Civil Procedure Code, 1908

Supreme Court Upholds Joint Family Business Claim in Property Dispute: Vitthalrao Marotirao Navkhare vs. Nanibai (Dead) (2024) INSC 283

/ Civil Procedure Code, Hindu Law, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 32, Joint Family Business, Joint Hindu Family, Review Petition, Second Appeal, Statements by persons who cannot be called as witness

Supreme Court Upholds Joint Family Business Claim in Property Dispute: Vitthalrao Marotirao Navkhare vs. Nanibai (Dead) (2024) INSC 283 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a business run by brothers is a joint family business, entitling them to a share in the properties purchased from its income. CASE TYPE: Civil (Property Partition) Case Name: Vitthalrao Marotirao Navkhare vs. […]

Supreme Court Upholds Joint Family Business Claim in Property Dispute: Vitthalrao Marotirao Navkhare vs. Nanibai (Dead) (2024) INSC 283 Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Exclusion of Time for Execution Petition: Purni Devi vs. Babu Ram (2024)

/ Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Section 48, Jammu and Kashmir Limitation Act, Jammu and Kashmir Limitation Act with Article 182, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 14

Supreme Court Allows Exclusion of Time for Execution Petition: Purni Devi vs. Babu Ram (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the time spent pursuing an execution petition before a court lacking jurisdiction can be excluded when calculating the limitation period for filing the same petition in a court with proper jurisdiction. CASE TYPE: Civil Execution Case Name:

Supreme Court Allows Exclusion of Time for Execution Petition: Purni Devi vs. Babu Ram (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds 1984 Partition, Overturns High Court in Property Dispute: Srinivas Raghavendrarao Desai vs. V. Kumar Vamanrao (2024)

/ Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Order VI, Rule 17, Family Disputes, Partition of Property, Pleadings and Evidence, Property Law, Sale of Property

Supreme Court Upholds 1984 Partition, Overturns High Court in Property Dispute: Srinivas Raghavendrarao Desai vs. V. Kumar Vamanrao (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Validity of a partition of family property and the effect of prior court decrees on subsequent property disputes. CASE TYPE: Civil Property Dispute Case Name: Srinivas Raghavendrarao Desai (Dead) By Lrs. vs. V. Kumar

Supreme Court Upholds 1984 Partition, Overturns High Court in Property Dispute: Srinivas Raghavendrarao Desai vs. V. Kumar Vamanrao (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Settles Property Dispute Through Settlement Agreement: Saraswathi vs. Palanisamy (2024)

/ Civil Law, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Order 23, Property Law, Settlement Agreement

Supreme Court Settles Property Dispute Through Settlement Agreement: Saraswathi vs. Palanisamy (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Settlement of a property dispute through a settlement agreement. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: Saraswathi (Dead) By Lrs. & Ors. vs. S.A. Palanisamy & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 7 February 2024 Can a long-standing property dispute be resolved through a settlement agreement,

Supreme Court Settles Property Dispute Through Settlement Agreement: Saraswathi vs. Palanisamy (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Dismisses Petition Due to Protracted Delays in Civil Suit: Omdeo Baliram Musale & Ors. vs. Prakash Ramchandra Mamidwar & Ors. (24 January 2024)

/ Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Order IX, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Order IX Rule 2, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Order IX Rule 9

Supreme Court Dismisses Petition Due to Protracted Delays in Civil Suit: Omdeo Baliram Musale & Ors. vs. Prakash Ramchandra Mamidwar & Ors. (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a suit can be dismissed due to repeated delays and procedural lapses. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: Omdeo Baliram Musale & Ors. vs. Prakash Ramchandra Mamidwar & Ors. Judgment

Supreme Court Dismisses Petition Due to Protracted Delays in Civil Suit: Omdeo Baliram Musale & Ors. vs. Prakash Ramchandra Mamidwar & Ors. (24 January 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Title Based on Registered Sale Deed: Appaiya vs. Andimuthu (20 September 2023)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 100, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 65, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 77, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 79, Registration Act, 1908, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 57(5), Second Appeal

Supreme Court Upholds Title Based on Registered Sale Deed: Appaiya vs. Andimuthu (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a certified copy of a registered sale deed can be admitted as evidence to prove the contents of the original document, and whether the High Court can overturn concurrent findings of fact by lower courts in a second appeal.

