Author: kkslawoffices

Ordering the transfer of a case, in a petition by a woman, seeking transfer of proceedings from the court of Principal Judge of Family Court, Saket; where the Judge made several scathing remarks against the Petitioner, the Delhi High Court (‘DHC’) observed that: “The observations by the Court must not have the potential to sully the person or character of a litigant. The language of the judgment must necessarily be tempered by restraint and moderation. A judgment of a court of law cannot become a blistering diatribe against a party or its cause.”

Delhi High Court (‘DHC’) has held that though denial of conjugal relationship is a ground for divorce and, therefore, equivalent to cruelty, the same cannot be said to amount to exceptional hardships under section 14 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 for waiving of one year period.

ITAT Delhi has held that interest on enhanced compensation awarded to land owners by the court under section 28 of the Land Acquisitions Act, 1894 is not the ‘income from other sources’. In view of this, it held that no Tax Deducted at Source (‘TDS’) is required to be deducted with respect to this payment.

Dismissing a batch of appeals challenging the order of the Jharkhand High Court(‘JHC’) with regard to the selection process for appointment of teachers, the Supreme Court (‘SC’) held that a court cannot act as an expert in the field of education and it should be left to the institutions to determine whether a candidate possesses requisite qualification or not. Observing that there cannot be any deviation from the educational qualifications mentioned in an advertisement of job, the bench said that: “Once having found that the respective writ petitioners were not having the requisite qualification as per the advertisement and thereafter their candidature was cancelled, the High court has rightly refused to interfere with the same.”

The Supreme Court has directed the Additional Solicitor General to file an affidavit for the Union of India; in a Special Leave Petition, challenging the constitutional validity of the levy of Goods and Services Tax (‘GST’) on Rent and Lease Payments, on the grounds that: a) renting is neither a good nor service and thus GST cannot be levied on such payments, under Article 246 A of the Constitution; and b) since, immovable property can only be taxed by State Legislature under Entry 49 List II of the Seventh Schedule of the Constitution, it is improper to levy GST on lease/ rent payments under Article 246A of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court (‘SC’), in an order reversing Allahabad High Court’s (‘HC’) order, cancelled the bail of the main accused in Lakhimpur Kheri case, asking him to surrender within a week and remanded the matter back to the High Court for fresh consideration. The SC observed that the High Court did not consider the charge sheet or even the judicial precedents, and instead relied upon the FIR filed, and denied the victims their ”unbridled participatory right” which is an essential element of a fair trial. The SC, without mincing words, said: “The denial of victims to be heard and the tearing hurry shown by the High Court merits the setting aside of bail order.”

In an appeal challenging the order of trial court granting compensation to the wife under Sec. 125 CrPC, which provides for maintenance to wives, children and parents, the Delhi High Court (‘HC’) upheld the order of the trial court. The challenge was made on several grounds including adultery on which the HC held that under Sec. 125(4), according to which wife is not entitled to maintenance if she is living in adultery, “the husband has to establish with definite evidence that the wife has been living in adultery and one or occasional acts of adultery committed in isolation would not amount to ‘living in adultery”.

Xiaomi Corp. India (‘Xiaomi’), a Chinese smartphone maker, is under investigation, with its global vice president called in for questioning by the Enforcement Directorate (‘ED’), regarding compliance with foreign exchange laws. ED is investigating the business structure of Xiaomi with its contract manufacturers and parent entity in China. Further, the fund flows, including royalty payments, between Xiaomi and its parent entity is also under scrutiny. This is not the first time that Xiaomi is under the radar of the Indian authorities as, in December 2021, the company was raided in a separate investigation by the Income tax department for alleged income tax evasion.

Dismissing a writ petition, filed against the overriding effect of Sec. 18, which provides for resolution of dispute by reference to a Facilitation Council, of Micro Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (‘MSMED/ the Act’) in case of an already existing arbitration clause in the agreement, between parties, the Madras High Court (‘HC’) stating Sec. 24, which provides overriding powers to Sec. 15-23 of the Act, held that “it has been well settled that validity of a contractual arbitration will be superseded by the provisions of the MSMED Act”.

The European Commission (‘EC’) cleared Parker-Hannifin’s, US engineering and aerospace group, $8.2 Billion acquisition of Meggitt, a British aerospace company, saying “The remedy package offered by Parker will preserve competition in these markets and ensure that aerospace and defense customers have access to sufficient choice of component suppliers and will continue benefiting from competitive prices”. As a remedy, for the acquisition, Parker-Hannifin will be divesting one of its factories in the US whose activities overlap with Meggitt.