Author name: G.R. Hari

Supreme Court holds Periyar & Pareekanni Rubbers Ltd. liable for sales tax dues as an agent of its lessee: Periyar & Pareekanni Rubbers Ltd. vs. State of Kerala (2008)

Date of the Judgment: March 7, 2008 Citation: Civil Appeal Nos. 1804-1807 of 2008 (Arising out of SLP (C) Nos. 18346 – 18349 of 2004) Judges: S.B. Sinha, J., Harjit Singh Bedi, J. Can a lessor be held responsible for the sales tax dues of its lessee if the lessee defaults? The Supreme Court of […]

Supreme Court holds Periyar & Pareekanni Rubbers Ltd. liable for sales tax dues as an agent of its lessee: Periyar & Pareekanni Rubbers Ltd. vs. State of Kerala (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies rules for amending written statements in property disputes: Gautam Sarup vs. Leela Jetly (2008)

Date of the Judgment: March 7, 2008 Judges: S.B. Sinha, J., V.S. Sirpurkar, J. Can a party be allowed to amend their written statement to retract admissions made earlier? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case involving a property dispute arising from a will. The court examined the circumstances under which

Supreme Court clarifies rules for amending written statements in property disputes: Gautam Sarup vs. Leela Jetly (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the maintainability of Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for daily wagers claiming bonus: H.P. State Electricity Board vs. Ranjeet Singh (2008)

Introduction Date of the Judgment: March 5, 2008 Judges: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J., P. Sathasivam, J. Can daily wage employees claim statutory bonus through an application under Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a batch of appeals concerning the Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board’s denial of

Supreme Court settles the maintainability of Section 33-C(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 for daily wagers claiming bonus: H.P. State Electricity Board vs. Ranjeet Singh (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies land possession in cooperative society case: Bihar Finance Service vs. Gautam Goswami (2008)

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 05/03/2008 Judges: S.B. Sinha & Harjit Singh Bedi When a cooperative society seeks land for housing its members, what happens when court orders regarding land possession are not followed? The Supreme Court addressed this issue in a contempt proceeding involving the Bihar Finance Service H.C. Coop. Soc. Ltd. The core

Supreme Court clarifies land possession in cooperative society case: Bihar Finance Service vs. Gautam Goswami (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the onus of proof in confiscation of vehicles used for forest offences: State of West Bengal vs. Mahua Sarkar (2008)

Introduction Date of the Judgment: February 27, 2008 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Dr. Arijit Pasayat, J., P. Sathasivam, J. When a vehicle is used to commit a forest offence, can it be confiscated even if the owner claims to be unaware of the illegal activity? The Supreme Court addressed this question in the

Supreme Court clarifies the onus of proof in confiscation of vehicles used for forest offences: State of West Bengal vs. Mahua Sarkar (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Consideration of Will in Property Dispute: N. Srihari (D) vs. N. Prakash (2008)

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 19th February 2008 Case Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Dr. Arijit Pasayat & P. Sathasivam In a dispute over property rights, can a will that is referenced in court documents but not formally presented as evidence be considered? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Consideration of Will in Property Dispute: N. Srihari (D) vs. N. Prakash (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles seniority rules for Direct Recruits and Departmental Promotees in AFHQ Civil Services: AFHQ/ISOs SOs (DP) Association & Ors vs. Union of India & Ors (2008)

Date of the Judgment: 19th February 2008 Citation: Appeal (civil) 1384 of 2008 Judges: H. K. Sema, Altamas Kabir, Lokeshwar Singh Panta Can the government alter seniority rules to favor one group of employees over another? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a dispute between Direct Recruits (DRs) and Departmental Promotees (DPs) within the

Supreme Court settles seniority rules for Direct Recruits and Departmental Promotees in AFHQ Civil Services: AFHQ/ISOs SOs (DP) Association & Ors vs. Union of India & Ors (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the law on necessary parties in mortgage redemption suits: Mohd. Hussain vs. Gopibai (2008)

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 19th February 2008 Citation: Appeal (civil) 912 of 1999 Judges: Tarun Chatterjee, J. and A.K. Mathur, J. When a person who has mortgaged their property wants to get it back, can they be stopped because not all family members of the person who lent the money are involved in the

Supreme Court settles the law on necessary parties in mortgage redemption suits: Mohd. Hussain vs. Gopibai (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Document Examination in Lilavati Hospital Trust Case (2008)

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 18th February 2008 Citation: Appeal (crl.) 330 of 2008 Judges: Altamas Kabir, J. and Lokeshwar Singh Panta, J. The Supreme Court addressed the extent to which documents could be examined in a case involving allegations of forgery within the Lilavati Kirtilal Mehta Medical Trust. The core issue revolved around whether

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Document Examination in Lilavati Hospital Trust Case (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Policy Decision on Promotion Channels for Technical Staff: T.N. Electricity Board vs. T.N. Electricity Board Thozhilalar Aykkiya Sangam (2008)

Date of the Judgment: 14th February 2008 Citation: Appeal (civil) 1279 of 2008 Judges: A.K. Mathur and Aftab Alam Can a government organization change its service rules to alter the promotion channels for its employees? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case involving the Tamil Nadu Electricity Board (TNEB) and its

Supreme Court Upholds Policy Decision on Promotion Channels for Technical Staff: T.N. Electricity Board vs. T.N. Electricity Board Thozhilalar Aykkiya Sangam (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the rights of candidates in waiting lists for public service appointments: U.P. Public Service Commission vs. Uday Kumar Upadhyaya (2008)

Date of the Judgment: 14th February 2008 Citation: [Citation details will be added when available] Judges: H.K. Sema and Markandey Katju, JJ. Does being on a waiting list for a government job guarantee you the position? The Supreme Court addressed this important question in a case involving the U.P. Public Service Commission. The court clarified

Supreme Court clarifies the rights of candidates in waiting lists for public service appointments: U.P. Public Service Commission vs. Uday Kumar Upadhyaya (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies evidentiary standards in murder cases based on circumstantial evidence: Benjamin vs. State (2008)

Date of the Judgment: January 11, 2008 Citation: Criminal Appeal No. 76 of 2008 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 863 of 2007) Judges: S.B. Sinha, J. and HARJIT SINGH BEDI, J. In a case revolving around circumstantial evidence, the Supreme Court was tasked with determining whether the High Court correctly upheld the conviction of

Supreme Court clarifies evidentiary standards in murder cases based on circumstantial evidence: Benjamin vs. State (2008) Read Post »

Scroll to Top