Bailment

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 clarifies bank’s duty of care for locker management: Amitabha Dasgupta vs. United Bank of India (2021)

/ Bailment, Banking Regulation Act, 1949, Banking Regulation Act, 1949 with Sections 45ZC to 45ZF, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 148, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 149, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court clarifies bank’s duty of care for locker management: Amitabha Dasgupta vs. United Bank of India (2021) Date of the Judgment: 19 February 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 79 Judges: Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Justice Vineet Saran Can a bank be held responsible for the loss of valuables from a locker, even if they claim

Supreme Court clarifies bank’s duty of care for locker management: Amitabha Dasgupta vs. United Bank of India (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies hotel liability for valet parking theft in consumer cases: Taj Mahal Hotel vs. United India Insurance (2019)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Bailment, Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Consumer Law, Deficiency in Service, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 148, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 151, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Supreme Court Clarifies Hotel Liability for Valet Parking Theft: Taj Mahal Hotel vs. United India Insurance (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the extent of liability of hotels for theft of vehicles under valet parking. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: Taj Mahal Hotel vs. United India Insurance Company Ltd. & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 14 November 2019

Supreme Court clarifies hotel liability for valet parking theft in consumer cases: Taj Mahal Hotel vs. United India Insurance (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Demurrage Liability for Port Authorities: Rasiklal Kantilal vs. Board of Trustee (2017)

/ Abhay Manohar Sapre, Bailment, Customs Act, 1962, Customs Act, 1962 with Section 29, Customs Act, 1962 with Section 7, Customs Port, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 148, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 158, J. Chelameswar, Judges, Major Port Trusts Act, 1963, Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 with Section 48, Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 with Section 59, Port Authority

LEGAL ISSUE: Determining liability for demurrage charges at ports. CASE TYPE: Civil Law, Port Trust Case Name: M/S. RASIKLAL KANTILAL & CO. vs. BOARD OF TRUSTEE OF PORT OF BOMBAY & OTHERS Judgment Date: 28 February 2017 Date of the Judgment: 28 February 2017 Citation: (2017) INSC 147 Judges: J. Chelameswar, J. Abhay Manohar Sapre

Supreme Court Clarifies Demurrage Liability for Port Authorities: Rasiklal Kantilal vs. Board of Trustee (2017) Read Post »

Scroll to Top