Author name: G.R. Hari

Supreme Court Denies Age Relaxation for Municipal Corporation Teacher: Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board vs. Seema Kapoor (2021)

/ Age Relaxation, Departmental Candidate, Government Servant, Hemant Gupta, Judges, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Service Law

Supreme Court Denies Age Relaxation for Municipal Corporation Teacher: Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board vs. Seema Kapoor (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a teacher working in a Municipal Corporation is entitled to age relaxation as a government servant or a departmental candidate for a direct recruitment process. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Delhi Subordinate Services […]

Supreme Court Denies Age Relaxation for Municipal Corporation Teacher: Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board vs. Seema Kapoor (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the scope of Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in land acquisition cases under the National Highways Act, 1956 (20 July 2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, B.R. Gavai, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 12, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Judges, Land Acquisition, National Highways Act, 1956, National Highways Act, 1956 with Section 3G, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 34 of Arbitration Act in National Highway Land Acquisition Cases Date of the Judgment: 20 July 2021 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: R.F. Nariman, J and B.R. Gavai, J. Can a court modify an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, or is

Supreme Court settles the scope of Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in land acquisition cases under the National Highways Act, 1956 (20 July 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Overturns Bombay High Court Order on Dilapidated Building Repairs: Shubhas Jain vs. Rajeshwari Shivam (20 July 2021)

/ Indira Banerjee, Judges, Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888, Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 with Section 353(B), Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 with Section 354, Mumbai Municipal Corporation Act, 1888 with Section 488, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Overturns Bombay High Court Order on Dilapidated Building Repairs: Shubhas Jain vs. Rajeshwari Shivam (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can direct repairs of a building declared dangerous based on conflicting technical reports. CASE TYPE: Civil (Property Law) Case Name: Shubhas Jain vs. Rajeshwari Shivam & Ors. Judgment Date: 20 July 2021

Supreme Court Overturns Bombay High Court Order on Dilapidated Building Repairs: Shubhas Jain vs. Rajeshwari Shivam (20 July 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Stays Criminal Proceedings in Loan and Voter Fraud Case: A.P. Mahesh Cooperative Bank (2021)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 156(3), Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 482, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 420, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002, Multi-State Cooperative Societies Act, 2002 with Section 84, Offences Against Property, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Stays Criminal Proceedings in Loan and Voter Fraud Case: A.P. Mahesh Cooperative Bank (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can stay criminal proceedings, including arrests, when there are underlying civil disputes and allegations of mala fide intent. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: A P Mahesh Cooperative Urban Bank Shareholders Welfare Association vs.

Supreme Court Stays Criminal Proceedings in Loan and Voter Fraud Case: A.P. Mahesh Cooperative Bank (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court directs High Court to Re-evaluate Acquittal Appeal: Brijesh Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (20 July 2021)

/ Appeals, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 378, D.Y. Chandrachud, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 498A, Judges, M R Shah, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court directs High Court to Re-evaluate Acquittal Appeal: Brijesh Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2021) Date of the Judgment: 20 July 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 413 Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J. and M R Shah, J. Can a High Court dismiss an appeal against acquittal without properly evaluating the evidence? The Supreme

Supreme Court directs High Court to Re-evaluate Acquittal Appeal: Brijesh Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (20 July 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Brutal Murder Case: Kumer Singh vs. State of Rajasthan (20 July 2021)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 161, Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 149, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, M. R. Shah, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Brutal Murder Case: Kumer Singh vs. State of Rajasthan (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court correctly exercised its discretion in granting bail to the accused in a case involving serious offenses like murder. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Kumer Singh vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr. Judgment Date: 20

Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Brutal Murder Case: Kumer Singh vs. State of Rajasthan (20 July 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Declares Part IXB of Constitution Ultra Vires for State Co-operative Societies: Union of India vs. Rajendra N Shah (2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 246, Constitutional Law with Article 368, Fundamental Rights, Judges, K.M. Joseph, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Declares Part IXB of Constitution Ultra Vires for State Co-operative Societies LEGAL ISSUE: Constitutional validity of Part IXB of the Constitution of India concerning co-operative societies. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law Case Name: Union of India vs. Rajendra N Shah & Anr. Judgment Date: 20 July 2021 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 20 July

