Court : Supreme Court of India
..... i.e. if the award is against the public policy of india. as per the legal position clarified through decisions of this court prior to the amendments to the 1996 act in 2015, a violation of indian public policy, in turn, includes a violation of the fundamental policy of indian law, a violation of the interest ..... [associated provincial picture houses ltd. v. wednesbury corpn., [1948]. 1 . . 223 (ca)]. reasonableness. furthermore, "patent illegality" itself has been held to mean contravention of the substantive law of india, contravention of the 1996 act, and 11 contravention of the terms of the contract." conclusion:20. in view of the above position in law on the ..... of india, conflict with justice or morality, and the existence of patent illegality in the arbitral award. additionally, the concept of the "fundamental policy of indian law .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... to note that section 15 of the pocso had undergone a significant change by virtue of the protection of children from sexual offences (amendment) act, 2019 (for short, the 2019 amendment act ), whereby several key changes were introduced. we shall discuss the said provision viz- -viz the unamended provision of section 15 along with ..... be effective in addressing the various forms of sexual degradation, abuse and exploitation of children in the country. the protection of children from sexual offences (amendment) act, 2019 earmarked a significant step by the legislature in response to the aforesaid problem, by introducing several new offences and further making the existing offences ..... , and not the mere possession of such material. b. three distinct offences punishable under section 15 of the pocso.73. prior to the 2019 amendment act, section 15 of the pocso as originally enacted, stipulated that any person who stores any pornographic material involving a child for commercial purposes shall be .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... , for if an arbitrator gives no reasons for an award and contravenes section 31(3) of the 1996 act, that would certainly amount to a patent illegality on the face of the award.40. the change made in section 28(3) by the amendment act really follows what is stated in paras 42.3 to 45 in associate builders, namely, that the construction ..... made in india are concerned, an additional ground is now available under sub-section (2-a), added by the amendment act, 2015 to section 34. here, there civil appeal @ slp (c) nos.21017-21018 of 2021 page 46 of 150 must be patent illegality appearing on the face of the award, which refers to such illegality as goes to the root of ..... @ slp (c) nos.21017-21018 of 2021 page 56 of 15062. in ssangyong (supra) this court specifically dealt with the 2015 amendment which inserted sub-section (2- a) in section 34 of the 1996 act. it was held that patent illegality appearing on the face of the award refers to such illegality as goes to the root of matter, but which does .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... command the appellant-dsgmc to pay them the salaries and other service benefits. 4 wp(c) nos. 13044-55/2006 4 9. the said writ petitions were later amended and the order of the ndmc dated 14th february, 2006 was also assailed by the teaching as well as non-teaching staff of the school. the writ petitions were ..... learned single judge was assailed by the then serving teachers/staff and the retired teachers of the school before the division bench of the high court by filing two letters patent appeals5, which were allowed vide order dated 9th december 2009, with the following directions:5. lpa no.441 of 2009 in ms. manju tomar & ors. v. nct & ors. ..... school building thereby, making it non-functional. consequent to the demolition of the school building, the ndmc stopped the grant-in- aid under rule 69 of the delhi education act and rules, 1973 (hereinafter after being referred to as delhi education rules ) on the reasoning that it was under an obligation to provide grant-in- aid to schools .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... its extraordinary powers under article 142 to implement a uniform enrolment fee structure that adequately caters to the financial requirements of the sbcs until legislative amendments are made to the advocates act. additionally, it has urged this court to direct the union government to revise the enrolment fee prescribed in section 24(1)(f).12. ..... without disturbing the fee payable in case of persons belonging to scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. ]. 24 bar council of maharashtra v. union of india, 2002 scc online bom 251 [3]. 25 1968 scc online sc317 part d entries 7726 and 7827 of list i. it was observed that the object of the advocates ..... calcutta, bombay, and madras brought all courts in the territories of british india under a unified system. the letters patent also allowed the high courts to enroll advocates, vakils, and attorneys. the legal practitioners act 1879 empowered the high courts not established by royal charters to make rules for the qualifications and admission of persons .