Contract Law

Supreme Court Upholds Tender Rejection in Foreign Funded Project: National High Speed Rail Corporation Limited vs. Montecarlo Limited & Anr. (31 January 2022)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Constitution of India, Constitution of India with Article 14, Constitution of India with Article 226, Contract Law, Doctrine of Substantial Compliance, Foreign Funded Contracts, Judges, M.R. Shah, Tender Process

Supreme Court Upholds Tender Rejection in Foreign Funded Project LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was justified in interfering with the tender process of a foreign-funded project. CASE TYPE: Contract Law, Tender Process, Foreign Funded Project Case Name: National High Speed Rail Corporation Limited vs. Montecarlo Limited & Anr. Judgment Date: 31 January 2022 Introduction […]

Supreme Court Upholds Tender Rejection in Foreign Funded Project: National High Speed Rail Corporation Limited vs. Montecarlo Limited & Anr. (31 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Tender Disqualification: Agmatel India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Resoursys Telecom & Ors. (2022)

/ Contract Law, Customs Act, 1950, Customs Act, 1950 with Section 151A, Dinesh Maheshwari, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, Tender Process, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds Tender Disqualification: Agmatel India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Resoursys Telecom & Ors. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a tender inviting authority’s interpretation of “same or similar category products” in a tender document can be challenged in court. CASE TYPE: Contract Law, Tender Process Case Name: M/s Agmatel India Pvt. Ltd. vs. M/s Resoursys Telecom

Supreme Court Upholds Tender Disqualification: Agmatel India Pvt. Ltd. vs. Resoursys Telecom & Ors. (2022) Read Post »

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

/ Agency, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 100, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 201, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Registration Act, 1908, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 32, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 33

Supreme Court Upholds Sale Deed Executed by Power of Attorney Holder: Amar Nath vs. Gian Chand (28 January 2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a sale deed executed by a power of attorney holder is valid when the principal claims the power of attorney was cancelled before the sale. CASE TYPE: Civil Law – Property Dispute Case

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

Supreme Court Upholds MRTP Commission’s Decision on Unfair Trade Practices in Real Estate: B.B. Patel vs. DLF Universal Ltd. (25 January 2022)

/ B.R. Gavai, B.V. Nagarathna, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 2(r), Consumer Rights, Contract Law, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969, Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 with Section 36A, Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 with Section 36B, Unconscionable Contracts, Unfair Trade Practices

Supreme Court Upholds MRTP Commission’s Decision on Unfair Trade Practices in Real Estate: B.B. Patel vs. DLF Universal Ltd. (25 January 2022) Date of the Judgment: 25 January 2022 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 1106 of 2009 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., B.R. Gavai, J., B.V. Nagarathna, J. Can a real estate developer be held liable

Supreme Court Upholds MRTP Commission’s Decision on Unfair Trade Practices in Real Estate: B.B. Patel vs. DLF Universal Ltd. (25 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds MRTP Commission’s Decision on Unfair Trade Practices in Real Estate: B.B. Patel vs. DLF Universal Ltd. (25 January 2022)

/ B.R. Gavai, B.V. Nagarathna, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 2(r), Contract Law, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969, Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 with Section 36A, Unfair Trade Practices

Supreme Court Upholds MRTP Commission’s Decision on Unfair Trade Practices in Real Estate: B.B. Patel vs. DLF Universal Ltd. (2022) Date of the Judgment: 25 January 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 912 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., B.R. Gavai, J., B.V. Nagarathna, J. (authored by L. Nageswara Rao, J.) Can a real estate developer be held

Supreme Court Upholds MRTP Commission’s Decision on Unfair Trade Practices in Real Estate: B.B. Patel vs. DLF Universal Ltd. (25 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds MRTP Commission Order in DLF Housing Dispute: B.B. Patel & Ors. vs. DLF Universal Ltd. (25 January 2022)

/ B.R. Gavai, B.V. Nagarathna, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969, Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969 with Section 36A, Unconscionable Contract, Unfair Trade Practices

