Contempt of Court

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of status quo orders in petroleum dealership guidelines: K.K. Gupta & Ors. vs. Himachal Pradesh Petroleum Dealers Association & Anr. (2018)

/ Civil Law, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Order 39, Contempt Jurisdiction, Contempt of Court, Interim Orders, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Navin Sinha, Scope of Contempt, Status Quo

Supreme Court Clarifies Status Quo Orders in Petroleum Dealership Guidelines: K.K. Gupta vs. Himachal Pradesh Petroleum Dealers Association (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of status quo orders in the context of policy guidelines. CASE TYPE: Civil Appeal, Contempt Jurisdiction Case Name: K.K. Gupta & Ors. vs. Himachal Pradesh Petroleum Dealers Association & Anr. [Judgment Date]: April […]

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of status quo orders in petroleum dealership guidelines: K.K. Gupta & Ors. vs. Himachal Pradesh Petroleum Dealers Association & Anr. (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Settles Matrimonial Dispute and Loan Settlement: Ramakanth V. Purnima (2018) INSC 171

/ Banking Law, Civil Procedure, Financial Settlement, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Loan Settlement, Matrimonial Law, Mediation, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Settlement, Settlement of Disputes

Supreme Court Settles Matrimonial Dispute: Ramakanth V. Purnima (2018) INSC 171 Date of the Judgment: March 19, 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 171 Judges: Kurian Joseph, J., Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J. Can a long-standing matrimonial dispute be resolved through mediation, and can a bank’s loan settlement be included in the final resolution? The Supreme Court of

Supreme Court Settles Matrimonial Dispute and Loan Settlement: Ramakanth V. Purnima (2018) INSC 171 Read Post »

Supreme Court Closes Contempt Petition in Cauvery Water Dispute: State of Tamil Nadu vs. Siddaramaiah (2018)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Amitava Roy, Civil Appeal, Civil Procedure, Contempt Law, Contempt Petition, Dipak Misra, Disposal of Contempt Petition, Judges

Supreme Court Closes Contempt Petition in Cauvery Water Dispute: State of Tamil Nadu vs. Siddaramaiah (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a contempt petition should continue after the disposal of the main civil appeal. CASE TYPE: Contempt Petition (Civil) Case Name: State of Tamil Nadu represented by the Secretary to Government Public Works Department vs. Siddaramaiah, Chief

Supreme Court Closes Contempt Petition in Cauvery Water Dispute: State of Tamil Nadu vs. Siddaramaiah (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles service appointment dispute in Jammu and Kashmir: State of Jammu and Kashmir vs. Mohammad Mehraj-ud-Din Khan (2017) INSC 967 (21 November 2017)

/ Amitava Roy, Appointment, Arrears, Contempt of Court, Contempt Proceedings, Costs, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Service Law

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the State of Jammu and Kashmir should be held liable for costs and contempt proceedings for delaying the appointment of a candidate to the Kashmir Administrative Service. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: State of Jammu and Kashmir vs. Mohammad Mehraj-ud-Din Khan & Ors. Judgment Date: 21 November 2017 Can a State

Supreme Court settles service appointment dispute in Jammu and Kashmir: State of Jammu and Kashmir vs. Mohammad Mehraj-ud-Din Khan (2017) INSC 967 (21 November 2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court directs challenge to Chief Secretary Report in Forest Land Identification: Viswajeet Khanna vs Sukhwinder Singh (2017)

/ Contempt of Court, Contempt Proceedings, Forest (Conservation) Act, 1980, Forest Land Identification, Implementation of the Act, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Land Law, R. Banumathi

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a report submitted by the Chief Secretary regarding the identification of forest lands can be challenged before the High Court in an appropriate proceeding. CASE TYPE: Contempt of Court and Land Law. Case Name: Viswajeet Khanna and Ors. vs. Sukhwinder Singh and Ors. [Judgment Date]: October 05, 2017 Introduction Date of the

Supreme Court directs challenge to Chief Secretary Report in Forest Land Identification: Viswajeet Khanna vs Sukhwinder Singh (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns High Court order on Contempt Proceedings: M.D. Jain vs. Bhagyavathi & Ors (26 July 2017)

/ Contempt of Court, Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 with Section 190, Judges, Kurian Joseph, R. Banumathi

