Contract Act, 1872

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Power of Attorney and Agreement to Sell in property transfer: M.S. Ananthamurthy vs. J. Manjula (2025) INSC 273 (27 February 2025)

/ Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 201, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 202, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges, R. Mahadevan, Registration Act, 1908, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 17, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 54

Date of the Judgment: 27 February 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 273 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., R. Mahadevan, J. Can a General Power of Attorney (GPA) holder transfer property after the death of the original owner? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in a recent case involving conflicting claims to a property in […]

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Power of Attorney and Agreement to Sell in property transfer: M.S. Ananthamurthy vs. J. Manjula (2025) INSC 273 (27 February 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation for Delayed Delivery of Goods by Air Carrier: Rajasthan Art Emporium vs. Kuwait Airways (2023)

/ Agency Law, Carriage by Air Act, 1972, Carriage by Air Act, 1972 with Section 13(3), Carriage by Air Act, 1972 with Section 19, Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 186, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 188

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation for Delayed Delivery of Goods by Air Carrier: Rajasthan Art Emporium vs. Kuwait Airways (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Liability of an air carrier for delay in delivery of goods. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: M/S. Rajasthan Art Emporium vs. Kuwait Airways & Anr. Judgment Date: 09 November 2023 Date of the

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation for Delayed Delivery of Goods by Air Carrier: Rajasthan Art Emporium vs. Kuwait Airways (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies “Other Valuable Articles” Under Section 69A of Income Tax Act: M/s. D.N. Singh vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2023)

/ Bailment, Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 148, Hrishikesh Roy, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 69, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 69A, Judges, K.M. Joseph

Supreme Court Clarifies “Other Valuable Articles” Under Section 69A of Income Tax Act: M/s. D.N. Singh vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether bitumen can be classified as “other valuable articles” under Section 69A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and whether a carrier of goods can be considered the owner of those

Supreme Court Clarifies “Other Valuable Articles” Under Section 69A of Income Tax Act: M/s. D.N. Singh vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (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 Settles Tariff Dispute: Karnataka Power vs. JSW Energy (2022)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Contract Act, 1872, Hrishikesh Roy, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Essential terms, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Karnataka Electricity Reforms Act, 1999, Karnataka Electricity Reforms Act, 1999 with Section 27(2), Offer and Acceptance, Tariff Regulations

Supreme Court Settles Tariff Dispute: Karnataka Power vs. JSW Energy (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a binding contract existed between Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited and JSW Energy Limited regarding electricity tariff before the enactment of the Karnataka Electricity Reforms Act, 1999. CASE TYPE: Electricity Regulatory/Contract Law Case Name: Karnataka Power Transmission Corporation Limited vs. JSW

Supreme Court Settles Tariff Dispute: Karnataka Power vs. JSW Energy (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court rules on enforceability of exclusion clauses in insurance contracts: Texco Marketing Pvt. Ltd. vs. TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. (09 November 2022)

/ Consumer Law, Consumer Protection, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 2019, Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 10, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 17, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 19, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Surya Kant

Supreme Court on Exclusion Clauses in Insurance Contracts: Texco Marketing vs. TATA AIG LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an insurance company can rely on an exclusion clause to deny a claim when it was aware of the circumstances that triggered the exclusion at the time of contract formation. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: M/s Texco Marketing

Supreme Court rules on enforceability of exclusion clauses in insurance contracts: Texco Marketing Pvt. Ltd. vs. TATA AIG General Insurance Company Ltd. (09 November 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the issue of extension of time under One Time Settlement (OTS) Scheme in banking cases: State Bank of India vs. Arvindra Electronics Pvt. Ltd. (2022) INSC 990 (04 November 2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 62, Judges, Krishna Murari, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court on OTS Scheme: No Extension as a Right Date of the Judgment: 04 November 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 990 Judges: Justice M.R. Shah and Justice Krishna Murari Can a borrower demand an extension of time to repay a loan under a One Time Settlement (OTS) scheme as a matter of right? The Supreme

