Constitutional Law with Article 136

Supreme Court Dismisses Challenge to Review Order in Service Dispute: T.K. David vs. Kuruppampady Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. (2020)

/ Ashok Bhushan, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Judges, M.R. Shah, Maintainability of Special Leave Petition, R. Subhash Reddy, Review Petition, Service Disputes, Service Law

Supreme Court Dismisses Challenge to Review Order in Service Dispute: T.K. David vs. Kuruppampady Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Maintainability of a special leave petition against an order rejecting a review petition when the main order is not challenged. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: T.K. David vs. Kuruppampady Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. […]

Supreme Court Dismisses Challenge to Review Order in Service Dispute: T.K. David vs. Kuruppampady Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision on Arbitration Award: Patel Engineering Ltd. vs. NEEPCO (22 May 2020)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Patent Illegality, R. Banumathi, Setting Aside Arbitral Awards

Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision on Arbitration Award: Patel Engineering Ltd. vs. NEEPCO (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court erred in setting aside an arbitral award based on the interpretation of contract clauses and the application of the “patent illegality” principle under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, as amended

Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision on Arbitration Award: Patel Engineering Ltd. vs. NEEPCO (22 May 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies “Ordinary Course of Transit” in Marine Insurance: Bajaj Allianz vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (24 April 2020)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insurance Law, Insurance Law with Institute Cargo Clauses (ICC), Judges, Marine Insurance

Supreme Court Clarifies “Ordinary Course of Transit” in Marine Insurance: Bajaj Allianz vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2020) Date of the Judgment: 24 April 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 329 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and Ajay Rastogi, J Can the unpacking and assembly of a helicopter at an intermediate location be considered part of

Supreme Court Clarifies “Ordinary Course of Transit” in Marine Insurance: Bajaj Allianz vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (24 April 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Contradictory Eyewitness Testimony: Parvat Singh & Ors. vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2020) INSC 185 (2 March 2020)

/ Ashok Bhushan, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 161, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, 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 Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Contradictory Eyewitness Testimony Date of the Judgment: 2 March 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 185 Judges: Ashok Bhushan, J. and M. R. Shah, J. Can a conviction be upheld when the sole eyewitness account is riddled with contradictions and inconsistencies? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case Due to Contradictory Eyewitness Testimony: Parvat Singh & Ors. vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2020) INSC 185 (2 March 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Alternative Site Allotment for Demolished Structures: Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs. Panna Mahesh Chandra Dave (2020)

/ Bombay Municipal Corporation Act, Bombay Municipal Corporation Act with Section 351, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Judges, N.V. Ramana, V. Ramasubramanian, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Upholds Alternative Site Allotment for Demolished Structures: Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs. Panna Mahesh Chandra Dave (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Municipal Corporation can demolish structures without following due process and without providing alternative accommodation to affected tenants. CASE TYPE: Civil. Case Name: Municipal Commissioner, Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai & Ors.

Supreme Court Upholds Alternative Site Allotment for Demolished Structures: Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai vs. Panna Mahesh Chandra Dave (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes Detention Order Due to Stale Grounds and Procedural Lapses: Khaja Bilal Ahmed vs. State of Telangana (2019)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 with Section 167(2), Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, Preventive Detention, Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986, Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986 with Section 12, Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986 with Section 3

Supreme Court Quashes Detention Order Due to Stale Grounds and Procedural Lapses: Khaja Bilal Ahmed vs. State of Telangana (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a detention order based on stale criminal cases and without proper confirmation is valid under the Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986. CASE TYPE: Criminal (Preventive Detention) Case Name: Khaja Bilal

Supreme Court Quashes Detention Order Due to Stale Grounds and Procedural Lapses: Khaja Bilal Ahmed vs. State of Telangana (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Strikes Down Direct Appeal Provision Under Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act (2019)

/ Arun Mishra, Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act, 2011, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Constitutional Law with Article 246, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Legislative Competence, M.R. Shah, Rent Control Law, Rent Control Tribunal, S. Ravindra Bhat, Vineet Saran

Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act: Supreme Court Invalidates Direct Appeals (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a State legislature can enact a law providing for direct appeals to the Supreme Court from a Rent Control Tribunal. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law, Rent Control Case Name: Rajendra Diwan vs. Pradeep Kumar Ranibala & Anr. Judgment Date: 10 December 2019 Introduction

Supreme Court Strikes Down Direct Appeal Provision Under Chhattisgarh Rent Control Act (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in 1992 Murder Case: State of Uttarakhand vs. Darshan Singh (2019)

/ Arms Act, 1959, Arms Act, 1959 with Section 25, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 148, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Offences Against Human Body, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in 1992 Murder Case: State of Uttarakhand vs. Darshan Singh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Assessing the reliability of eyewitness testimony and medical evidence in a criminal trial, particularly when inconsistencies arise. CASE TYPE: Criminal Appeal Case Name: State of Uttarakhand vs. Darshan Singh [Judgment Date]: 7 November 2019 Date of the Judgment:

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in 1992 Murder Case: State of Uttarakhand vs. Darshan Singh (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Rejects Juvenile Claim Based on Matriculation Certificate: Sanjeev Kumar Gupta vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (25 July 2019)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 364A, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Juvenile Justice Act, Juvenile Justice Act with Section 7A, Juvenile Justice Act with Section 94, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Rejects Juvenile Claim Based on Matriculation Certificate: Sanjeev Kumar Gupta vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of juvenility based on conflicting age records. CASE TYPE: Criminal Appeal Case Name: Sanjeev Kumar Gupta vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr Judgment Date: 25 July 2019 Introduction Date of the Judgment:

Supreme Court Rejects Juvenile Claim Based on Matriculation Certificate: Sanjeev Kumar Gupta vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (25 July 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies “continuous service” for promotion: Girish Kumar vs. State of Maharashtra (2019)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Constitutional Law with Article 309, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, M.R. Shah, Recruitment Rules, Seniority Rules, Service Law, Service Law with Continuous Service

Supreme Court Clarifies Continuous Service for Promotion: Girish Kumar vs. State of Maharashtra (2019) Date of the Judgment: May 10, 2019 Citation: Girish Kumar vs. State of Maharashtra and others, Civil Appeal No. 4894 of 2019, (Arising from SLP (C) No. 2784 of 2011) Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., M.R. Shah, J. Can an employee

Supreme Court clarifies “continuous service” for promotion: Girish Kumar vs. State of Maharashtra (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Interim Maintenance Order Against Brother-in-Law in Domestic Violence Case: Ajay Kumar vs. Lata @ Sharuti (2019)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, D.Y. Chandrachud, Domestic Relationship, Hemant Gupta, Judges, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 with Section 2(q), Shared Household

Supreme Court Upholds Interim Maintenance Order Against Brother-in-Law in Domestic Violence Case: Ajay Kumar vs. Lata @ Sharuti (2019) Date of the Judgment: April 8, 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 338 Judges: Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud and Mr. Justice Hemant Gupta. This was a two-judge bench, and the judgment was authored by Dr. Justice D.Y. Chandrachud.

Supreme Court Upholds Interim Maintenance Order Against Brother-in-Law in Domestic Violence Case: Ajay Kumar vs. Lata @ Sharuti (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies maintainability of review petitions after dismissal of special leave petitions in civil cases: Khoday Distilleries Ltd. vs. Sri Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd. (01 March 2019)

/ A.K. Sikri, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order 47 Rule 1, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 96, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Judges, M.R. Shah, S. Abdul Nazeer

Supreme Court Clarifies Maintainability of Review Petitions After Dismissal of Special Leave Petitions: Khoday Distilleries Ltd. vs. Sri Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a review petition is maintainable before the High Court after the Supreme Court has dismissed a Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the same judgment. CASE TYPE: Civil Appeal

Supreme Court clarifies maintainability of review petitions after dismissal of special leave petitions in civil cases: Khoday Distilleries Ltd. vs. Sri Mahadeshwara Sahakara Sakkare Karkhane Ltd. (01 March 2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top