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a contempt proceeding should be closed based on a CBI report exonerating the accused. CASE TYPE: Criminal Contempt Case Name: M.D. Jain vs. Bhagyavathi & Ors. Judgment Date: 26 July 2017 Date of the Judgment: 26 July 2017 Citation: Not Available Judges: Kurian Joseph, J., R. Banumathi, J. Can a contempt proceeding

Supreme Court overturns High Court order on Contempt Proceedings: M.D. Jain vs. Bhagyavathi & Ors (26 July 2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order on Interest Payment in Land Allotment Case: Estate Officer, Punjab vs. Jagtar Singh (2017)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Contempt Jurisdiction, Contempt of Court, Judges, Kurian Joseph, R. Banumathi

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a contempt jurisdiction can be used to adjudicate a dispute regarding interest on a refund. CASE TYPE: Land Allotment/Contempt of Court Case Name: The Estate Officer, Punjab Urban Planning & Development Authority vs. Jagtar Singh and Ors. [Judgment Date]: July 19, 2017 Introduction Date of the Judgment: July 19, 2017 Citation: Not

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order on Interest Payment in Land Allotment Case: Estate Officer, Punjab vs. Jagtar Singh (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Holds Industrialist in Contempt for Violating Closure Orders: Jaghbir Singh & Ors. vs. P.K. Tripathi & Ors. (2017) INSC 635 (10 July 2017)

/ Contempt of Court, D.Y. Chandrachud, Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957, Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 with Section 345-A, Jagdish Singh Khehar, Judges, Undertaking to the Court, Violation of Court Orders

Can an individual repeatedly violate court orders and undertakings without facing consequences? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in a contempt case involving an industrialist who repeatedly defied orders to close down his factory in a residential area. This case highlights the importance of respecting judicial pronouncements and the consequences of failing

Supreme Court Holds Industrialist in Contempt for Violating Closure Orders: Jaghbir Singh & Ors. vs. P.K. Tripathi & Ors. (2017) INSC 635 (10 July 2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies implementation of Majithia Wage Board Award: Avishek Raja & Ors. vs. Sanjay Gupta (2017) INSC 530 (19 June 2017)

/ Contempt of Court, Judges, Labor Law, Minimum Wages, Navin Sinha, Ranjan Gogoi, Wage Boards, Working Journalists Act, 1955, Working Journalists Act, 1955 with Section 12, Working Journalists Act, 1955 with Section 16, Working Journalists Act, 1955 with Section 17

Date of the Judgment: 19 June 2017 Citation: (2017) INSC 530 Judges: Ranjan Gogoi, J., Navin Sinha, J. Can newspaper employees be denied the wages as per the Majithia Wage Board Award? The Supreme Court addressed this crucial question in a batch of contempt petitions, clarifying the scope and implementation of the Majithia Wage Board

Supreme Court clarifies implementation of Majithia Wage Board Award: Avishek Raja & Ors. vs. Sanjay Gupta (2017) INSC 530 (19 June 2017) Read Post »

Majithia Wage Board Award: Supreme Court clarifies implementation in Contempt Case (2017)

/ Contempt of Court, Contempt of Court with Wilful Disobedience, Judges, Navin Sinha, Ranjan Gogoi, Working Journalists Act, 1955, Working Journalists Act, 1955 with Section 16, Working Journalists Act, 1955 with Section 17

LEGAL ISSUE: Implementation of the Majithia Wage Board Award for working journalists and non-journalist employees. CASE TYPE: Contempt of Court / Labour Law Case Name: Avishek Raja & Ors. vs. Sanjay Gupta Judgment Date: 19 June 2017 Can newspaper establishments be held in contempt for not fully implementing the Majithia Wage Board Award? The Supreme

Majithia Wage Board Award: Supreme Court clarifies implementation in Contempt Case (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition: Kathuria Public Schools vs. Union of India (2016)

/ Adarsh Kumar Goel, Anil R. Dave, Contempt of Court, Court Orders, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6, Non-Compliance of Court Orders, Shiva Kirti Singh, Undertaking to the Court

The Supreme Court of India addressed the issue of land acquisition and possession in this case. The core legal question was whether the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) could take possession of land previously acquired, despite the appellant’s claims. This case highlights the importance of adhering to court orders and undertakings. Citation: This judgment is from

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition: Kathuria Public Schools vs. Union of India (2016) Read Post »

Scroll to Top