Supreme Court Allows Leave to Defend in Summary Suit: B.L. Kashyap and Sons Ltd. vs. JMS Steels and Power Corporation (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether leave to defend should be granted in a summary suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. CASE TYPE: Civil (Commercial) Case Name: B.L. Kashyap and Sons Ltd. […]
Supreme Court allows leave to defend in money recovery suit: B.L. Kashyap vs. JMS Steels (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the defendant in a summary suit under Order XXXVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, is entitled to leave to defend when they assert they acted as an agent and not a principal in a
Supreme Court Clarifies Deputation Requirements in Employment Contracts: Sarita Singh vs. Shree Infosoft (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an employee’s overseas travel for a business meeting constitutes a “deputation” requiring them to serve a mandatory period upon return, as per their employment contract. CASE TYPE: Contract Law/Employment Law Case Name: Ms Sarita Singh vs. M/s Shree
Supreme Court Clarifies Deputation Requirements in Employment Contracts: Sarita Singh vs. Shree Infosoft (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an employee’s overseas visit constitutes a deputation requiring them to serve a minimum period upon return, and the consequences of failing to do so. CASE TYPE: Employment Contract Dispute Case Name: Ms Sarita Singh v. M/s Shree Infosoft
Supreme Court Clarifies “Deputation” in Employment Contracts: Sarita Singh vs. Shree Infosoft (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: What constitutes a “deputation” in an employment contract and the obligations of an employee upon return from overseas travel. CASE TYPE: Civil, Employment Contract Dispute Case Name: Ms Sarita Singh vs. M/s Shree Infosoft Private Limited [Judgment Date]: 12 January
Supreme Court Upholds Compound Interest in Arbitration, Dismisses State’s Appeal: UHL Power Company Ltd. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitral tribunal can award compound interest and whether a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) merges into an Implementation Agreement. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: UHL Power Company Ltd. vs. State of
Supreme Court Upholds Compound Interest in Arbitration, Rejects State’s Appeal: UHL Power Company Ltd. vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitral tribunal can award compound interest and whether a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) merges into an Implementation Agreement. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: UHL Power Company Ltd. vs. State of
Supreme Court clarifies Assured Career Progression Scheme: Union of India vs. Manju Arora (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether employees who refuse promotions are eligible for financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Union of India & Ors. vs. Manju Arora & Anr. Judgment Date: 3 January 2022 Introduction
Supreme Court Upholds Claim in Paper Supply Dispute: M/S Star Paper Mills Ltd. vs. M/S Beharilal Madanlal Jaipuria Ltd. (2021) Date of the Judgment: December 16, 2021 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 4102 of 2013 Judges: Hemant Gupta, J. and V. Ramasubramanian, J. Can a company deny payment for goods received by claiming fraudulent transactions, despite
Supreme Court quashes order passed by MSME Council for not following Arbitration Act: Jharkhand Urja Vikas Nigam Ltd. vs. State of Rajasthan (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council (MSEFC) can pass an order for payment without initiating proper arbitration proceedings as per the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE:
Compassionate Appointment: Supreme Court sets aside High Court order on Junior Assistant Post LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a candidate who accepts a lower post on compassionate grounds, with an undertaking not to claim a higher post in the future, can later seek appointment to the higher post from the initial date of appointment. CASE TYPE: Service
Supreme Court Clarifies Insurance Liability in Hospital Negligence Case: Sheth M L Vaduwala Eye Hospital vs. Oriental Insurance Company Limited (2021) INSC 755 Date of the Judgment: 11 December 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 755 Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and A S Bopanna, J. Can an insurance company be held liable for the negligence
