Industrial Disputes Act, 1947

In case termination of daily wager is found to be illegal because of procedural defect, then reinstatement with back wages is not automatic and instead the workman should be given monetary compensation. (2014)7SCC177 – Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited vs. Bhurumal

Important Case Laws

CONSUMER PROTECTION ACT, 1986

1.      Concurrent jurisdiction- availability of alternative remedy under another statute – no bar to seek remedy under CP Act- (2013) 9 SCC 383, Virender Jain vs. Alaknanda Cooperative.

ARBITRATION LAW

1.      Section 11 application is to be instituted based on section 20 of the CPC- 2013(9) SCC 32

2.      Use of words “alone” “only” ”exclusive” or  “exclusive jurisdiction” is not necessary in exclusion clause to exclude jurisdiction -  2013(9) SCC 32 Swastik Gases vs. Indian Oil corporation.

HINDU LAW

1.      Partitioned share of ancestral property held by single person again becomes coparcenary property as soon as child is born to such holder of portioned share of ancestral property. – 2013(9) SCC 419, Rohit Chauhan vs. Surinder Singh

SECURITIZATION ACT

1.      The magistrate under section 14 has to follow the rule laid under CrPC for obtaining possession. Refer s. 83(3) and (4). Not necessary for the magistrate to follow Rule 8 of Securitisaiton Rules. – (2013) 9 SCC 620, Standard Chartered Bank vs. V.Noble Kumar

NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS ACT

1.      Section 141 is not applicable to joint account holders. – (2013)8 SCC 71, Aparna Shah v. Sheth Developers

2.      Ingredients of offence of 138. - (2013)8 SCC 71, Aparna shah v. Sheth Developers

3.       6 month period of cheque does not mean 30 days. It means six months period would expire one day prior to the date in the corresponding month and in case no such day the last day of the immediately previous month. – (2014)11SCC759, Rameshchandra Ambalal Joshi vs. State of Gujarat.

4.      For the purpose of calculating the period of one month, which is prescribed under section 142(b) of the NI Act, the period has to be reckoned by excluding the date on which the cause of action arose. – (2014) 11 SCC 769, Econ Antri Limited vs. ROM Industries Limited and Another.

5.      Power of attorney holder can file a complaint under section 142 provided he has personal knowledge of the transaction in question. – (2014)11SCC790, A.C.Narayanan vs. State of Maharastra and Another