A bank manager was removed from service as he had sanctioned a loan to his wife under a scheme that prohibits the granting of such loan to the employee?s spouse, relatives, etc. The manager contended that he tried to salvage his mistake by not encashing the draft issued in the maiden name of his wife. The Supreme Court agreed with the bank?s view that a manager should discharge his duties with integrity. The punishment of removal of service was upheld (Ganesh Santa Ram Sirur vs State Bank of India).
In a case involving death, the high court discarded the evidence of eyewitnesses on the ground that there was long-standing enmity between the parties. The Supreme Court held that although the testimony of inimical witnesses should be treated with caution, their testimony, if otherwise true, cannot be ignored. In the instant case, the witnesses were cross-examined, their testimony corroborated with medical evidence and deemed creditable. The enmity between the accu- sed and the prosecution cannot be a ground for disc- arding the evidence. The trial court?s order of convic- tion was restored (Ram Shish Rai vs Jagdish Singh).
The first marriage of a lady was dissolved by way of ?chhor chithi? ? a document of dissolution ? a practice prevalent in the community she belonged to. The document was shown to the second husband before marriage. The wife later filed for divorce and maintenance against him. The family court granted maintenance and judicial separation. On appeal, the high court held the second marriage not valid. The decree for mainte- nance, however, was upheld. The husband challenged this order. The Supreme Court ruled that the Hindu Marriage Act provides payment of alimony and maintenance at the time of passing the decree or ?at any time subsequent thereto?. It also held that it was only right to decree maintenance as they had lived as husband and wife for a long period of time (Ramesh Chandra R. Daga vs Rameswari R.C. Daga).
SOLON