Supreme Court settles the issue of extension of time under One Time Settlement (OTS) Scheme in banking cases: State Bank of India vs. Arvindra Electronics Pvt. Ltd. (2022) INSC 990 (04 November 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Disallows Tax Benefits on Freebies Given to Doctors: Apex Laboratories vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (22 Feb 2022)

/ Business Expenditure, Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 23, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 37(1), Judges, Public Policy, S. Ravindra Bhat, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Disallows Tax Benefits on Freebies Given to Doctors: Apex Laboratories vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (22 Feb 2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether pharmaceutical companies can claim tax deductions on expenses incurred for providing freebies to medical practitioners. CASE TYPE: Income Tax Law Case Name: M/s Apex Laboratories Pvt. Ltd. vs. Deputy Commissioner of

Supreme Court Disallows Tax Benefits on Freebies Given to Doctors: Apex Laboratories vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (22 Feb 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Sale Deed Executed by Power of Attorney Holder: Amar Nath vs. Gian Chand (28 January 2022)

/ Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 201, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 202, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Registration Act, 1908, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 18A, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 32, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 33, Termination of Agency

Supreme Court Upholds Sale Deed Executed by Power of Attorney Holder: Amar Nath vs. Gian Chand (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a sale deed executed by a power of attorney holder is valid when the original power of attorney was allegedly cancelled but a certified copy was used for registration. CASE TYPE: Civil Law – Property

Supreme Court Upholds Sale Deed Executed by Power of Attorney Holder: Amar Nath vs. Gian Chand (28 January 2022) Read Post »

Leave to Defend Granted: Supreme Court overturns High Court in B.L. Kashyap vs. JMS Steels (2022)

/ Agency Law, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXXVII, Dinesh Maheshwari, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 2(d), Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 230, Judges, Leave to Defend, Summary Suits, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Allows Leave to Defend in Summary Suit: B.L. Kashyap vs. JMS Steels (2022) Date of the Judgment: 18 January 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 41 Judges: Justice Vineet Saran and Justice Dinesh Maheshwari Can a contractor be held liable in a summary suit for payments when the purchase orders were issued on behalf of

Leave to Defend Granted: Supreme Court overturns High Court in B.L. Kashyap vs. JMS Steels (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court rules on Insurance Policy Renewal and Disclosure: Jacob Punnen & Anr. vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (9 December 2021)

/ Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 2(g), Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 2(r), Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 22, Deficiency in Service, Duty of Disclosure, Insurance Law, Insurance Law with Section 2(6C), Judges, K.M. Joseph, Renewal of Policy, S. Ravindra Bhat

Supreme Court on Duty to Inform Policyholders of Changes During Renewal: Jacob Punnen vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (2021) Date of the Judgment: 9 December 2021 Citation: 2021 INSC 729 Judges: S. Ravindra Bhat, J. and K.M. Joseph, J. Is an insurance company obligated to inform its policyholders about changes in policy terms during

Supreme Court rules on Insurance Policy Renewal and Disclosure: Jacob Punnen & Anr. vs. United India Insurance Co. Ltd. (9 December 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights Under Section 11 of Coal Mines Act: Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. vs. EMTA Coal Ltd. (21 September 2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, B.V. Nagarathna, Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015, Coal Mines (Special Provisions) Act, 2015 with Section 11, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Contract Act, 1872, Contract Act, 1872 with Section 62, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Novation of Contracts

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights Under Section 11 of Coal Mines Act: Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. vs. EMTA Coal Ltd. (2021) Date of the Judgment: 21 September 2021 Citation: 2021 INSC 677 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., B.R. Gavai, J., B.V. Nagarathna, J. Can a successful bidder of a coal mine be forced to continue

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights Under Section 11 of Coal Mines Act: Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. vs. EMTA Coal Ltd. (21 September 2021) Read Post »

Scroll to Top