The Supreme Court held that voluntary deductions such as provident fund and ESPP contributions cannot reduce income while fixing child maintenance, enhancing it to ₹1.5 lakh per month. New Delhi: The Supreme Court has enhanced the maintenance payable for two minor children in a matrimonial dispute to ₹1,50,000 per month, holding that voluntary deductions from […]
The Supreme Court held that advocates cannot surrender or compromise a client’s substantive property rights without explicit authorisation. The Court ruled that a compromise decree based solely on a lawyer’s consent, without the client’s signature or approval, is legally unsustainable under the Civil Procedure Code.
The Supreme Court stressed that deep-rooted patriarchal attitudes and the covert practice of sex selection continue to necessitate strict enforcement of the PCPNDT Act. Dismissing a doctor’s appeal, the Court observed that despite progress in gender equality, societal attitudes require significant transformation.
The Supreme Court held that injuries caused by a falling tree branch on a stationary autorickshaw do not automatically qualify as a motor vehicle accident. However, invoking Article 142, the Court enhanced compensation for the claimant, emphasizing that a proximate connection between the vehicle and accident is necessary.
The Supreme Court held that loss of a wife’s domestic care constitutes an independent head of compensation in motor accident claims. Granting enhanced compensation to a widower, the Court recognised homemakers’ invaluable contribution and observed that they should be regarded as “nation-builders” in society.
The Supreme Court held that loss of case records cannot justify keeping a criminal investigation pending indefinitely, expressing concern over a nearly two-decade delay. Setting aside the Gujarat High Court’s order, it directed Gujarat Police to complete the investigation within six weeks to protect the right to a speedy trial.
The Supreme Court held that probate revocation pleas under Section 263 of the Indian Succession Act are subject to limitation under Article 137 of the Limitation Act, ruling that parties cannot avoid statutory deadlines by ignoring constructive notice or failing to investigate facts a prudent person would examine.