Civil Procedure

Supreme Court clarifies mandatory nature of pre-institution mediation under Commercial Courts Act: Dhanbad Fuels vs. Union of India (2025) INSC 696 (15 May 2025)

/ Civil Procedure, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Commercial Courts Act, 2015, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges, Order VII Rule 11, CPC, Pre-Institution Mediation, R. Mahadevan, Section 12A, Commercial Courts Act, 2015

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 15 May 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 696 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., R. Mahadevan, J. (Majority opinion by J.B. Pardiwala, J.) Is pre-institution mediation mandatory for commercial suits? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in M/S Dhanbad Fuels Private Limited vs. Union of India & Anr., clarifying the […]

Supreme Court clarifies mandatory nature of pre-institution mediation under Commercial Courts Act: Dhanbad Fuels vs. Union of India (2025) INSC 696 (15 May 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the enforceability of an Agreement to Sell when buyer accepts refund of earnest money: Sangita Sinha vs. Bhawana Bhardwaj (2025) INSC 450 (04 April 2025)

/ Agreement to Sell, Civil Procedure, Civil Procedure with Status Quo, Contract Law, Dipankar Datta, Judges, Manmohan, Specific Performance, Suits

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 04 April 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 450 Judges: Dipankar Datta, J, Manmohan, J Can a buyer still demand the execution of a sale deed if they’ve already taken back a large part of the initial payment? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this critical question in a case concerning

Supreme Court settles the enforceability of an Agreement to Sell when buyer accepts refund of earnest money: Sangita Sinha vs. Bhawana Bhardwaj (2025) INSC 450 (04 April 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court nullifies ex-parte arbitration awards in service dispute: State of Uttar Pradesh vs. R.K. Pandey (2025) INSC 48

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 34, Arbitration Law with Section 7, Civil Procedure, Civil Procedure with Section 47, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Supreme Court nullifies ex-parte arbitration awards in service dispute: State of Uttar Pradesh vs. R.K. Pandey (2025) INSC 48 LEGAL ISSUE: Validity of ex-parte arbitration awards and the existence of a valid arbitration agreement. CASE TYPE: Service Law, Arbitration Law. Case Name: State of Uttar Pradesh and Another vs. R.K. Pandey and Another [Judgment Date]:

Supreme Court nullifies ex-parte arbitration awards in service dispute: State of Uttar Pradesh vs. R.K. Pandey (2025) INSC 48 Read Post »

Supreme Court defers decision on Hyderabad Cricket Association Constitution: Hyderabad Cricket Association vs. Charminar Cricket Club (2025) INSC 23

/ Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), Civil Appeal, Civil Procedure, Civil Suit, Cricket, Hyderabad Cricket Association, Sports Law

Supreme Court defers decision on Hyderabad Cricket Association Constitution: Hyderabad Cricket Association vs. Charminar Cricket Club (2025) INSC 23 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the recommendations of a Single Member Committee regarding the constitution of the Hyderabad Cricket Association should be approved. CASE TYPE: Civil. Case Name: M/s The Hyderabad Cricket Association vs. M/s Charminar Cricket Club

Supreme Court defers decision on Hyderabad Cricket Association Constitution: Hyderabad Cricket Association vs. Charminar Cricket Club (2025) INSC 23 Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies maintainability of miscellaneous applications in disposed of cases: Ajay Kumar Jain vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024) INSC 958 (09 December 2024)

/ Civil Procedure, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Constitutional Law with Article 32, Functus Officio, Fundamental Rights, Miscellaneous Application

Supreme Court clarifies maintainability of miscellaneous applications in disposed of cases: Ajay Kumar Jain vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024) INSC 958 (09 December 2024) Date of the Judgment: 09 December 2024 Citation: (2024) INSC 958 Judges: Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan Can a litigant file a miscellaneous application in a case that

Supreme Court clarifies maintainability of miscellaneous applications in disposed of cases: Ajay Kumar Jain vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024) INSC 958 (09 December 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Appoints Administrator for Oachira Temple: Oachira Parabrahma Temple vs. G. Vijayanathakurupu (2024)

/ Bye-laws of Religious Institutions, Civil Procedure, Civil Procedure with Interlocutory Applications, Elections in Religious Institutions, Functus Officio, Jurisdiction of High Court, Religious Institutions, Temple Administration

Supreme Court Appoints Administrator for Oachira Temple: Oachira Parabrahma Temple vs. G. Vijayanathakurupu (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Appointment of an administrator for a temple and its institutions due to management disputes. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: Oachira Parabrahma Temple & Anr. vs. G. Vijayanathakurupu and Ors. Judgment Date: 03 December 2024 Date of the Judgment: 03

