Constitutional Law with Article 142

Supreme Court Clarifies Powers of Adjudicating Authority in Jaypee Infratech Resolution Plan (24 March 2021)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dinesh Maheshwari, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 30, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 31, Judges, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Clarifies Powers of Adjudicating Authority in Jaypee Infratech Resolution Plan (24 March 2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of powers and jurisdiction of the Adjudicating Authority while dealing with the resolution plan approved by the Committee of Creditors. CASE TYPE: Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) Case Name: Jaypee Kensington Boulevard Apartments Welfare Association & Ors. […]

Supreme Court Clarifies Powers of Adjudicating Authority in Jaypee Infratech Resolution Plan (24 March 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Dismisses Contempt Petition in Family Business Dispute: Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Narang (2021)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, B.R. Gavai, Civil Contempt, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 397, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 139-A, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 with Section 2(b), Judges, Oppression and Mismanagement

Supreme Court Dismisses Contempt Petition in Family Business Dispute: Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Narang (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the respondents’ actions constituted contempt of court for violating a prior consent order, despite subsequent orders from the Company Law Board (CLB). CASE TYPE: Contempt of Court, Family Business Dispute Case Name: Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Narang

Supreme Court Dismisses Contempt Petition in Family Business Dispute: Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Narang (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court allows delayed written statements in consumer cases due to COVID-19 extension: SS Group Pvt. Ltd. vs. Aaditiya J. Garg (2020)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 141, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Consumer Protection Act, 2019, Consumer Protection Act, 2019 with Section 38, Judges, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, S. Ravindra Bhat, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Allows Delayed Written Statements in Consumer Cases Due to COVID-19 Extension: SS Group Pvt. Ltd. vs. Aaditiya J. Garg (2020) Date of the Judgment: 17 December 2020 Citation: 2020 INSC 949 Judges: Justice Vineet Saran and Justice S. Ravindra Bhat Can a delay in filing a written statement in a consumer case be

Supreme Court allows delayed written statements in consumer cases due to COVID-19 extension: SS Group Pvt. Ltd. vs. Aaditiya J. Garg (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Transfers Petitions on Personal Guarantors Under IBC: Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India vs. Lalit Kumar Jain & Ors. (29 October 2020)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 139A, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Hemant Gupta, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 1(3), Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Personal Guarantors

Supreme Court Transfers Petitions on Personal Guarantors Under IBC: Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India vs. Lalit Kumar Jain & Ors. (2020) Date of the Judgment: 29 October 2020 Citation: Not Available Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta, and Ajay Rastogi, JJ. Can the Supreme Court transfer writ petitions from various High Courts to itself

Supreme Court Transfers Petitions on Personal Guarantors Under IBC: Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India vs. Lalit Kumar Jain & Ors. (29 October 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies compassionate appointment for work-charged employees’ dependents: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Amit Shrivas (29 September 2020)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Compassionate Appointment, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Krishna Murari, Regular Employees, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Service Law, Work-Charged Employees

Compassionate Appointment: Supreme Court clarifies rights of work-charged employees’ dependents (29 September 2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether dependents of work-charged employees are entitled to compassionate appointment. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. vs. Amit Shrivas Judgment Date: 29 September 2020 Date of the Judgment: 29 September 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC

Supreme Court clarifies compassionate appointment for work-charged employees’ dependents: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Amit Shrivas (29 September 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Limits Monitoring Committee’s Power to Seal Residential Premises: M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (2020)

/ Arun Mishra, B.R. Gavai, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Constitutional Law with Article 300A, Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 with Section 334, Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 with Section 335, Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 with Section 347A, Judges, Krishna Murari

Supreme Court Limits Monitoring Committee’s Power to Seal Residential Premises: M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Authority of the Monitoring Committee to seal residential premises. CASE TYPE: Environmental Law, Public Interest Litigation Case Name: M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India & Ors. Judgment Date: 14 August 2020 Date of the Judgment: 14

Supreme Court Limits Monitoring Committee’s Power to Seal Residential Premises: M.C. Mehta vs. Union of India (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Case: Sangita Arya vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (2020)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Compensation Calculation, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Motor Accident Claims, Motor Vehicle Act, 1988, Motor Vehicle Act, 1988 with Section 166, R. Banumathi

