Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI OCR

Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal / NCLT & Others
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court.
Eg: Madhya Pradesh, Orissa, Hyderabad

Use comma for multiple locations.

AY/FY: New?
Enter only the year or year range (e.g., 2025, 2025–26, or 2025–2026).
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a law > statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
  • Select the law first, to see the statutes list
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----
  • Select the statute first, to see the sections list

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        1973 (3) TMI 144 - SC - Indian Laws

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Award enforceability and default consequences: no substitution of debtor, title passed on default, and the award remained executable. An award requiring payment to a third-party creditor or an effective discharge of the opposite party's liability does not relieve the original obligors ...
                        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

                            Award enforceability and default consequences: no substitution of debtor, title passed on default, and the award remained executable.

                            An award requiring payment to a third-party creditor or an effective discharge of the opposite party's liability does not relieve the original obligors unless the creditor clearly accepts a substituted debtor; partial payment and informal correspondence are insufficient. Clause 7 of the award, read as a whole, shows that on default the respondents were to regain both possession and proprietary title, not possession alone. The award created enforceable obligations and was therefore executable, not merely declaratory. The default clause was not treated as penal, so no relief was available on that ground.




                            Issues: (i) Whether the appellants were relieved of their liability under the award by the alleged co-operation or recognition of the Board; (ii) whether, on default in payment, clause 7 of the award transferred only possession or also title to the respondents; (iii) whether the award was merely declaratory and therefore inexecutable; and (iv) whether the default clause was penal so as to entitle the appellants to relief.

                            Issue (i): Whether the appellants were relieved of their liability under the award by the alleged co-operation or recognition of the Board.

                            Analysis: The arrangement required the appellants either to make payment to the Board within the stipulated period or to secure an effective discharge of the respondents' liability. The correspondence and acceptance of partial payments did not establish any formal recognition of the appellants as substituted debtors. The Board never agreed to accept the appellants in place of the respondents, and mere receipt of money did not terminate the respondents' primary liability.

                            Conclusion: The appellants were not discharged from their obligation, and the respondents' liability to the Board was not shown to have been extinguished.

                            Issue (ii): whether, on default in payment, clause 7 of the award transferred only possession or also title to the respondents.

                            Analysis: Clause 7, read as a whole, restricted the appellants from dealing with the property as owners and described their possession during the interregnum as being in trust. That structure showed that the parties intended the respondents to regain not merely possession but the beneficial and proprietary interest if the appellants failed to satisfy the Board's dues or secure a discharge.

                            Conclusion: On default, both possession and title passed to the respondents.

                            Issue (iii): whether the award was merely declaratory and therefore inexecutable.

                            Analysis: The language of the award did not merely pronounce abstract rights. It created enforceable obligations and contemplated execution if the appellants failed to perform. A decree or award need not use express words directing execution in order to be executable.

                            Conclusion: The award was executable and not merely declaratory.

                            Issue (iv): whether the default clause was penal so as to entitle the appellants to relief.

                            Analysis: The clause was part of a decree passed in terms of the award, not a penal stipulation in a compromise decree. Relief against such a term could not be granted merely on the footing that it operated harshly. The authorities relied upon concerning compromise decrees did not apply.

                            Conclusion: The default clause was not penal and no relief was available to the appellants on that ground.

                            Final Conclusion: The award and the order under execution were upheld, and the appellants' challenge failed in all material respects.

                            Ratio Decidendi: Where an award requires payment to a third-party creditor within a fixed time or an effective discharge of the opposite party's liability, partial payment or informal correspondence does not substitute a new debtor or extinguish the original liability unless there is clear acceptance by the creditor; on default, the award must be construed as a whole to determine whether proprietary title as well as possession passes, and such an award is executable according to its terms.


                            Full Summary is available for active users!
                            Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.

                            Topics

                            ActsIncome Tax
                            No Records Found