Supreme Court Appoints Administrator for Oachira Temple: Oachira Parabrahma Temple vs. G. Vijayanathakurupu (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court awards compensation in lieu of deciding jurisdiction in a labour dispute: Bastiram vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (2024) INSC 934 (2 December 2024)

/ Civil Procedure, Dismissal of Employee, Disputes under Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Jurisdiction of Civil Court

Supreme Court awards compensation in lieu of deciding jurisdiction in a labour dispute: Bastiram vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (2024) INSC 934 (2 December 2024) Date of the Judgment: 2 December 2024 Citation: 2024 INSC 934 Judges: J.K. Maheshwari, J. and Rajesh Bindal, J. Can a civil court decide on the legality of a

Supreme Court awards compensation in lieu of deciding jurisdiction in a labour dispute: Bastiram vs. Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation (2024) INSC 934 (2 December 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Appeal Due to Inordinate Delay: Rajneesh Kumar vs. Ved Prakash (21 November 2024)

/ Appeals, Civil Procedure, Civil Suits, Condonation of Delay, Limitation Act, Principle of Limitation

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Appeal Due to Inordinate Delay: Rajneesh Kumar vs. Ved Prakash (2024) Date of the Judgment: 21 November 2024 Citation: 2024 INSC 891 Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. Mahadevan. This was a two-judge bench, and the judgment was authored by Justice J.B. Pardiwala. Can a

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Appeal Due to Inordinate Delay: Rajneesh Kumar vs. Ved Prakash (21 November 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of Limitation Period under Electricity Act in Dues Recovery Cases: Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Company Limited vs. Bapuna Alcobrew Private Limited (2024) INSC 829 (4 November 2024)

/ Civil Procedure, Electricity Act, 1910, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Law, Electricity Law with Section 56(2), Issue Estoppel, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Law, Limitation Law with Article 15, Res Judicata

Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of Limitation Period under Electricity Act in Dues Recovery Cases Date of the Judgment: 4 November 2024 Citation: (2024) INSC 829 Judges: Dipankar Datta, J., Pankaj Mithal, J. Can a power distribution company recover dues from a consumer after a significant delay, even if the relevant electricity act doesn’t specify a

Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of Limitation Period under Electricity Act in Dues Recovery Cases: Madhya Pradesh Madhya Kshetra Vidyut Vitran Company Limited vs. Bapuna Alcobrew Private Limited (2024) INSC 829 (4 November 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Decree for Lack of Fair Hearing in Property Dispute: Ranjit Singh vs. State of Uttarakhand (2024)

/ Civil Procedure, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 47, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 106

Supreme Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Decree for Lack of Fair Hearing in Property Dispute: Ranjit Singh vs. State of Uttarakhand (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an ex-parte decree can be set aside if the defendant was not given a fair opportunity to be heard. CASE TYPE: Civil Property Dispute Case Name: Ranjit Singh & Anr. vs.

Supreme Court Sets Aside Ex-Parte Decree for Lack of Fair Hearing in Property Dispute: Ranjit Singh vs. State of Uttarakhand (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies time extension for arbitral awards under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Rohan Builders vs. Berger Paints (2024)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 29A, Arbitration Proceedings, Civil Procedure, Extension of Time, Time Limit for Arbitral Award

Supreme Court Clarifies Time Extension for Arbitral Awards under Section 29A: Rohan Builders vs. Berger Paints (2024) Date of the Judgment: September 12, 2024 Citation: 2024 INSC 686 Judges: Sanjiv Khanna, J. and R. Mahadevan, J. Can a court extend the deadline for an arbitral award even after the initial time limit has passed? The

Supreme Court clarifies time extension for arbitral awards under Section 29A of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996: Rohan Builders vs. Berger Paints (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Landowner’s Rights, Denies Compensation to Unauthorized Occupants in Property Dispute

/ Civil Procedure, Claims, Compensation, Evidence, Land Acquisition, Mysore (Personnel & Miscellaneous) Inams Abolition Act, 1954, Pleadings, Property Law, Vesting of Land

Supreme Court Upholds Landowner’s Rights, Denies Compensation to Unauthorized Occupants in Property Dispute LEGAL ISSUE: Entitlement to compensation for land acquired for public projects when ownership is disputed. CASE TYPE: Civil Property Dispute Case Name: Lakshmesh M. vs. P. Rajalakshmi (Dead) by Lrs. and Ors. [Judgment Date]: 11 September 2024 Date of the Judgment: 11

Supreme Court Upholds Landowner’s Rights, Denies Compensation to Unauthorized Occupants in Property Dispute Read Post »

Scroll to Top