Supreme Court Declares Part IXB of Constitution Ultra Vires for State Co-operative Societies: Union of India vs. Rajendra N Shah (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Rejection of Plaint Under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC: Sayyed Ayaz Ali vs. Prakash G Goyal (20 July 2021)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 2(2), Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, M.R. Shah, Order 7 Rule 11, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Specific Relief Act, 1963, Specific Relief Act, 1963 with Section 34

Supreme Court Clarifies Rejection of Plaint Under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC: Sayyed Ayaz Ali vs. Prakash G Goyal (20 July 2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Clarification on the procedure for rejecting a plaint under Order 7 Rule 11(d) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, specifically regarding the permissibility of granting time to amend the plaint

Supreme Court Clarifies Rejection of Plaint Under Order 7 Rule 11(d) CPC: Sayyed Ayaz Ali vs. Prakash G Goyal (20 July 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Auction for Trust Property Sale: Ganesh Ramchandra Jadhav vs. Govardhan Sanstha (2021)

/ Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, M.R. Shah, Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950, Maharashtra Public Trusts Act, 1950 with Section 36(1), Sale of Trust Property

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Auction for Trust Property Sale: Ganesh Ramchandra Jadhav vs. Govardhan Sanstha (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was right in directing the sale of a public charitable trust’s property to a party who had progressively increased its offer, instead of ordering a fresh auction to realize the full market value.

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Auction for Trust Property Sale: Ganesh Ramchandra Jadhav vs. Govardhan Sanstha (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Bank Guarantee Encashment: Atlanta Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Delta Marine Company & Ors. (2021)

/ Bank Guarantee, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order 41 Rule 27, Contract Law, Encashment of Bank Guarantee, Fraud, Hemant Gupta, Judges, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Upholds Bank Guarantee Encashment: Atlanta Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Delta Marine Company & Ors. (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of interference in encashment of bank guarantees. CASE TYPE: Civil Appeal. Case Name: Atlanta Infrastructure Ltd. (Rechristened as Atlanta Ltd.) vs. Delta Marine Company & Ors. Judgment Date: 19 July 2021 Date of the Judgment: 19

Supreme Court Upholds Bank Guarantee Encashment: Atlanta Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Delta Marine Company & Ors. (2021) Read Post »

Study Leave During Pandemic: Supreme Court directs reconsideration of denial of study leave: Dr. Rohit Kumar vs. Secretary Office of Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors. (15 July 2021)

/ Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972, Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972 with Rule 50, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Government Employees, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Public Interest, Service Law, Study Leave, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Directs Reconsideration of Study Leave for Doctor Amidst COVID-19: Dr. Rohit Kumar vs. Secretary Office of Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors. (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a government doctor can be denied study leave during a pandemic. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Dr. Rohit Kumar vs. Secretary Office of Lt. Governor of

Study Leave During Pandemic: Supreme Court directs reconsideration of denial of study leave: Dr. Rohit Kumar vs. Secretary Office of Lt. Governor of Delhi & Ors. (15 July 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Limits High Court’s Power to Issue Directions Beyond Pleadings in Noise Pollution Case: Sachin Kashyap & Ors. vs. Sushil Chandra Srivastava & Ors. (2021) INSC 458 (15 July 2021)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 19(1)(g), Constitutional Law with Article 226, Dinesh Maheshwari, DJ Ban, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules, 2000, Noise Pollution Law, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Limits High Court’s Power to Issue Directions Beyond Pleadings in Noise Pollution Case Date of the Judgment: 15 July 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 458 Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vineet Saran and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dinesh Maheshwari Can a High Court issue directions on matters not specifically raised in a writ petition? The Supreme

Supreme Court Limits High Court’s Power to Issue Directions Beyond Pleadings in Noise Pollution Case: Sachin Kashyap & Ors. vs. Sushil Chandra Srivastava & Ors. (2021) INSC 458 (15 July 2021) Read Post »

Scroll to Top