. The Court emphasized that trivial matrimonial disputes should not be treated as criminal offenses under this section. The bench, comprising Justices J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, highlighted that every minor discord in a marriage does not amount to cruelty. They recommended legislative changes to prevent the misuse of this provision, ensuring that it is not used as a tool for harassme...

Understanding the Application of Order VII Rule 11 of CPC: A Comprehensive Legal Analysis Introduction: Order VII Rule 11 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC) is a crucial provision that empowers courts to reject a plaint at the threshold if certain conditions are met. This provision is designed to prevent frivolous or vexatious litigation, ensuring that judicial resources are not wasted on cases without merit. This blog post delves into the intricacies of Order VII Rule 11, discussing its objectives, application, relevant case laws, and judicial interpretations. 1. Objectives of Order VII Rule 11: The primary objective of Order VII Rule 11 is to eliminate cases that do not disclose a cause of action or are otherwise barred by law, thus preventing unnecessary prolongation of legal proceedings. Courts are empowered to reject such plaints to save time and resources that would otherwise be spent on baseless litigation. Key Case Laws: Dahiben vs. Arvinbhai Kalyanji Bhansai (2...