Supreme Court awards compensation in lieu of specific performance: Urmila Devi vs. Mandir Shree Chamunda Devi (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether compensation can be awarded in lieu of specific performance of a contract when the subject matter of the contract is acquired by the government. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: Urmila Devi and Others vs. The […]
Supreme Court Upholds Concurrent Findings in Land Encroachment Case: Municipal Council Bawal vs. Babu Lal (2018) Date of the Judgment: January 10, 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 14 Judges: Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice Amitava Roy Can a municipal council encroach upon private land without proper acquisition? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in
Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Fraudulent Enrolment in Army: Ex Sig. Man Kanhaiya Kumar vs. Union of India (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether dismissal under Section 20(3) of the Army Act, 1950 is valid when a specific provision under Section 122(4) of the same Act exists for fraudulent enrolment. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Ex
Supreme Court Modifies National Anthem Order in Cinema Halls: Shyam Narayan Chouksey vs. Union of India (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether playing of the National Anthem in cinema halls before the screening of feature films should be mandatory. CASE TYPE: Public Interest Litigation Case Name: Shyam Narayan Chouksey vs. Union of India & Others Judgment Date:
Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Homicidal Death Case: State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Raj Kumar (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was correct in overturning the trial court’s conviction in a case based on circumstantial evidence of murder. CASE TYPE: Criminal. Case Name: State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Raj Kumar. [Judgment Date]: January 8,
Supreme Court Clarifies the Role of ‘Next Friend’ in Suits Filed on Behalf of Minors: Nagaiah vs. Chowdamma (2018) INSC 12 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an elder brother can act as the ‘next friend’ of his minor brother in a property dispute case, when their father, the natural guardian, has conflicting interests. CASE TYPE: Civil Property
Supreme Court Upholds Screening Committee’s Decision to Deny Constable Posts to Candidates with Criminal Backgrounds: Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration vs. Pradeep Kumar (2018) INSC 12 Introduction Date of the Judgment: January 8, 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 12 Judges: R. Banumathi, J. and Uday Umesh Lalit, J. Can a police force reject candidates for a constable
Date of the Judgment: January 8, 2018 Citation: Not Available Judges: Kurian Joseph, J. and Amitava Roy, J. Can a state be compelled to pay interest on revised pay scales? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in a case concerning the State of Uttar Pradesh and its employees. The core issue revolved
Supreme Court Upholds Screening Committee’s Decision to Deny Constable Posts to Candidates with Criminal History: Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration vs. Pradeep Kumar (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Screening Committee can deny appointment to candidates with a criminal history, despite acquittal, for the post of constable. CASE TYPE: Service Law/Recruitment Case Name: Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration
Supreme Court Upholds Screening Committee’s Decision to Deny Constable Posts to Candidates with Criminal History: Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration vs. Pradeep Kumar (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Screening Committee can deny employment to candidates with a criminal history, even after acquittal, for the post of constable in the police force. CASE TYPE: Service Law, Criminal
Supreme Court Upholds Screening Committee’s Decision to Deny Constable Posts to Candidates with Criminal History: Union Territory, Chandigarh Administration vs. Pradeep Kumar (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Screening Committee can deny employment to candidates with a criminal history, even if they were acquitted, and whether courts can substitute their views for the committee’s decision. CASE
Supreme Court Refuses to Interfere with Magistrate’s Order in Atrocities Case: Leena Vivek Masal vs. State of Maharashtra (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Supreme Court should interfere with an interim order of a Magistrate issuing process in a case under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. CASE TYPE: Criminal. Case
