Contract Law

Supreme Court Upholds Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants in New Delhi Market: New Delhi Municipal Council vs. Ganga Devi & Anr. (2021) INSC 648 (27 September 2021)

/ Breach of contract, Contract Law, Eviction, Hemant Gupta, Judges, Property Law, Transfer of Property, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants in New Delhi Market Date of the Judgment: 27 September 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 648 Judges: Hemant Gupta, J., V. Ramasubramanian, J. Can a municipal council be bound by policies of the Union Government when managing properties transferred to it? The Supreme Court recently addressed this question in […]

Supreme Court Upholds Eviction of Unauthorized Occupants in New Delhi Market: New Delhi Municipal Council vs. Ganga Devi & Anr. (2021) INSC 648 (27 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies arbitrability of disputes under Construction Management Agreements: DLF Home Developers vs. Rajapura Homes (22 September 2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11(6), Breach of contract, Construction Management Agreement, Contract Law, International Commercial Arbitration, Judges, Kompetenz Kompetenz, N.V. Ramana, Share Purchase Agreement, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Clarifies Arbitrability of Disputes Under Construction Management Agreements: DLF Home Developers vs. Rajapura Homes (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether disputes arising from Construction Management Agreements can be referred to arbitration under the arbitration clause of the Construction Management Agreements, or whether they fall under the ambit of the Share Purchase Agreements. CASE TYPE: Arbitration

Supreme Court clarifies arbitrability of disputes under Construction Management Agreements: DLF Home Developers vs. Rajapura Homes (22 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court sets aside Allahabad High Court order on land allotment rates: NOIDA vs. 24 Oranges Lab LLP (2021)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 2(d), Interim Orders, Judges, Lease Deeds, M. R. Shah

Supreme Court sets aside Allahabad High Court order on land allotment rates: NOIDA vs. 24 Oranges Lab LLP (2021) Date of the Judgment: September 21, 2021 Citation: Not Available Judges: M. R. Shah, J., A.S. Bopanna, J. Can a lease deed executed based on an interim court order be considered final and binding? The Supreme

Supreme Court sets aside Allahabad High Court order on land allotment rates: NOIDA vs. 24 Oranges Lab LLP (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Tender Award, Emphasizes Limited Judicial Review in Contractual Matters: Uflex Ltd. vs. Government of Tamil Nadu (2021)

/ Business Efficacy, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Contract Law, Contract Law with Interpretation of Contracts, Fundamental Rights, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tender (Public-Private Partnership Procurement) Rules, 2012 with Rule 15, Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998, Tamil Nadu Transparency in Tenders Act, 1998 with Section 10(2)

Supreme Court Upholds Tender Award, Emphasizes Limited Judicial Review in Contractual Matters Date of the Judgment: September 17, 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 625 Judges: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J., Hrishikesh Roy, J. Can unsuccessful bidders challenge tender processes merely on the basis of perceived irregularities? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question, emphasizing that

Supreme Court Upholds Tender Award, Emphasizes Limited Judicial Review in Contractual Matters: Uflex Ltd. vs. Government of Tamil Nadu (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Award in Delhi Metro Dispute: DAMEPL Wins Against DMRC (2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Breach of contract, Concession Agreement, Contract Law, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, S. Ravindra Bhat

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Award in Delhi Metro Dispute: DAMEPL Wins Against DMRC (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Interference with Arbitral Awards under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Delhi Airport Metro Express Pvt. Ltd. vs. Delhi Metro Rail Corporation Ltd. Judgment Date: September 09, 2021 Introduction Date

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitration Award in Delhi Metro Dispute: DAMEPL Wins Against DMRC (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies adjustment of departmental management fees in liquor license cancellation cases: Assistant Excise Commissioner vs. Esthappan Cherian (2021) INSC 528 (06 September 2021)

/ Administrative Law, Administrative Law with Rule 13 of the Abkari Shops Departmental Management Rules, 1972, Amnesty Schemes, Contract Law, Delegated Legislation, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Retrospective Application of Law, S. Ravindra Bhat

Supreme Court Clarifies Adjustment of Departmental Management Fees in Liquor License Cancellation Cases Date of the Judgment: 06 September 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 528 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., S. Ravindra Bhat, J. Can a state government forfeit the departmental management fees collected after cancelling a liquor license, while also recovering dues from the original

