Supreme Court Allows Leave to Defend in Summary Suit: B.L. Kashyap and Sons Ltd. vs. JMS Steels and Power Corporation (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether leave to defend should be granted in a summary suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. CASE TYPE: Civil (Commercial) Case Name: B.L. Kashyap and Sons Ltd. […]
Supreme Court Allows Leave to Defend in Summary Suit: B.L. Kashyap vs. JMS Steels (2022) Date of the Judgment: 18 January 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 41 Judges: Justice Vineet Saran and Justice Dinesh Maheshwari Can a contractor be held liable in a summary suit for payments when the purchase orders were issued on behalf of
Supreme Court Orders Appointment Despite NOC Delay: Narender Singh vs. State of Haryana (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a candidate should be denied appointment due to the employer’s delay in issuing a No Objection Certificate (NOC), despite the candidate applying on time and being more meritorious than the selected candidate. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name:
Supreme Court Orders Appointment Despite NOC Delay: Narender Singh vs. State of Haryana (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a candidate should be denied appointment due to a delay in the issuance of a No Objection Certificate (NOC) by their employer, when the candidate applied for the NOC well in time and was otherwise meritorious. CASE TYPE:
Supreme Court acquits accused in murder case due to lack of overt act: Mukesh vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an accused can be convicted under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, without any overt act being attributed to them in a murder case. CASE TYPE:
Supreme Court Holds Bihar in Contempt for Non-Compliance in Pension Case (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Contempt of Court for non-compliance of orders regarding pensionary benefits. CASE TYPE: Contempt Jurisdiction. Case Name: Bijay Kumar Sinha and Others vs. Tripurari Sharan and Others. Judgment Date: 18 January 2022 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 18 January 2022 Citation: Contempt
Supreme Court Remands Criminal Appeal for Re-evaluation: Geeta Devi vs. State of U.P. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Proper procedure for High Courts when dealing with appeals against acquittals in criminal cases. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Geeta Devi vs. State of U.P. & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 18 January 2022 Date of the Judgment: 18 January 2022
Supreme Court Remands Criminal Appeal for Re-evaluation: Geeta Devi vs. State of U.P. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Proper procedure for High Courts when dealing with appeals against acquittals. CASE TYPE: Criminal Appeal Case Name: Geeta Devi vs. State of U.P. & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 18 January 2022 Date of the Judgment: 18 January 2022 Citation: Criminal
Supreme Court clarifies interim mining permissions in Bihar: State of Bihar vs. Pawan Kumar (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Clarification on interim arrangements for mining permissions during the pendency of environmental clearances. CASE TYPE: Environmental Law, Mining Law Case Name: The State of Bihar and Others vs. Pawan Kumar and Others [Judgment Date]: 18 January 2022 Date
Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility Under Section 29A(h) of IBC: Bank of Baroda vs. MBL Infrastructures (2022) Date of the Judgment: January 18, 2022 The Supreme Court of India, in a recent judgment, addressed a critical question regarding the eligibility of resolution applicants under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). Specifically, the court examined whether
Supreme Court clarifies ineligibility under Section 29A(h) of IBC: Bank of Baroda vs. MBL Infrastructures (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of Section 29A(h) of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 concerning the eligibility of a resolution applicant who has provided a guarantee to a creditor. CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: Bank of Baroda & Anr.
Supreme Court on Enforceability of Agreements Violating Bangalore Development Authority Rules Date of the Judgment: 18 January 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 512 Judges: K.M. Joseph, J., Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, J. Can an agreement to sell, which violates the rules of the Bangalore Development Authority (BDA), be enforced? The Supreme Court recently addressed this question, examining
