Landmark Cases of 2023 | Tata Sons | PSV | Shilpi Lenkar | Pension Case| Bhopal Gas Tragedy

Hello, and welcome to the Legal Bites newsletter, where I share with you some of the important judgments of 2023 from India that have implications for the legal profession and the society at large. In this edition, we will look at five cases that cover topics such as arbitration, maintenance, education, pension, and compensation.

1. TATA Sons Pvt. Ltd. (Formerly TATA Sons Ltd) v. Siva Industries and Holdings Ltd & Ors.

This case is related to the amendment of section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, which imposes a time limit of 12 months for the completion of domestic arbitrations, extendable by another six months with the consent of the parties. The Supreme Court held that this provision does not apply to international commercial arbitrations, which are governed by a different set of rules and principles. The Court observed that imposing a rigid time limit on complex cross-border disputes would hamper the quality and efficiency of arbitration and undermine India's reputation as an arbitration-friendly jurisdiction. This judgment is a welcome step towards promoting India as a hub for international arbitration and respecting party autonomy and flexibility in resolving disputes.

2. Shipli Lenkar v. Susanta Kumar Lenkar & Anr

This case deals with the issue of maintenance under Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which provides for a monthly allowance to be paid by a husband to his wife who is unable to maintain herself. The Calcutta High Court dismissed a wife's plea for enhanced maintenance after she had obtained an order from another court to block a substantial source of the husband's income by attaching his bank accounts and properties. The Court held that such an order was contrary to the interests of justice and amounted to an abuse of the process of law. The Court also noted that the wife had concealed her own income and assets from the court and had not made any efforts to find employment or become self-reliant. This judgment highlights the need for a balanced and realistic approach towards maintenance claims and cautions against misuse of legal remedies by either party.

3. PSV v. Indian School & Anr.

This case reflects upon the rights of a child under Article 21 of the Constitution to access education and the balance between the same and the rights and authorities of the private schools to collect fees. The Delhi High Court upheld the decision of a private school to expel a student for non-payment of fees despite his parents' financial difficulties due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Court observed that while education is a fundamental right of every child, it is also subject to reasonable restrictions and regulations by the school authorities in accordance with law. The Court further held that the parents cannot expect the school to provide free education to their child without any reciprocal obligation or responsibility on their part. The Court also directed the school to consider granting some concession or installment facility to the parents in view of their hardship. This judgment underscores the importance of ensuring quality education for all children while also respecting the autonomy and viability of private educational institutions.

4. Shri Ram Shridhar Chimurkar v. Union of India

This case relates to the eligibility for family pension under Rule 54 (14) (b) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, which provides for payment of pension to a son or daughter who is adopted by a widow after her husband's death if such adoption is in accordance with law. The Supreme Court ruled that such adoption does not entitle the son or daughter to claim family pension as they are not members of the family as defined under Rule 54 (11) of the Rules. The Court held that the term "family" under the Rules is a narrow and precise term that cannot be expanded to include all heirs as permitted by Hindu law or other personal laws. The Court also observed that allowing such claims would defeat the purpose and object of family pension, which is to provide financial assistance to the immediate dependents of a deceased government employee. This judgment clarifies the scope and meaning of family pension and prevents any possible misuse or abuse of the same.

5. The SC rejected the center's petition seeking extra compensation from UCC for the Bhopal Gas Tragedy

This case pertains to one of the worst industrial disasters in history, which occurred in 1984 when a gas leak from a pesticide plant owned by Union Carbide Corporation (UCC) in Bhopal killed thousands of people and injured lakhs more. In 1989, UCC agreed to pay 470 million US Dollars to the Union Government to settle all claims relating to the disaster. In 2010, a curative petition was filed by the Union Government contending that the earlier settlement was based on incorrect data on the number of deaths, injuries, and losses, and had not taken into account the subsequent environmental degradation. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition and held that the settlement was final and binding and could not be reopened on the basis of any new facts or evidence. The Court also observed that the Union Government had failed to show any fraud or mistake that would vitiate the settlement. The Court, however, directed the Union Government to utilize the remaining amount of compensation to satisfy any pending claims in accordance with the Bhopal Gas Leak Disaster (Processing of Claims) Act, 1985 and any scheme made under the Act. This judgment puts an end to the long-pending litigation over the compensation for the Bhopal Gas Tragedy and reaffirms the sanctity of settlements in law.

These are some of the landmark judgments of 2023 that have shaped the legal landscape of India and have implications for various aspects of law and society. I hope you found this newsletter informative and useful. If you have any feedback or suggestions, please feel free to share them with me. You can also follow me on LinkedIn for more updates and insights on legal issues and developments. Thank you for reading and stay tuned for the next edition of Legal Bites.

If you enjoyed this newsletter and want to support my work, please consider subscribing to Legal Bites and sharing it with your friends and colleagues. You can also join the Legal Bites community on LinkedIn, where you can interact with other legal professionals and enthusiasts, ask questions, share your views, and learn from each other. I would love to hear from you and connect with you. Thank you for your time and attention. See you in the next edition of Legal Bites. Stay safe and stay curious.