DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS (20 JUNE 2026)

SC IMPOSES ₹2 LAKH COST ON CHHATTISGARH FOR CHALLENGING COMPENSATION AFTER DECADES OF ILLEGAL LAND OCCUPATION

Case Name:Mr. Bishwajit Dubey, A.A.G. Mr. Vinayak Sharma, Adv. Mr. Ravinder Kumar Yadav, AOR Mr. Karan Khetani, Adv.

The Supreme Court imposed costs of ₹2 lakh on the State of Chhattisgarh for pursuing what it termed a frivolous challenge against compensation awarded to landowners whose property had remained under unauthorized occupation by the Public Works Department for nearly 25 years. The Court reiterated that prolonged deprivation of private property without lawful acquisition cannot be legitimized through delayed litigation. Source: Supreme Court of India.

LEGAL PROVISIONS & FRAMEWORK

• Article 300A of the Constitution
• Right to property jurisprudence
• Land acquisition and compensation principles
• Doctrine against unjust enrichment by the State
• Public accountability in eminent domain cases
• Costs for frivolous litigation

FINANCIER CANNOT CLAIM INSURANCE FOR THEFT OF VEHICLE SURRENDERED BY INSURED OWNER: SC

Case Name:K. Prakashchand v. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd.

The Supreme Court held that a financier does not automatically acquire the right to claim insurance proceeds merely because the insured owner surrendered possession of the vehicle. The Court clarified that indemnification depends upon contractual privity or a valid assignment of rights under the insurance policy, and possession alone cannot create an enforceable insurance claim. Source: Supreme Court of India.

LEGAL PROVISIONS & FRAMEWORK

• Insurance Act, 1938
• Indian Contract Act, 1872
• Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
• Principles of indemnity
• Doctrine of contractual privity
• Assignment of insurance rights

DELHI HC ORDERS REMOVAL OF FAKE NEWS ON JUDGES AND LAW MINISTER'S ALLEGED LONDON BADMINTON VISIT

Case Name:Badminton Association of India v. Social Media Intermediaries & Ors.

The Delhi High Court directed the removal of online posts falsely claiming that the Chief Justice of India, several judges, and Union Law Ministers travelled to London at public expense for a badminton tournament. Holding the material to be prima facie false, malicious, and derogatory, the Court observed that such misinformation undermines public confidence in judicial institutions. Source: Delhi High Court.

LEGAL PROVISIONS & FRAMEWORK

• Information Technology Act, 2000
• Section 69A of the IT Act
• Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines) Rules, 2021
• Article 19(1)(a) and Article 19(2)
• Protection of institutional reputation
• Intermediary liability principles

Also Read:DAILY CURRENT AFFAIRS (19 JUNE 2026)