Cognisance

Cognisance is taken of the cases and not of the persons.

The Associate Builders Judgment of 2015 seems to have been overruled in Ssangyong (2019) judgment after the amendments were introduced to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 through the Amendment Act, 2015. This partly encourages speedy disposal. 

The position is now relegated to Renusagar (1994) position. Further, Section 34(2-A) associated with patent illegality is another provision available in the A&C Act for setting aside the arbitral award under the A&C Act. The time-limit remains 90 days. The appeal provision are in Section 37 of the Arbitration & Conciliation Act.

For construction of wills and effect of Section 14 of HSA, one may refer to 25th April 2020 decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Behl case which takes the definition of mutual will and what is absolute right to property of a female  where "any property possessed by a female Hindu" is the language employed in Section 14 "shall be held by her as full owner thereof".

"It is well settled that the presumption is always in favour of the constitutionality of a statute and the onus lies on the person assailing the Act to prove that it is unconstitutional. "

Before any repugnancy can arise, the following conditions must be satisfied:-

1. That there is a clear and direct inconsistency between the Central Act and the State Act.

2. That such an inconsistency is absolutely irreconcilable.

3. That the inconsistency between the provisions of the two Acts is of such a nature as to bring the two Acts into direct collision with each other and a situation is reached where it is impossible to obey the one without disobeying the other.

 One should remember M. Karunanidhi Judgment and Deep Chand Judgment for discussing the theory of repugnancy under the Indian Constitution.