Even Pricewaterhouse Coopers Ltd, with worldwide reputation, can make a &lsquo;silly&rsquo; computing error in filing income tax returns, and it got relief only from the Supreme Court last week after eight years of litigation. In its statement, the firm claimed a deduction towards payment of gratuity for some of its employees. Though it was accepted by the assessing officer, after a few years, the error was discovered and the assessment was reopened.

M J Antony: PwC caught on a 'silly' point

Business Standard

A moment of transition is a time for stocktaking. The new chief justice of India (CJI), Altamas Kabir, begins his term with 63,749 cases pending in the Supreme Court. His predecessors tried to push back the rising numbers but failed. Former chief justice S H Kapadia took up the top post in 2010 with a backlog of 55,018, but he has not been able to contain the flow of litigation.

M J Antony: To turn the tide

The Supreme Court has overruled its own judgment regarding the law on bounced cheques. The Supreme Court as well as high courts have been following the wrong judgment in several cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Now it has turned the law around. In this case, the payee did not issue notice to the drawer when the cheques bounced for the first time. He presented them again, and they bounced again. Then only he initiated proceedings under the Act.

M J Antony: SC overrules decision on cheques

Setting up quasi-judicial tribunals has almost always been accompanied by squabbles over their powers and appointment of members. The friction started soon after the launch of the Constitution. The first was over the nature and duties of industrial tribunals. The Supreme Court ruled in 1950 that though the tribunal was very much like that of a body discharging judicial functions, it is not a court in the technical sense.

M J Antony: Quasi-judicial quibbles

Behind every successful scam, there is a supporting cast of civil servants. They might be standing in deep background but their role cannot be underestimated. They wear the badge of obedience and their classic excuse when challenged is that they were &ldquo;just following orders&rdquo;, which has earned the nickname &mdash; Nuremberg defence.

M J Antony: Your obedient servant

The Supreme Court last week ruled that an arbitration petition cannot be dealt with piecemeal by a high court, and it should be considered in its entirety. In this case, Hindustan Copper Ltd vs Monarch Gold Mining Ltd, one judge of the Calcutta high court ruled that disputes have arisen for arbitration. He then referred the issues to the Chief Justice for appointment of an arbitrator. The chief justice then designated another judge to nominate the arbitrator. The high court had followed this method adopted in an earlier case. This procedure was challenged by Hindustan Copper in the Supreme Court. It held that the procedure followed by the high court was &ldquo;legally impermissible&rdquo;. The function of the chief justice or his designate is judicial and they should deal with it in its entirety by one of them and &ldquo;not by both making it a two-tier procedure&rdquo;. The high court precedent which was followed by it in this case was overruled on this legal issue.

M J Antony: Arbitration plea not piecemeal: SC

The Supreme Court last week ruled that in a petition against railways before the Railway Claims Tribunal, third parties cannot intervene with contractual claims of their own. In this case, a Tamil Nadu sugar manufacturer demanded from Southern and Eastern Central Railways Rs 9,46,85,726 together with 12 per cent interest. The sugar consignments sent to Bihar were delivered improperly to some parties. Since the goods passed through several railway units, and criminal cases were involved, Central Railway also wanted to intervene with three more parties. The tribunal rejected all of them, in the case, Shree Shyam Agency vs Union of India. It remarked that the Railway Administration, through those parties, was trying to linger on with the proceedings and more parties cannot be allowed to intervene. The Madras high court dismissed their appeal for intervention in the claims tribunal. On further appeal, the Supreme Court upheld the view of the courts below.

M J ANTONY: No third parties in Railway tribunal

Demolition of urban slums using muscle power and political might to raise luxury condominiums has become so common that even Bollywood has created films with sardonic titles like Shanghai. The Supreme Court has also written reams of judgments highlighting the injustice of it all.

M J Antony: Towering illegalities

The appointment of the chairperson of the UP State Electricity Regulatory Commission has been struck down by the Supreme Court as the selection committee did not follow the rule that &ldquo;such person does not have any financial or other interest which is likely to affect prejudicially his functions as chairperson or member.&rdquo; This is a condition under Section 82(5) of the Electricity Act.

M J Antony: Conflict of interest in power panel 

The Supreme Court has held that a winding up petition against a company would not be maintainable in a tenancy dispute in the absence of any specific finding as to the rate of rent and the period of default committed by the tenant company. In this case, Raju Jhurani vs M/s Germindia Ltd, the landlord evicted the tenant company, but claimed arrears of various dues. Since they were not paid, the landlord moved a winding up petition under the Companies Act. The Calcutta high court rejected the petition on the ground that the winding-up petition was not maintainable as there was no admitted arrears and there was no ascertained amount due in respect of which a winding-up order could be passed.

M J Antony: Rent arrears no ground for winding up

The nation stands dazed by a staggering variety of mega swindles unravelled in the past months, with Coalgate and the spectrum scam currently occupying the front stage. But if there is one field that is perennially under cloud it is the invitation of tenders by public authorities. From panchayats to public sector undertakings, hardly any tender is free from bickering followed by litigation.

