Important Supreme Court Decisions of November 2013

Administrative Law – Suspension Order – Res judicata – Legal Malice – [Union of India Vs. Ashok Kumar Aggarwal, November 22, 2013] (2013) 16 SCC 147 : 2013 (12) SCR 629 : 2013 (14) Scale 323 : JT 2013 (15) SC 200 : 2014 (140) FLR 737 : 2014 (2) SCT 70 : 2014 (134) AIC 41 : 2014 (2) PLJR 286 : 2014 (2) JLJR 35 : 2014 All SCR 359 : 2014 (3) Cal. H.C.N. 128


Agricultural Produce – Market Fee – Manufacture of castor oil out of castor seeds – Levy of market fee on castor seeds – Validity – Held, Respondent-company became owner of the property only once the exact weight of the castor seeds was ascertained and purchase voucher was obtained – Sale of castor seeds thus took place within the market area of appellant- APMC and accordingly appellant was authorized to charge fees from respondent. [Agricultural Produce Market Committee Vs. Biotor Industries Ltd. & Anr., November 29, 2013] (2014) 3 SCC 732 : 2013 (14) Scale 546 : JT 2013 (15) SC 415 : 2014 (1) RJ 1 : 2014 (5) RCR (Civil) 186  : 2014 (2) RAJ 276


Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976S. 38-A (As amended w.e.f. 21.4.1984) – Bangalore Development Authority (Civic Authority Site) Allotment Rules, 1989 – R. 3 – Grant of area reserved for civic amenities – Civic amenity site earmarked for `bank’, allotted for installing a petrol pump – Held, Under S. 38A (1), BDA would have the authority to lease, sell or otherwise transfer any area reserved for the purpose for which such area is reserved, and no other – In case, a disposition is made for a purpose other than the one for which it is reserved, it shall be null and void – High Court has rightly declared the allotment of civic amenity site in question for establishment of a petrol pump as null and void. [Purushotham Vs. State of Karnataka; November 29, 2013]


Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 – R. 10 (6) – Suspension Order – CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 are a self contained code and the order of suspension can be examined in the light of the statutory provisions to determine as to whether the suspension order was justified. [Union of India Vs. Ashok Kumar Aggarwal, November 22, 2013]


Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – S. 96(3) & O. 43 R. 1A – Appeal against consent decree – Maintainability – Held, When decree is passed on the basis of compromise without raising any dispute to the compromise, appeal would not be maintainable – But if the decree is passed after holding an enquiry with regard to the validity of the compromise, decree cannot be called consent decree, and hence appeal would be maintainable. [Daljit Kaur Vs. Muktar Steels Pvt Ltd., November 19, 2013] (2013) 16 SCC 607 : 2013 (14) Scale 527 : 2014 (1) ICC 684 : 2014 (2) ALT 1 : 2014 (2) Law Herald 1172 : 2014 (2) WLN 9 : 2014 (1) JCR 157 : 2014 (1) RCR (Civil) 625 : 2014 (1) RAJ 245 : 2014 (133) AIC 253 : 2014 (1) CTC 105 : 2014 (1) CivCC 538 : 2014 (122) RD 390 : 2014 (1) Law Herald (SC) 668 : 2014 (102) ALR 275 : 2014 (1) UAD 281 : 2014 (1) RJ 49 : 2014 All SCR 1823 : 2014 (2) Cal. H.C.N. 142 : 2014 (118) CutLT 299 : 2014 (1) ACJ (SC) 276


Civil Procedure Code, 1908 – Order 2 Rule 2 – Applicability of – In respect of two suits filed by the respondent – Held, the object of Or.II, r.2 is to avoid multiplicity of proceedings and not to vex the parties over and again in a litigative process. [State Bank of India Vs. Gracure Pharmaceuticals Ltd; November 22, 2013] (2014) 3 SCC 595 : AIR  2014 SC 731 : JT 2013 (15) SC 316 : 2013 (12) SCR 617 : 2013 (14) Scale 392 : 2014 (1) ICC 674 : 2014 (1) CivCC 653 : 2014 (2) MPLJ 696 : 2014 (4) Mh. LJ 20 : 2015 (1) WBLR 203 : 2013(8) MLJ 535 : 2014 (1) JCR 122 : 2014 (133) AIC 6 : 2014 (1) ALT 25 : 2014 (1) RAJ 558 : 2014 (1) RCR (Civil) 889 : 2014 (140) DRJ 6 : 2014 (122) RD 280 : 2014(2) PLJR 65 : 2014 AIR (SCW) 247 : 2013 (2) UD 664 : 2014 (102) ALR 223 : 2014 (1) JLJR 613 : 2014 (1) UAD 211 : 2014 (1) RJ 65 : 2014 All SCR 135 : 2014 (2) Andh LD 113 : 2014 (4) Law Herald (SC) 2978 : 2014 (2) Rajdhani LR 716 : 2014 (2) Cal. HCN 101 : 2014 (1) JBCJ 395 : 2013 (6) CTC 789 : 2014 (118) CutLT 59 : 2014 (1) Him. L.R. 269 : 2014 (1) ACJ 532


Contract Law – Government Contracts – Tenders – Cancellation of Tender – Deficiencies in the Tender Process – Held, Submission of a tender in response to a notice inviting such tenders is no more than making an offer which the State or its agencies are under no obligation to accept Bidders participating in the tender process cannot, therefore, insist that their tenders should be accepted simply because a given tender is the highest or lowest depending upon whether the contract is for sale of public property or for execution of works on behalf of Government All that participating bidders are entitled to is a fair, equal and non-discriminatory treatment in the matter of evaluation of their tenders – To that extent the tenderer has an enforceable right. [Maa Binda Express Carrier Vs. Northeast Frontier Railway; November 29, 2013] AIR 2014 SC 390 : (2014) 3 SCC 760 : 2013 (12) SCR 529 : 2013 (14) Scale 226 : 2013 (8) MLJ 540 : 2013 AIR (SCW) 6779 : 2014 (1) BC 76 : 2014 (2) GLD 19 : 2014 (5) RCR (Civil) 217 : 2014 All SCR 347 : 2014 (2) Rajdhani LR 682 : 2014 (2) Cal. H.C.N. 96 : 2014 (1) JBCJ 404 : 2014 (2) RAJ 154 : AIR 2014 (3) Jhar R. 500 : 2014 (1) JCR 154 : 2014 (1) WLN 28 : 2014 (4) GauLT 1