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... part-iii of the schedule with respect to the state of bihar, the entry remained the same as that in the 1956 amendment i.e. 'pan, sawasi'.19. by the constitution (scheduled castes) orders (second amendment) act, 2002 enacted by the parliament in the 53rd year of the republic of india, entry 20 for the state of bihar was substituted ..... on the principles of equity and good conscience.36. having considered the submissions advanced, we have no hesitation in holding that the resolution dated 01.07.2015 was patently illegal, erroneous as the state government had no competence/ authority/power to tinker with the lists of scheduled castes published under article 341 of the constitution. the ..... the division bench of the patna high court whereby civil appeal no.18802 of2017page 1 of 25 a group of four (4) writ petitions and one letters patent appeal were decided by a common judgment dismissing all the five cases. the challenge in the writ petitions and the appeal before the division bench of the high .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... i.e. if the award is against the public policy of india. as per the legal position clarified through decisions of this court prior to the amendments to the 1996 act in 2015, a violation of indian public policy, in turn, includes a violation of the fundamental policy of indian law, a violation of the interest ..... across the bar, the findings recorded by the arbitral tribunal and the issue of illegality or perversity of the award. detailed reasons while dealing with the alleged patent illegalities associated with the directions issued under the arbitral award have been recorded. considering the nature of the findings recorded by the learned single judge, the ..... the building. the learned single judge also held that awarding payment of interest on interest free deposit was contrary to the terms of the contract, which shows patent illegality. however, the learned single judge rejected the allegation of bias made by the appellant against the learned arbitrator.13. we have referred to only material .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... not be deprived without due process of law and upon just and fair compensation. 18 the right to property ceased to be a fundamental right by the constitution (forty-fourth amendment) act, 1978, however, it continued to be a human right in a welfare state, and a constitutional right under article 300-a of the constitution. article 300-a provides that ..... succeeds and is hereby allowed. the impugned order passed by the high court is set aside and the matter is remitted to the high court for fresh consideration. letters patent appeal no 997 of 2019 is restored to its original file. the high court shall hear both the sides and pass an appropriate order in accordance with what has been ..... no 997 of 2019 in civil writ jurisdiction case no 8408 of 2019 by which the division bench of the high court disposed of the letters patent appeal by asking the appellant herein to file an appropriate application before the concerned authority for disbursement of the value of the land assessed at rs 4,68,099. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... i.e. if the award is against the public policy of india. as per the legal position clarified through decisions of this court prior to the amendments to the 1996 act in 2015, a violation of indian public policy, in turn, includes a violation of the fundamental policy of indian law, a violation of the ..... interfering with the arbitral award. in the aforesaid decision, this court considered different heads of public policy in india which, inter alia, includes patent illegality. after referring section 28(3) of the arbitration act and after considering the decisions of this court in mcdermott international inc. v. burn standard co. ltd. [mcdermott international inc. v. ..... kb223(ca)]. reasonableness. 4 (2019) 4 scc163civil appeal no.4702 of 2023 etc. page 9 of 15 furthermore, patent illegality itself has been held to mean contravention of the substantive law of india, contravention of the 1996 act, and contravention of the terms of the contract. (emphasis added) 9. this court, in the case of uhl .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... this court endorsed the position in associate builders (supra), on the scope for interference with domestic awards, even after the 2015 amendment: 40. the change made in section 28(3) by the amendment act really follows what is stated in paras 42.3 to 45 in associate builders, namely, that the construction of the terms ..... set aside an arbitral award under section 34 of the arbitration act. ii. scope of interference of courts with arbitral awards 36. section 34 of the arbitration act delineates the grounds for setting aside an arbitral award. the provision, as amended by the arbitration and conciliation (amendment) act, 2015 reads as follows: 34. application for setting aside ..... vs. ashok hurra20 is linked with patent illegality. the high court s interference under section 37 was justified because the exercise of jurisdiction under section 34 was erroneous; and 28.10. the issue of the fitness of the line was a matter falling under the 2002 act under which the commissioner was the final .....
Tag this Judgment!