Constitution of India , Art.309, Art.16— Punjab Civil Services (Reservation of Posts for Women) Rules (2020) , R.5— Appointment - Reservation for women - Challenge against - After advertisement was issued, Rules of 2020 came into force and new advertisement was issued - Though Chief Secretary stated that DSP post was erroneously reserved for 'SC Sports (Woman)' in advertisement and advertisement deserves to be withdrawn, this was never done - Said advertisement was never challenged - Rights of parties would have to be decided under said advertisement only - Roster on which respondent relied, came later - There was only one post of DSP against 'SC Sports', which was reserved for women as per 2020 Rules, wherein 33% reservation was mandated for women and as such respondent could not be appointed to said post - Appellant was only SC woman candidate who successfully cleared all tests - Once an eligibility criteria was declared by means of a fresh advertisement same could not be changed midway through recruitment process - Respondent participated in entire recruitment process without protest - Challenge to reservation of posts was not sustainable.

AIROnline 2023 P and H 1691-ReversedAIROnline 2024 SC 747-Followed(Paras1516171819202324)

(Para 15 16 17 18 19 20 23 24)

Marine Insurance Act (11 of 1963) , S.44— Consumer Protection Act (35 of 2019) , S.2(6)(d)— Marine insurance - Repudiation of insurance claim - Breach of special condition - Policy was taken for a period from 16.05.2013 to 15.06.2013 to cover voyage from Mumbai to Kolkata - As per DGS Circular, foul weather commences on 1st May itself on East Coast - Only logical conclusion was that insurance was availed to cover foul weather period along west and east coast - Special condition could not be treated as a condition precedent to waive any liability under policy - Same was impliedly waived by parties due to its non-material nature - Policy being capable of literal interpretation, rule of contra proferentem could not be applied - Respondent was not entitled to repudiate claim of appellant on ground of breach of special condition

Doctrines - contra Proferentem - Applicability(Paras1516171820)

(Para 15 16 17 18 20)

Registration Act (16 of 1908) , S.22A, S.22B, S.69— Tamil Nadu Registration Rules , R.55A— Registration of documents - Power of registrar to refuse registration - Validity of provision for - Rule 55A of Registration Rules framed by Government of Tamil Nadu which empowers registering authority to refuse to register a document unless documents are produced to prove that the executant has a right in respect of property subject matter of instrument, was declared ultra vires Registration Act, 1908 being inconsistent with provisions of the Act

Order of Division Bench of Madras dt.20.03.2024-Reversed

Motor Vehicles Act (59 of 1988) , S.147— Motor accident - Compensation - Liability of insurer - A person riding his scooter , had died due to collision allegedly caused by a car - During inquiry, alleged eyewitness, who was a customer at a paan shop near the accident site, disclosed registration number of offending vehicle to police two and a half months later - Belated disclosure, lack of corroboration by paan shop owner and failure to produce paper on which number was allegedly noted raised doubts about reliability of testimony of witness - Inspection report showed damage to vehicle - Owner of offending vehicle did not appear before any forum throughout proceedings, despite valid service of notice - It would have to be presumed that owner had no defence to offer before any forum - Record showed that during police investigation, driver of vehicle had admitted guilt - Vehicle was insured and no violation of policy terms was proved - insurance company was held liable to compensate claimants.

M.A.C.M.A. no.77 of 2017,D/-07-03-2019 (TEL)-Reversed(Paras17181920212223)

(Para 17 18 19 20 21 22 23)

Criminal P.C. (2 of 1974) , S.227— Penal Code (45 of 1860) , S.376, S.506— Discharge of accused - Offences of rape and criminal intimidation - Complainant was in long-standing relationship with accused, who allegedly promised to marry her and take care of her and her children - Based on said promise, prosecutrix claimed to have entered into physical relationship with accused and eventually obtained divorce from her husband - Relationship lasted several years, but accused allegedly refused to marry her and threatened her children - Material on record showed that physical relationship between appellant and respondent was consensual from very beginning - There was no material on record to show that there was any dishonest inducement, or incitement on part of Appellant or to establish offence of criminal intimidation - High Court had erred in undertaking an exhaustive analysis of allegations in FIR, and Charge sheet - Order of High Court by which order of discharge of accused was set aside, was erroneous.

AIROnline 2024 DEL 1724-Reversed2023 Cri LJ 2785 (SC)-Relied on(Paras1516)

(Para 15 16)