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Case: Sangita Arya vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of fair compensation in motor accident claims, specifically concerning the assessment of income and the application of appropriate multipliers and future prospects. CASE TYPE: Motor Accident Compensation Case Name: Smt. Sangita Arya & Ors. vs. Oriental

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation in Motor Accident Case: Sangita Arya vs. Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd. (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Parity in Sub-Inspector Appointments: Nirbhay Kumar vs. State of Bihar (2020)

/ Appointment, Ashok Bhushan, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Judges, M.R. Shah, Selection Process, Service Law, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Denies Parity in Sub-Inspector Appointments: Nirbhay Kumar vs. State of Bihar (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether candidates who did not participate in or failed the physical test for Sub-Inspector appointments can claim parity with those exempted from the test. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Nirbhay Kumar & Ors. vs. State of Bihar &

Supreme Court Denies Parity in Sub-Inspector Appointments: Nirbhay Kumar vs. State of Bihar (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Re-evaluation of Bihar Staff Selection Exam Results: Bihar Staff Selection Commission vs. Arun Kumar (2020)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Expert Opinion, Judges, Judicial Review, Recruitment Examination, Rohinton Fali Nariman, S. Ravindra Bhat, Service Law

Supreme Court Orders Re-evaluation of Bihar Staff Selection Exam Results: Bihar Staff Selection Commission vs. Arun Kumar (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: The core legal issue revolves around the extent of judicial review in matters concerning the evaluation of candidates in public service recruitment exams, specifically when there are allegations of errors in question papers and answer

Supreme Court Orders Re-evaluation of Bihar Staff Selection Exam Results: Bihar Staff Selection Commission vs. Arun Kumar (2020) Read Post »

Matrimonial Home Rights: Supreme Court Directs Accommodation in Redeveloped Property in Aishwarya Atul Pusalkar vs. Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority (27 April 2020)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Deepak Gupta, Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956, Hindu Adoption and Maintenance Act, 1956 with Section 18, Judges, Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976, Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 with Section 177, Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 with Section 2(25), Maharashtra Housing and Area Development Act, 1976 with Section 95-A, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 with Section 19, Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 with Section 2(s), Protection of Women from Domestic Violence Act, 2005 with Section 3(iv)

Supreme Court Directs Accommodation for Wife in Matrimonial Dispute: Aishwarya Atul Pusalkar vs. Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a wife can enforce her right to reside in her matrimonial home through a writ petition, especially when the original home was part of a redevelopment project under the Maharashtra Housing and

Matrimonial Home Rights: Supreme Court Directs Accommodation in Redeveloped Property in Aishwarya Atul Pusalkar vs. Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority (27 April 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Directs Use of Video Conferencing for Court Functioning During COVID-19 Pandemic

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, D.Y. Chandrachud, e-Courts Integrated Mission Mode Project, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, S.A. Bobde, Technology in Courts, Video Conferencing

Supreme Court Directs Use of Video Conferencing for Court Functioning During COVID-19 Pandemic Date of the Judgment: April 6, 2020 Citation: Suo Motu Writ (Civil) No. 5/2020 Judges: S.A. Bobde, CJI, D.Y. Chandrachud, J., L. Nageswara Rao, J. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a shift in how courts function. The Supreme Court of India, recognizing the

Supreme Court Directs Use of Video Conferencing for Court Functioning During COVID-19 Pandemic Read Post »

Supreme Court annuls marriage using Article 142 in settlement: Kirti Vijayvargiya vs. Rahul Vijayvargiya (28 February 2020)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 125, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Annuls Marriage Under Article 142 in Settlement: Kirti Vijayvargiya vs. Rahul Vijayvargiya (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Supreme Court can annul a marriage in exercise of its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, when the parties have settled their disputes amicably. CASE TYPE: Family Law, Transfer Petition Case Name: Kirti

Supreme Court annuls marriage using Article 142 in settlement: Kirti Vijayvargiya vs. Rahul Vijayvargiya (28 February 2020) Read Post »

Scroll to Top