Contract Law

Supreme Court clarifies appointment of substitute arbitrator under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration Act in Government of Haryana vs. G.F. Toll Road Pvt. Ltd. (2019)

/ Abhay Manohar Sapre, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 15(2), Breach of contract, Concession Agreement, Contract Law, Fifth Schedule of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Termination of Mandate of Arbitrator

Supreme Court clarifies appointment of substitute arbitrator under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration Act in Government of Haryana vs. G.F. Toll Road Pvt. Ltd. (2019) Date of the Judgment: January 3, 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 3 Judges: Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre and Justice Indu Malhotra Can an arbitral institution appoint a substitute arbitrator when one […]

Supreme Court clarifies appointment of substitute arbitrator under Section 15(2) of the Arbitration Act in Government of Haryana vs. G.F. Toll Road Pvt. Ltd. (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Departmental Arbitrator Appointment in Construction Contract Dispute: SP Singla Constructions vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Clause, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 11(6), Arbitration Law with Section 26, Construction Contracts, Contract Law, Indira Banerjee, Judges, R. Banumathi

Supreme Court Upholds Departmental Arbitrator Appointment in Construction Contract Dispute LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a departmental employee can be appointed as an arbitrator as per the arbitration clause in a contract, and whether the 2015 Amendment to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 applies to arbitral proceedings commenced before the amendment. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case

Supreme Court Upholds Departmental Arbitrator Appointment in Construction Contract Dispute: SP Singla Constructions vs. State of Himachal Pradesh (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Revisits Textile Nationalisation Act: Union of India vs. Nareshkumar Badrikumar Jagad (2018)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Judges, Leases, Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995, Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995 with Section 3, Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995 with Section 39, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 105

Supreme Court Revisits Textile Nationalisation Act: Union of India vs. Nareshkumar Badrikumar Jagad (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether leasehold rights of textile undertakings continue to vest with the Central Government after nationalization, and the impact of the Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Laws (Amendment and Validation) Act, 2014 on prior court orders. CASE TYPE: Civil Law, Nationalisation, Property

Supreme Court Revisits Textile Nationalisation Act: Union of India vs. Nareshkumar Badrikumar Jagad (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Dispute Resolution Clauses in Contracts: South Delhi Municipal Corporation vs. SMS AAMW Tollways Private Ltd (22 November 2018)

/ Arbitration Agreement, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Contract Law, Dispute Resolution Clauses, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, S.A. Bobde

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Dispute Resolution Clauses in Contracts: South Delhi Municipal Corporation vs. SMS AAMW Tollways Private Ltd (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a clause providing for an appeal to a higher authority within an organization constitutes an arbitration agreement. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: South Delhi Municipal Corporation vs. SMS AAMW Tollways

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Dispute Resolution Clauses in Contracts: South Delhi Municipal Corporation vs. SMS AAMW Tollways Private Ltd (22 November 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Suit for Declaration and Specific Performance: Rakesh Malhotra vs. Kamaljit Singh Sandhu (2018)

/ Agreement to Sell, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 6 Rule 17, Contract Law, Judges, M. R. Shah, Specific Performance, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Suit for Declaration and Specific Performance: Rakesh Malhotra vs. Kamaljit Singh Sandhu (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a suit for declaration of ownership and possession can be decreed in the absence of a prayer for specific performance of an agreement to sell, and whether such a suit is barred by limitation.

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Suit for Declaration and Specific Performance: Rakesh Malhotra vs. Kamaljit Singh Sandhu (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Resumption of Industrial Plot Due to Non-Commencement of Production: Dalip Singh vs. State of Haryana (25 October 2018)

/ Economic Development, Employment Generation, Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977, Indira Banerjee, Industrial Policy, Judges, R. Banumathi, Resumption of Industrial Plot, Section 17, Haryana Urban Development Authority Act, 1977, Terms of Allotment

Supreme Court Upholds Resumption of Industrial Plot Due to Non-Commencement of Production: Dalip Singh vs. State of Haryana (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the authorities were justified in resuming an industrial plot due to the allottee’s failure to commence production within the stipulated time. CASE TYPE: Civil. Case Name: Dalip Singh and Others vs. State of

Supreme Court Upholds Resumption of Industrial Plot Due to Non-Commencement of Production: Dalip Singh vs. State of Haryana (25 October 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds University’s Right to Evict Retired Employees from Housing: Ranchi University vs. Jharkhand State Housing Board (2018)

