SC sets aside the 2008 NCDRC judgment capping interest on credit card dues at 30 pc
The 2008 NCDRC judgment was set aside by a bench of Justice Belas M Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma. The copy of the judgment is awaited.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday gave the Central government eight weeks time to tell it on the outcome of the discussion it was holding with Punjab and Haryana for some amicable solution of the Sutlej-Yamuna Link (SYL) canal dispute.
Giving the period, the bench of Chief Justice Dipak Misra, Justice Amitava Roy and Justice A.M.Khanwilkar directed the hearing of the matter on November 8.
Advertisement
The Central government was given time till November 8 as Attorney General K.K.Venugopal told the court that the discussion were on for resolving the dispute and there was a possibility of some solution.
Advertisement
Seeking six weeks time, Venugopal said that Prime Minister Narendra Modi was away.
During the hearing of the matter on July 11, Punjab had informed the court that there was a proposal for Modi to hold a meeting over the settlement of the Sutlej-Yamuna Link canal issue.
Haryana has moved the top court for the implementation of its 2002 and 2004 orders and decrees that had directed the completion of the stretch of the SYL canal falling in Punjab.
The top court, by its 2002 and 2004 orders and decrees, had directed the completion of the stretch of the SYL canal falling in Punjab.
The court had on February 15 said that the status quo order passed on November 30, 2016 and continued from time to time would remain in force until further orders.
The top court had ordered status quo on the land acquired for the construction of Sutlej-Yamuna Link canal’s stretch in Punjab in the wake of latter’s decision to denotify the acquired land and restoring it to original owners.
The top court’s status quo order had come on Haryana government’s plea challenging the Punjab government’s decision to denotify the acquired land for constructing its stretch of SYL and restore it to original owners.
By the notification that was challenged by Haryana, Punjab had de-notified 5,376 acres of land acquired from the 4,980 acres for the canal.
Advertisement
