Esheria India Case Law
Sign in
India Source-linked decisions Coverage checked

India Case Law

Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.

Courts on this page
0 court collections
Last checked

Search and filter India case law

Results update automatically as you type.

India decisions

Decisions matching the current search

Clear filters
Pension

K.G. SESHADRI versus THE TRUSTEES OF STATE BANK OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

The appellant was not entitled to pension because he had not completed twenty years of pensionable service when reckoned from date of confirmation (being below twenty years) and had not attained fifty years of age, so he did not satisfy Rule 22(i)(a); nor was his cessation a voluntary retirement under an operative VRS but a declaration of voluntary abandonment of service, so Rule 22(i)(c) did not apply; accordingly entitlement failed and the appeal was dismissed.

Source excerpt

  • Rule 22(i)(c)
  • Rule 22(i)(a)
  • Rule 20
  • Rule 7
  • Voluntary retirement
  • Voluntary abandonment of service
Read case analysis
Consumer protection

SANT ROHIDAS LEATHER INDUSTRIES AND CHARMAKAR DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. versus VIJAYA BANK

Because the Bank asserted that the FDR had been pledged to avail an overdraft and the appellant alleged that such pledge/loan was fraudulent (with a criminal complaint pending), there was a serious unresolved factual dispute going to whether the deposit was made for a commercial purpose; that dispute and allegations of fraud could not be resolved in summary consumer proceedings and therefore the complaint was not maintainable and dismissal by the NCDRC was justified.

Source excerpt

  • Definition of consumer
  • Commercial purpose
  • Fixed deposit receipt (fdr)
  • Deficiency in service
  • Maintainability of consumer complaint
  • Pledge/hypothecation
Read case analysis
Consumer protection

AKSHAY GUPTA & ANR. versus ICICI BANK LIMITED & ORS.

Having found that the parties fully complied with the settlement terms recorded by this Court, the Bank had no further claim in respect of the loans; accordingly the Court directed the loan accounts be closed as repaid, directed the builder to hand over possession by a fixed date and to issue written acknowledgments, ordered withdrawal of recovery proceedings by the Bank and withdrawal of RERA proceedings by appellants, and disposed of the appeals.

Source excerpt

  • Settlement
  • Recovery proceedings
  • Possession of apartments
  • Loan account closure
  • Acknowledgment of payment
Read case analysis
Securitisation and reconstruction of financial assets and enforcement of security interest act, 2002

CENTRAL BANK OF INDIA & ANR. versus SMT. PRABHA JAIN & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that the civil court's jurisdiction under Section 9 CPC to adjudicate declarations that the prior sale deed and mortgage deed are nullities is not ousted by Section 34 of the SARFAESI Act because those reliefs do not relate to measures taken by the secured creditor under Section 13(4) and thus are beyond the DRT's competence under Section 17; the DRT's power to 'restore' possession is limited to returning possession to the borrower or to someone who was in possession on the borrower's behalf and does not extend to handing over possession to a person who was never in pos…

Source excerpt

  • Jurisdiction of civil court
  • Section 34 sarfaesi act
  • Section 17 sarfaesi act
  • Order vii rule 11 cpc
  • Partial rejection of plaint
  • Drt jurisdiction
Read case analysis
Arbitration

GUJARAT COMPOSITE LIMITED versus A INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED & ORS.

Because only the original licence agreement contained an arbitration clause and the tripartite agreement and subsequent conveyances (involving the bank and other purchasers) did not, and the substantive reliefs in the suit related to the tripartite agreement, mortgage and non-parties (including allegations of fraud), there was no prima facie valid arbitration agreement covering the entire subject-matter; therefore the courts below rightly declined to refer the dispute to arbitration under Section 8 and the appeals were dismissed.

Source excerpt

  • Arbitrability
  • Section 8 arbitration and conciliation act, 1996 (as amended)
  • Tripartite agreement
  • Non-parties to arbitration agreement
  • Fraud allegations
Read case analysis
Consumer protection

M/S BAWA PAULINS PVT. LTD. versus UPS FREIGHT SERVICES (INDIA) PVT. LTD. AND ANOTHER

The admitted mistake by the forwarding agent in recording the wrong port of loading in the Forwarder Cargo Receipt amounted to negligence and deficiency in service; that deficiency caused the issuing/confirming bank to refuse to honour the Letter of Credit and resulted in non-payment to the appellant. The National Commission erred in reducing and setting aside the State Commission's award; the State Commission's decision granting Rs.13,79,901 plus Rs.50,000 for mental agony and Rs.10,000 costs was restored and respondents were held jointly and severally liable to pay.

Source excerpt

  • Free on board
  • Letter of credit
  • Deficiency in service
  • Forwarder cargo receipt
  • Quantum of compensation
Read case analysis
Banking

STATE BANK OF INDIA versus ARVINDRA ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD.

The High Court's order extending time beyond the schedule in the sanctioned OTS was unsustainable; OTS benefits are not a matter of right and are subject to eligibility and the terms of the sanction letter, and rescheduling or modifying the OTS payment schedule amounts to altering the contract which requires mutual consent under Section 62 of the Indian Contract Act; accordingly the High Court order granting further time was quashed and the writ petition dismissed.

Source excerpt

  • One time settlement (ots)
  • Article 226
  • Writ of mandamus
  • Extension of time
  • Section 62 indian contract act
  • Eligibility criteria
Read case analysis
Banking

KOTAK MAHINDRA BANK LIMITED versus NARENDRA JAYANTILAL TRIVEDI & ANR.

The Division Bench erred in granting and continuing an ex-parte ad-interim stay and in permitting withdrawal of the Letters Patent Appeal while simultaneously directing that prior observations of the Single Judge/DRT be ignored; such conduct amounted to enabling abuse of process and stalling of SARFAESI recovery proceedings, and therefore paragraphs 3(ii), 3(iii) and 4 of the impugned order were quashed and the ex-parte interim order was vacated.

Source excerpt

  • Stay orders
  • Letters patent appeal
  • Writ petition under article 226
  • Abuse of process
  • Costs
Read case analysis
Central excise

PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

The confiscation orders dated 26.03.2007 and 29.03.2007 were without jurisdiction and are quashed because Rule 173Q(2) of the Central Excise Rules, 1944 — which authorized confiscation of land, buildings, plant and machinery — had been omitted w.e.f. 12.05.2000 and pending proceedings under an omitted rule were not saved by Section 38A or the General Clauses Act; further, the bank as a secured creditor has priority over excise dues by virtue of SARFAESI Act, 2002.

Source excerpt

  • Confiscation
  • Priority of secured creditors
  • Repeal and omission of rules
  • Saving provisions
  • Natural justice
Read case analysis
Banking

PHOENIX ARC PRIVATE LIMITED versus VISHWA BHARATI VIDYA MANDIR & ORS.

The Supreme Court held that writ petitions under Article 226 challenging a proposed or actual measure under Section 13(4) of the SARFAESI Act against a private Assets Reconstruction Company are not maintainable where an efficacious statutory remedy by appeal under Section 17 exists, and that the High Court erred in entertaining the writs and continuing ex-parte interim stay orders; the High Court's interim orders were vacated and the writ petitions dismissed.

Source excerpt

  • Sarfaesi act
  • Section 13(2)
  • Section 13(4)
  • Section 17
  • Security interest (enforcement) rules, 2002
  • Writ jurisdiction under article 226
Read case analysis

About this LexChat collection

India decisions are organised by court, judge, legal area and indexed issue so a practitioner can move from a proposition to a citable authority with the surrounding context intact.

Source links and collection timestamps are retained alongside the indexed records.