Author name: G.R. Hari

Supreme Court Upholds Fee Regulatory Committee’s Authority in Private Engineering Colleges: Vasavi Engineering College Parents Association vs. State of Telangana (2019)

/ Arun Mishra, Education Law, Fee Regulation, Judges, Navin Sinha, Private Institutions, Regulatory Bodies, Telangana Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983, Telangana Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983 with Rule 3(i), Telangana Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983 with Rule 4

Supreme Court Upholds Fee Regulatory Committee’s Authority in Private Engineering Colleges: Vasavi Engineering College Parents Association vs. State of Telangana (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: The core legal issue in this case is the extent of the High Court’s power to interfere with the fee structure determined by the Telangana Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee (TAFRC) for […]

Supreme Court Upholds Fee Regulatory Committee’s Authority in Private Engineering Colleges: Vasavi Engineering College Parents Association vs. State of Telangana (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Accident Victim with 100% Disability: Parminder Singh vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (2019)

/ Indu Malhotra, Insurance Law, Judges, M.R. Shah, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Section 166, Pay and Recover

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Accident Victim with 100% Disability: Parminder Singh vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining adequate compensation for a motor accident victim with permanent disability. CASE TYPE: Motor Accident Compensation Case Name: Parminder Singh vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. & Ors. [Judgment Date]: July 1, 2019 Date

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Accident Victim with 100% Disability: Parminder Singh vs. New India Assurance Co. Ltd. (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies Group of Companies Doctrine in Arbitration: Reckitt Benckiser vs. Reynders Label Printing (2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Ajay Rastogi, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 7, Group of Companies Doctrine, Judges

Supreme Court clarifies Group of Companies Doctrine in Arbitration: Reckitt Benckiser vs. Reynders Label Printing (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a non-signatory to an arbitration agreement can be impleaded in arbitration proceedings under the “group of companies” doctrine. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Reckitt Benckiser (India) Private Limited vs. Reynders Label Printing India Private Limited

Supreme Court clarifies Group of Companies Doctrine in Arbitration: Reckitt Benckiser vs. Reynders Label Printing (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court: No Mandatory Alternative Housing for Land Acquired for Railways (2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Ajay Rastogi, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Compensation, Land Acquisition for Public Purpose

Supreme Court: No Mandatory Alternative Housing for Land Acquired for Railways (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether individuals whose land is acquired for a railway project are entitled to alternative housing sites as a matter of right. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: The State of Tamil Nadu vs. Dr. Vasanthi Veerasekaran Judgment Date: 01 July 2019

Supreme Court: No Mandatory Alternative Housing for Land Acquired for Railways (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights in Joint Family Property After Reconveyance: Doddmuniyappa vs. Muniswamy (2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Ajay Rastogi, Civil Law, Compromise Decree, Coparcenary Rights, Hindu Law, Joint Family Property, Judges, Property Rights, Reconveyance

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights in Joint Family Property After Reconveyance: Doddmuniyappa vs. Muniswamy (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a compromise decree entered into by some coparceners without the consent of other coparceners is binding on the latter, especially when the property has been reconveyed and has assumed the character of joint family property. CASE TYPE: Civil

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights in Joint Family Property After Reconveyance: Doddmuniyappa vs. Muniswamy (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Tender Rejection Based on Sister Company’s Adverse Record in Government Contracts (21 June 2019)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 12, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 1.19 of the Manual of Contracts, 2007, Deepak Gupta, Government Contracts, Judges, Judicial Review, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Upholds Tender Rejection Based on Sister Company’s Adverse Record Date of the Judgment: 21 June 2019 Citation: The Silppi Constructions Contractors vs. Union of India and Anr. ETC. ETC., Special Leave Petition(Civil) Nos. 13802-13805 of 2019 Judges: Deepak Gupta J., Surya Kant J. Can a government authority reject a company’s tender based on

Supreme Court Upholds Tender Rejection Based on Sister Company’s Adverse Record in Government Contracts (21 June 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Refuses Extension for PG Medical Admissions: Education Promotion Society vs. Union of India (21 June 2019)

/ Admission Schedule, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Deepak Gupta, Judges, Judicial Review, Medical Admissions, Medical Education Law, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Refuses Extension for PG Medical Admissions: Education Promotion Society vs. Union of India (2019) Date of the Judgment: 21 June 2019 Citation: Not Available Judges: Deepak Gupta, J., Surya Kant, J. Can medical colleges be granted an extension of time to fill vacant postgraduate (PG) seats? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed

Supreme Court Refuses Extension for PG Medical Admissions: Education Promotion Society vs. Union of India (21 June 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds AICTE Penalty for Excess Admissions: Foundation for Organizational Research and Education vs. AICTE (21 June 2019)

/ All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), Approval Process Handbook, Deepak Gupta, Education Law, Excess Admissions, Judges, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Upholds AICTE Penalty for Excess Admissions: Foundation for Organizational Research and Education vs. AICTE (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an educational institution can admit students beyond the sanctioned intake and whether the penalty imposed by the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) for excess admissions is justified. CASE TYPE: Education Law Case Name:

Supreme Court Upholds AICTE Penalty for Excess Admissions: Foundation for Organizational Research and Education vs. AICTE (21 June 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court acquits in-laws in dowry death case due to lack of evidence: State of Haryana vs. Angoori Devi (2019)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 304B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 498A, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Offences Against Women

Supreme Court acquits in-laws in dowry death case due to lack of evidence: State of Haryana vs. Angoori Devi (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the accused were guilty of dowry death under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: State of Haryana vs. Angoori Devi & Anr. Judgment Date: 13

Supreme Court acquits in-laws in dowry death case due to lack of evidence: State of Haryana vs. Angoori Devi (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Pension Based on Notional Salary in Contempt Case: State of Bihar vs. Meera Tiwary (2019)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Bihar Service Code, Contempt of Court, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Pension Benefits, Service Law, Service Law with Rule 58(a)

Supreme Court Upholds Pension Based on Notional Salary in Contempt Case: State of Bihar vs. Meera Tiwary (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can direct the calculation of pension based on the notional salary of a higher post in a contempt proceeding, when the employee was promoted to that post but the employer claims

Supreme Court Upholds Pension Based on Notional Salary in Contempt Case: State of Bihar vs. Meera Tiwary (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Reopening of IL&FS Accounts: Hari Sankaran vs. Union of India (2019)

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 130, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 212, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 241, Indu Malhotra, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Upholds Reopening of IL&FS Accounts: Hari Sankaran vs. Union of India (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) can order the reopening of a company’s accounts under Section 130 of the Companies Act, 2013, based on allegations of fraud or mismanagement. CASE TYPE: Corporate Law Case Name: Hari Sankaran vs.

Supreme Court Upholds Reopening of IL&FS Accounts: Hari Sankaran vs. Union of India (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Kamlakar vs. State of Maharashtra (2019)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Criminal Conviction, Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, 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 Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Kamlakar vs. State of Maharashtra (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the conviction of the accused for murder based on eyewitness testimony and recovery of the weapon was justified. CASE TYPE: Criminal. Case Name: Kamlakar vs. State of Maharashtra. Judgment Date: May 31, 2019 Date of the Judgment: May 31,

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Kamlakar vs. State of Maharashtra (2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top