Orders and Judgments Duration July 08-22, 2020

Home / Articles

Orders and Judgments Duration July 08-22, 2020

“A LAW IS VALUABLE NOT BECAUSE IT IS LAW, BUT BECAUSE THERE IS RIGHT IN IT.”

HENRY WARD BEECHER

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

State Trading Corporation of India Ltd v. Jindal Steel and Power Limited

High Court cannot suo motu appoint an Arbitrator ignoring agreed procedure between parties

The Supreme Court held that a High Court cannot appoint an arbitrator while ignoring the appointment procedure specifically agreed upon by the parties in the arbitration agreement.

The Court emphasized that party autonomy and contractual procedure for appointment of arbitrators must be respected.

The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details

ADMISSIBILITY OF ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE

Arjun Pandithrao Khotkar v. Kailash Kushanrao Gorantyal and Ors

Certificate under Section 65B(4) of Evidence Act mandatory for admissibility of electronic evidence – Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that the certificate required under Section 65B(4) of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 is a mandatory precondition for admissibility of electronic evidence.

The Court further clarified that where a person or authority refuses to provide the required certificate, the concerned party may seek appropriate directions from the Court under the Evidence Act, CPC or CrPC.

The Bench also observed that the certificate requirement is unnecessary where the original electronic device or document itself is produced before the Court.

The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details

ENVIRONMENT

The Director General (Road Development) National Highways Authority of India v. AAM Aadmi Lokmanch & Ors

NGT has power to issue general directions for future environmental protection – Supreme Court

The Supreme Court held that the National Green Tribunal possesses the authority to issue general directions for future guidance in order to prevent environmental damage.

The Court observed that the powers of the National Green Tribunal are not merely restitutionary but also preventive and remedial in nature.

The dispute arose from directions issued by the NGT restricting construction and development activities near hill slopes and hilltops.

The Supreme Court further recognized that environmental authorities may issue preventive measures to avoid future ecological harm.

The Judgement can be accessed at:
View Details

alayalegal

Most Recent Posts

All Posts
Articles

Orders and Judgments Duration July 08-22, 2020

Home / Articles