M J Antony: Hard battles over tenders

The Supreme Court last week severely criticised the Orissa High Court for directing the Orissa State Financial Corporation (OSFC) and Industrial Promotion and Investment Corporation of Odisha Ltd to offer afresh the benefit of &ldquo;One-Time Settlement Scheme&rdquo; to M/s Hotel Torrento Limited, a defaulter of loan. It had earlier been offered the scheme but did not avail of it. The high court had also ordered dispossession of Micro Hotel Ltd, the auction purchaser, which had bought the mortgaged property under the procedure followed by the State Financial Corporation Act. The Supreme Court listed 13 factors which the high court overlooked while deciding the case. Moreover, the order was also against that of another bench of the same court. &ldquo;We express our strong disapproval of the manner in which the division bench of the high court virtually sat in judgment over the judgment of another co-ordinate bench,&rdquo; the Supreme Court judgment observed.

M J Antony: Call for fresh bid set aside

Banks and lending institutions often tend to behave like Shylock, rigorously invoking debt recovery laws that are all in their favour. Big corporations can defend themselves by engaging canny lawyers. But it is rural borrowers, small and medium enterprises and even housewives who have taken a Rs 1-lakh loan who are driven to financial ruin and suicides. They are dragged up to the Supreme Court.

M J Antony: Appeals without end

The Supreme Court last week dismissed the appeal of Salora International Ltd, manufacturer of various components of television sets, and ruled that it was liable to pay excise duty on the units sent to its branches in other parts of the country. The company manufactured components in its Delhi factory and checked each part. The sets were assembled and then disassembled and transported to other centres. There, the parts are reassembled and the complete units are made marketable goods.

M J Antony: Excise duty on television parts

With Parliament sinking in its own well, we have to hold on precariously to several antiquated laws like the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. A Bill to replace the colonial law has been mired for years in politics and sophistry. The outdated provisions are more often misused than used for public purpose. The latest judgment of the Supreme Court on this law is a case in point (Patasi Devi vs State of Haryana).

M J Antony: Land-grabbing of another kind

The Supreme Court last week ruled that land belonging to scheduled castes (SCs) or tribes (STs) cannot be bought by companies and non-Dalits and such transactions are illegal. The Rajasthan High Court had held all along that such sale to a company or body corporate was legal as they were not humans but &lsquo;juristic persons&rsquo;. On the appeal of the state government, the Supreme Court reversed that view and held that the purchase of SC land by a company, Aanjaney Organic Herbal Pvt Ltd, was not valid. It upheld the refusal by the state authorities to recognise or grant mutation to the purchase of a plot by the company from a person belonging to SC. Section 42 (b) of the Rajasthan Tenancy Act barring such transactions is a &ldquo;beneficial legislation which takes special care to protect the interest of the members of SC/ST,&rdquo; the judgment said and explained that the provision is a safeguard against the exploitation of the SC/ST.

M J Antony: Companies can't buy Dalit land

When Chief Justice S H Kapadia assumed the top post, one of the first things he did in July, 2010, was to order investigation into inordinate delays in filing appeals by the revenue departments. The time limit had been exceeded by more than three years in two cases. In one case, the solicitor general admitted that there was an &ldquo;elephantine delay of 1,206 days&rdquo;.

M J Antony: Incorrigibly yours

The Supreme Court has ruled that an arbitration clause in a deed which is compulsorily registrable but not registered and insufficiently stamped cannot be enforced. In this case, Naina Thakkar vs Annapurna Builders, the Hyderabad civil court rejected her application invoking the Arbitration and Conciliation Act because the lease deed was not registered properly. The Andhra Pradesh High Court upheld the civil court order. She moved the Supreme Court contending that she should have been given an opportunity to make up the deficit stamp duty and pay penalty following the procedure prescribed in the Indian Stamps Act. The court rejected her contention remarking that &ldquo;it is not the duty of the court to adjourn the suit indefinitely until the defect on stamp duty concerning the arbitration agreement is cured.

M J Antony: Arbitration deed must be registered

The Supreme Court last week raised the compensation in motor vehicle accidents in two appeals, finding fault with the high courts and motor vehicle accident tribunals for wrong computation. In Kavita vs Deepak, a 30-year-old woman was rendered paraplegic in an accident. The tribunal awarded Rs 4 lakh. On appeal, the Madhya Pradesh High Court raised it to Rs 12.76 lakh. On further appeal, the Supreme Court directed the insurance company to pay Rs 34.38 to the woman. In another case, Rebeka Minz vs United Insurance Company, the tribunal awarded Rs 10 lakh for death on the road which was reduced by the Orissa High Court to Rs 5 lakh. On appeal, the Supreme Court raised the damages to Rs 13.5 lakh.

M J Antony: Insurers to pay more compensation

Litigants and society in general have become inured to long delays in courts. Decades-old cases no longer shock anyone. Like climate change, the deceleration of the wheels of justice is hardly discernible to the naked eye.

M J Antony: Grin and bear delays

With the decline of Parliament, political debate has moved to television studios, the Jantar Mantar premises and social media. Another front for political wrangling these days is courts. With the writ courts opening wide their doors to anyone claiming to have a grievance on behalf of the public, there are wild allegations thinly clothed as public interest litigations (PILs).

M J Antony

M J Antony

Page 23 - M J Antony