Supreme Court Upholds Title Based on Registered Sale Deed: Appaiya vs. Andimuthu (20 September 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court allows counterclaim for loss of business opportunity despite lack of notice under Carriage by Road Act, 2007: ESSEMM Logistics vs. DARCL Logistics Limited (2023) INSC 4712 (1 May 2023)

/ Carriage by Road Act, 2007, Carriage by Road Act, 2007 with Section 16, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Order VII Rule 11, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Order VIII Rule 6-A(4), Consignment, Judges, Pankaj Mithal, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Allows Counterclaim Despite Lack of Notice in Logistics Dispute LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a counterclaim for damages related to loss of business opportunity, reputation, and overheads requires a mandatory notice to a common carrier under Section 16 of the Carriage by Road Act, 2007, similar to claims for loss or damage to consignment. CASE

Supreme Court allows counterclaim for loss of business opportunity despite lack of notice under Carriage by Road Act, 2007: ESSEMM Logistics vs. DARCL Logistics Limited (2023) INSC 4712 (1 May 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies specific performance in sale agreement: T.D. Vivek Kumar vs. Ranbir Chaudhary (2023)

/ Breach of contract, C.T. Ravikumar, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Section 100, Contract Law, Judges, M.R. Shah, Remedies for Breach, Specific Performance

Supreme Court clarifies specific performance in sale agreement: T.D. Vivek Kumar vs. Ranbir Chaudhary (2023) Date of the Judgment: 28 April 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 462 Judges: M.R. Shah, J. and C.T. Ravikumar, J. Can a buyer demand specific performance of a sale agreement if the agreement itself stipulates a remedy for non-performance? The Supreme

Supreme Court clarifies specific performance in sale agreement: T.D. Vivek Kumar vs. Ranbir Chaudhary (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court quashes High Court order, upholds right to withdraw appeal: Yogesh Navinchandra Ravani vs. Nanjibhai Sagrambhai Chaudhary (25 April 2023)

/ Agency Law, Authority of Agent, B.R. Gavai, Civil Law, Civil Procedure, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Judges, Order XXIII, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Power of Attorney, Right to Withdraw Appeal, Termination of Agency, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court quashes High Court order, upholds right to withdraw appeal: Yogesh Navinchandra Ravani vs. Nanjibhai Sagrambhai Chaudhary (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Power of Attorney holder can maintain a legal proceeding after the cancellation of the Power of Attorney and whether a party can withdraw an appeal after transposing other parties as defendants. CASE

Supreme Court quashes High Court order, upholds right to withdraw appeal: Yogesh Navinchandra Ravani vs. Nanjibhai Sagrambhai Chaudhary (25 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds SARFAESI Act Bar on Civil Court Jurisdiction: Punjab & Sind Bank Wins Against Frontline Corporation Ltd. (2023)

/ Aravind Kumar, B.R. Gavai, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Order XLIII Rule 1, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Order XXXIX Rule 1, Judges, SARFAESI Act, 2002, SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 13, SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 34, Secured Creditor Rights

Punjab & Sind Bank vs. Frontline Corporation Ltd.: Supreme Court Upholds SARFAESI Act Bar on Civil Court Jurisdiction (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a civil court can interfere with actions taken under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act). CASE TYPE: Securitisation Law. Case Name: Punjab &

Supreme Court Upholds SARFAESI Act Bar on Civil Court Jurisdiction: Punjab & Sind Bank Wins Against Frontline Corporation Ltd. (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Trial Court Decree in Property Dispute: Murti Shri Durga Bhawani Trust vs. Diwan Chand (2023)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Adverse Possession, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Order XXVI, Evidence Law, Judges, Land Disputes, Property Law, Rajesh Bindal

Supreme Court Restores Trial Court Decree in Property Dispute: Murti Shri Durga Bhawani Trust vs. Diwan Chand (2023) Date of the Judgment: 11 April 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 348 Judges: Abhay S. Oka, J. and Rajesh Bindal, J. Can a court deny relief to a property owner when the opposing party admits the property belongs

Supreme Court Restores Trial Court Decree in Property Dispute: Murti Shri Durga Bhawani Trust vs. Diwan Chand (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Sets Aside Labour Court Award Due to Workman’s Failure to Report for Duty: Creative Garments Ltd. vs. Kashiram Verma (2023)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Order VI Rule 14A, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Judges, Labour Law, Payment of Wages Act, 1936, Rajesh Bindal, Workman Compensation Act, 1923

Supreme Court Sets Aside Labour Court Award Due to Workman’s Failure to Report for Duty: Creative Garments Ltd. vs. Kashiram Verma (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Labour Court’s award of reinstatement with back wages is valid when the workman fails to report for duty despite multiple opportunities and court orders. CASE TYPE: Labour Law Case

Supreme Court Sets Aside Labour Court Award Due to Workman’s Failure to Report for Duty: Creative Garments Ltd. vs. Kashiram Verma (2023) Read Post »

Scroll to Top