Legal News | 28th September

Supreme Court Grants Army Veteran 10-Year Disability Pension Extension

In a recent verdict, the Supreme Court has extended the disability pension claim of a former Indian Army veteran for a period of ten years. The veteran, discharged in 1987 due to cardiac discomfort, had faced a Tribunal decision limiting his disability pension to just one year. However, the Court found no negligence on his part and cited the Army’s pension regulations, which clearly state that such cases warrant a ten-year disability pension.

The Court also referred to the presumption of sound health upon entry into the military and the burden of proof resting with the employer. Consequently, the Court ordered the disability pension to be disbursed for ten years, with a reassessment option and limited calculations retroactively and for the foreseeable future. The case is titled Ex L/NK Rajput Ajit Singh v. Union of India.

Bengaluru Court Orders Suspension of ‘The Liver Doctor’s’ Account in Defamation Suit by Himalaya Wellness Corporation

A Bengaluru Civil Court has issued an ex-parte interim injunction order directing X (formerly known as Twitter) to suspend the account of Dr. Cyriac Abby Philips, who operates the popular X handle ‘@theliverdr.’ The injunction was granted in response to a defamation suit filed by Himalaya Wellness Corporation, alleging that Dr. Philips had made defamatory statements about the company’s products.

Himalaya Wellness Corporation contends that Dr. Philips posted derogatory remarks about their products, causing significant harm to their business. They argue that Dr. Philips’ statements are false and unjustified, with the intention of promoting products from other companies like Cipla and Alchem.

The civil court not only ordered the suspension of Dr. Philips’ account but also restrained him from tweeting or publishing any further defamatory remarks against Himalaya Wellness Corporation. The court emphasised the urgency of the matter, stating that an immediate injunction was necessary to prevent further damage to the company’s reputation and finances.

The court also noted that consumers benefiting from Himalaya products like Liv-52 were being negatively impacted by Dr. Philips’ statements. The case has been scheduled for the next hearing on January 5, 2024, with Sr. Adv. Udaya Holla representing Himalaya Wellness Corporation.

Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Murder Accused, Seeks Explanation for Trial Delay

The Bombay High Court has called for an explanation from a sessions judge regarding the delay in completing a murder trial, despite a previous directive from the High Court in September 2022 to conclude the trial within six months. Justice Bharati Dangre criticised the sessions judge for not complying with the order to expedite the trial by hearing it on a day-to-day basis. The High Court expressed dissatisfaction with the trial court’s failure to ensure the presence of witnesses and the accused to move forward with the trial.

The accused, Shishirkumar Padhy, had sought bail for the second time and has been in jail since January 18, 2016. The High Court granted bail and reiterated the six-month trial deadline.

The State informed the High Court that only 5 out of 10 witnesses had been examined in the trial. Despite the High Court’s previous direction to conduct daily hearings, the trial was not proceeding as ordered. Justice Dangre emphasised the need for accountability in such cases, especially when accused individuals are incarcerated for extended periods due to trial delays.

She noted the lack of accountability on the prosecution’s part, resulting in prolonged detention for accused persons awaiting trial. Advocates Sandesh Manikhedka, Anil Yadav and Dipika Gupta represented the accused, while Additional Public Prosecutor SR Agarkar represented the State.

NCLAT Rules for Consolidation of CIRPs Not Equity Jurisdiction

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has clarified that the consolidation of Corporate Insolvency Resolution Processes (CIRPs) is not an exercise of equity jurisdiction but a legal principle aimed at maximising asset value. This clarification came as the NCLAT allowed the consolidation and simultaneous CIRP of corporate debtors, including the defunct wind turbine manufacturer Regen Powertech Pvt Ltd and its wholly-owned subsidiary Regen Infrastructure and Services.

The NCLAT’s decision involved setting aside a November 2021 order of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) that had dismissed petitions seeking consolidation and simultaneous CIRP. Regen’s Resolution Professionals opposed the consolidation requests, arguing that combined CIRP was not mandated by the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) and that the equity jurisdiction did not apply in this case.

The NCLAT held that consolidation of CIRP in this case was not an exercise of equity jurisdiction but rather aimed at maximising asset value and value addition, which aligns with the core objectives of the IBC. The decision clarified that consolidation is based on a legal principle, not an equity principle, especially when business activities make it appropriate to treat the holding and subsidiary units as a single unit.

Senior Counsel PS Raman, E Om Prakash and advocates Vidhya Shankar and NP Vijay Kumar represented the appellant-companies, while Senior Counsel PH Arvindh Pandian and advocates Sathyanarayana, TK Bhaskar and B Dhanraj represented Regen Powertech and Regen Infrastructure.

Supreme Court: Dying Declaration Cannot Convict Co-Accused After Acquittal

The Supreme Court has ruled that a dying declaration, which was discarded by the court leading to the acquittal of one accused, cannot be used as the basis for the conviction of another accused in the same matter. The Court found that the dying declaration of a woman was relied upon to convict her husband but was disbelieved when examining the allegations against the father-in-law.

The Court emphasised that for a conviction based on a dying declaration, it must be trustworthy, reliable and inspire confidence. In this case, due to inconsistencies and doubts about the declaration’s voluntariness, the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt. Consequently, the accused husband was acquitted of all charges.

Calcutta High Court Acquits Hindustan Unilever Officials in Red Label Tea Misbranding Case

The Calcutta High Court has acquitted the office bearers of Hindustan Unilever Limited in a criminal case related to the alleged misbranding of the product ‘Red Label Natural Care Tea.’ Justice Subhendu Samanta issued the acquittal order, noting discrepancies in the prosecution’s case against Hindustan Unilever and its officials. 

The public analyst who provided an opinion on the misbranding was not produced by the prosecution to substantiate the claim. The prosecution also failed to explain why Hindustan Unilever allegedly misbranded its product. Consequently, the judge ordered the acquittal of all the accused in the case. The case was initially registered by a food inspector of the Kolkata Municipal Corporation.