Supreme Court Upholds MRTP Commission Order in DLF Housing Dispute: B.B. Patel & Ors. vs. DLF Universal Ltd. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a delay in handing over possession of apartments and the imposition of extra charges by a builder constitutes an unfair trade practice under the Monopolies and Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969. CASE TYPE:

Supreme Court Upholds MRTP Commission Order in DLF Housing Dispute: B.B. Patel & Ors. vs. DLF Universal Ltd. (25 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Claim Rejection for Potato Spoilage: Shivram Chandra Jagarnath Cold Storage vs. New India Assurance (2022)

/ Consumer Law, Contract Law, Deterioration of Stock Policy, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Dinesh Maheshwari, Exclusion Clauses, Insurance Claims, Insurance Law, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, Terms of Contract

Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Claim Rejection for Potato Spoilage: Shivram Chandra Jagarnath Cold Storage vs. New India Assurance (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of exception clauses in insurance policies related to temperature control in cold storage facilities. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law, Insurance Law Case Name: M/s Shivram Chandra Jagarnath Cold Storage & Anr vs. New India

Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Claim Rejection for Potato Spoilage: Shivram Chandra Jagarnath Cold Storage vs. New India Assurance (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Claim Rejection in Cold Storage Spoilage Case: Shivram Chandra Jagarnath Cold Storage vs. New India Assurance Company (2022)

/ Contract Law, Deterioration of Stock Policy, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Dinesh Maheshwari, Exception Clauses, Insurance Law, Interpretation of Contracts, Interpretation of Insurance Policies, Judges

Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Claim Rejection in Cold Storage Spoilage Case LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of exception clauses in insurance policies. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law, Insurance Law Case Name: M/s Shivram Chandra Jagarnath Cold Storage & Anr vs. New India Assurance Company Limited & Ors [Judgment Date]: 24 January 2022 Date of the Judgment: 24 January

Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Claim Rejection in Cold Storage Spoilage Case: Shivram Chandra Jagarnath Cold Storage vs. New India Assurance Company (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the date for possession in housing projects: IREO Private Limited vs. Aloke Anand (2022)

/ Apartment Buyers Agreement, Bela M. Trivedi, Breach of contract, Consumer, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 2(1)(d), Contract Law, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges

Supreme Court clarifies the date for possession in housing projects: IREO Private Limited vs. Aloke Anand (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the commencement date for calculating the period for handing over possession of an apartment in a housing project. CASE TYPE: Consumer Case Name: M/s IREO Private Limited vs. Aloke Anand and Others Judgment Date: 21

Supreme Court clarifies the date for possession in housing projects: IREO Private Limited vs. Aloke Anand (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitrator’s Award on Contract Termination and Idle Hire Charges: Atlanta Ltd. vs. Union of India (2022)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Arbitration Act, 1940, Arbitration Act, 1940 with Section 30, Arbitration Law, Contract Law, Contract Termination, Hima Kohli, Judges, Judicial Review of Arbitral Awards, Mitigation of Damages, N.V. Ramana

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitrator’s Award on Contract Termination and Idle Hire Charges: Atlanta Ltd. vs. Union of India (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court can interfere with an arbitral award under the Arbitration Act, 1940, by re-appreciating evidence and substituting its own view on contract interpretation. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law, Contract Law Case Name:

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitrator’s Award on Contract Termination and Idle Hire Charges: Atlanta Ltd. vs. Union of India (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitrator’s Award on Contract Termination and Idle Hire Charges: Atlanta Ltd. vs. Union of India (2022)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Arbitration Act, 1940, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 30, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 70, Hima Kohli, Judges, N.V. Ramana

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitrator’s Award on Contract Termination and Idle Hire Charges: Atlanta Ltd. vs. Union of India (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court can interfere with an arbitral award under the Arbitration Act, 1940, by re-appreciating evidence and substituting its own view, particularly on matters of contract interpretation, extension of time, and idle

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitrator’s Award on Contract Termination and Idle Hire Charges: Atlanta Ltd. vs. Union of India (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 »

Scroll to Top