Keeping Pace with Legal Change
The Supreme Court in this case clarified that a person not party to a document is not obligated to seek its cancellation. It restored the plaintiff’s title based on a valid gift deed, setting aside the High Court’s erroneous interpretation of Section 31 and 34 of the Specific Relief Act, 1963.
The Supreme Court said that the truck driver and his insurer, Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd., are fully responsible for a deadly car collision. They did not accept the argument that the driver was partially at fault. The Court made it clear that vehicle owners and insurers are responsible.
The Supreme Court threw out the criminal case against S.C. Garg, saying that a company can’t be charged with a crime unless the firm itself is also charged. The Court highlighted how important it is for things to be final and stopped parallel criminal trials on things that had already been decided.
It was decided by the Supreme Court that SEBI could not reopen a matter that had already been resolved in order to impose new sanctions on the same entities. In the context of securities law, it used the principle of res judicata and stressed the significance of finality in judicial and quasi-judicial rulings.
