Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act filed through a power of attorney holder was not liable to fail merely because the complaint did not expressly plead the holder's direct personal knowledge. The Court treated the objection as an irregularity in institution, to be tested under Section 465 CrPC, and found no failure of justice because the complainant later entered the witness box, deposed to the transaction, and the accused had full opportunity to cross-examine. The conviction was therefore sustained. On sentence, the Court reduced the substantive custodial term in view of the nature and gravity of the offence, while maintaining the compensation and default clause, and substituted imprisonment till the rising of the court.
A complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act filed through a power of attorney holder was not liable to fail merely because the complaint did not expressly plead the holder's direct personal knowledge. The Court treated the objection as an irregularity in institution, to be tested under Section 465 CrPC, and found no failure of justice because the complainant later entered the witness box, deposed to the transaction, and the accused had full opportunity to cross-examine. The conviction was therefore sustained. On sentence, the Court reduced the substantive custodial term in view of the nature and gravity of the offence, while maintaining the compensation and default clause, and substituted imprisonment till the rising of the court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.