Supreme Court clarifies adjustment of departmental management fees in liquor license cancellation cases: Assistant Excise Commissioner vs. Esthappan Cherian (2021) INSC 528 (06 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Foreign Award Against Non-Signatories Under Alter Ego Doctrine: Gemini Bay Transcription Pvt. Ltd. vs. Integrated Sales Service Ltd. (2021) INSC 482 (10 August 2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 44, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 48, B.R. Gavai, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Contract Law with Alter Ego Doctrine, Enforcement of Foreign Awards, Judges, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Upholds Foreign Award Against Non-Signatories Under Alter Ego Doctrine Date of the Judgment: 10 August 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 482 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J and B.R. Gavai, J. The judgment was authored by R.F. Nariman, J. Can a foreign arbitral award be enforced against entities that were not direct signatories to the arbitration

Supreme Court Upholds Foreign Award Against Non-Signatories Under Alter Ego Doctrine: Gemini Bay Transcription Pvt. Ltd. vs. Integrated Sales Service Ltd. (2021) INSC 482 (10 August 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Terms: PSA Sical Terminals Loses Appeal Against V.O. Chidambaranar Port Trust (28 July 2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Arbitration Law, B.R. Gavai, Contract Law, Contract Law with Article 14, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Terms: PSA Sical Terminals vs. V.O. Chidambaranar Port Trust (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of “Change in Law” clause in a contract and the extent of the Arbitral Tribunal’s power to modify contractual terms. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law, Contract Law Case Name: PSA Sical Terminals Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Board of Trustees

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Terms: PSA Sical Terminals Loses Appeal Against V.O. Chidambaranar Port Trust (28 July 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Contract Formation in Tender Cases: South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. vs. M/s. S. Kumar’s Associates (2021)

/ Breach of contract, Contract Law, Formation of Contract, Hemant Gupta, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 7, Judges, Letter of Intent, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Clarifies Contract Formation in Tender Cases: South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. vs. M/s. S. Kumar’s Associates (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a contract is formed when a Letter of Intent (LoI) is issued and some preliminary steps are taken, but the formal contract is not executed and the required security deposit and integrity pact are

Supreme Court Clarifies Contract Formation in Tender Cases: South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. vs. M/s. S. Kumar’s Associates (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Bank Guarantee Encashment: Atlanta Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Delta Marine Company & Ors. (2021)

/ Bank Guarantee, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order 41 Rule 27, Contract Law, Encashment of Bank Guarantee, Fraud, Hemant Gupta, Judges, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Upholds Bank Guarantee Encashment: Atlanta Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Delta Marine Company & Ors. (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of interference in encashment of bank guarantees. CASE TYPE: Civil Appeal. Case Name: Atlanta Infrastructure Ltd. (Rechristened as Atlanta Ltd.) vs. Delta Marine Company & Ors. Judgment Date: 19 July 2021 Date of the Judgment: 19

Supreme Court Upholds Bank Guarantee Encashment: Atlanta Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Delta Marine Company & Ors. (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the distinction between a business license and a rent agreement in Mangala Waman Karandikar vs. Prakash Damodar Ranade (2021)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Contract Law, Contractual Interpretation, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 92, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 95, Judges, N.V. Ramana, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Clarifies Business License vs. Rent Agreement: Mangala Waman Karandikar vs. Prakash Damodar Ranade (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an agreement to run an existing business constitutes a license of the business itself or a lease of the premises where the business is located. CASE TYPE: Civil Law (Contractual Dispute) Case Name: Mangala Waman Karandikar

Supreme Court clarifies the distinction between a business license and a rent agreement in Mangala Waman Karandikar vs. Prakash Damodar Ranade (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies calculation of Scheduled Commissioning Date in Solar Power Agreements: Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited vs. E.S. Solar Power Pvt. Ltd. (2021) INSC 284 (3 May 2021)

/ Contract Law, Contract Law with Article 21, Electricity Law, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, Karnataka Electricity Regulatory Commission, L. Nageswara Rao, Power Purchase Agreements, Renewable Energy, Solar Power Projects, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Clarifies Scheduled Commissioning Date in Solar Power Agreements LEGAL ISSUE: How to calculate the Scheduled Commissioning Date (SCOD) in a Power Purchase Agreement (PPA) for a solar power project, specifically whether the date of approval of the PPA should be included or excluded in the calculation. CASE TYPE: This case falls under the

Supreme Court clarifies calculation of Scheduled Commissioning Date in Solar Power Agreements: Bangalore Electricity Supply Company Limited vs. E.S. Solar Power Pvt. Ltd. (2021) INSC 284 (3 May 2021) Read Post »

Scroll to Top