/ Abhay Manohar Sapre, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Contractual Obligations, Employee Rights, Eviction, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, Retirement Benefits, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds University’s Right to Evict Retired Employees from Housing: Ranchi University vs. Jharkhand State Housing Board (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether retired employees of a university can claim a right to continue occupying university-allotted housing after their retirement, based on a cancelled allotment and subsequent payment to the housing board. CASE TYPE: Civil Law

Supreme Court Upholds University’s Right to Evict Retired Employees from Housing: Ranchi University vs. Jharkhand State Housing Board (2018) Read Post »

Specific Performance of Development Agreements: Supreme Court Rules on Developer’s Rights in Sushil Kumar Agarwal vs. Meenakshi Sadhu (2018)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Development Agreements, Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Judges, Specific Performance, Specific Relief Act, 1963, Specific Relief Act, 1963 with Section 14

Supreme Court Clarifies Specific Performance of Development Agreements: Sushil Kumar Agarwal vs. Meenakshi Sadhu (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a developer can seek specific performance of a development agreement against the property owner under Section 14(3)(c) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963. CASE TYPE: Contract Law, Real Estate, Specific Performance Case Name: Sushil Kumar Agarwal vs.

Specific Performance of Development Agreements: Supreme Court Rules on Developer’s Rights in Sushil Kumar Agarwal vs. Meenakshi Sadhu (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Appoints Arbitrator in Shipping Dispute: Trans Asian Shipping vs. Beacon Shipping (2018)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Agency Agreement, Appointment of Arbitrator, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11(9), Arbitration Law, Contract Law, D.Y. Chandrachud, Dipak Misra, Judges

Supreme Court Appoints Arbitrator in Shipping Dispute: Trans Asian Shipping vs. Beacon Shipping (2018) Date of the Judgment: September 19, 2018 Citation: Not Available Judges: Dipak Misra, CJI, A.M. Khanwilkar, J., Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J. Can a party compel another to arbitration when a dispute arises from a commercial agreement? The Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court Appoints Arbitrator in Shipping Dispute: Trans Asian Shipping vs. Beacon Shipping (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Auction Sale, Rejects Challenge Based on Waiver and Estoppel: Pravesh Kumar Sachdeva vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2018)

/ Auction Sale, Contract Law, Deepak Gupta, Estoppel, Judges, Madan B. Lokur, Property Law, S. Abdul Nazeer, Uttar Pradesh Zamindari Abolition and Land Reforms Act, 1950, Waiver

Supreme Court Upholds Auction Sale, Rejects Challenge Based on Waiver and Estoppel: Pravesh Kumar Sachdeva vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2018) Date of the Judgment: September 13, 2018 Citation: 2018 INSC 780 Judges: Madan B. Lokur, J., S. Abdul Nazeer, J., Deepak Gupta, J. Can a party challenge an auction sale after accepting the excess

Supreme Court Upholds Auction Sale, Rejects Challenge Based on Waiver and Estoppel: Pravesh Kumar Sachdeva vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Readiness and Willingness Requirement in Specific Performance Suit: Jagjit Singh vs. Amarjit Singh (2018) INSC 763 (13 September 2018)

/ Breach of contract, Civil Procedure, Contract Law, Contractual Obligations, Deepak Gupta, Findings of Fact, Judges, Madan B. Lokur, Readiness and Willingness, Second Appeal, Specific Performance, Specific Relief Act, 1963, Specific Relief Act, 1963 with Section 16(c)

Supreme Court Upholds Readiness and Willingness Requirement in Specific Performance Suit Date of the Judgment: 13 September 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 763 Judges: Madan B. Lokur, J., Deepak Gupta, J. Can a party seeking specific performance of a contract succeed if they fail to demonstrate continuous readiness and willingness to fulfill their obligations? The Supreme

Supreme Court Upholds Readiness and Willingness Requirement in Specific Performance Suit: Jagjit Singh vs. Amarjit Singh (2018) INSC 763 (13 September 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Specific Performance Suit: Lakshmi Sreenivasa Cooperative Building Society vs. Puvvada Rama (2018)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Burden of Proof, Contract Law, D.Y. Chandrachud, Dipak Misra, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 114, Judges, Specific Performance, Specific Relief Act, 1963

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Specific Performance Suit: Lakshmi Sreenivasa Cooperative Building Society vs. Puvvada Rama (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a suit for specific performance can be decreed when the execution of the underlying agreement is not proven. CASE TYPE: Civil (Specific Performance) Case Name: Lakshmi Sreenivasa Cooperative Building Society vs. Puvvada Rama (Dead) by

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Specific Performance Suit: Lakshmi Sreenivasa Cooperative Building Society vs. Puvvada Rama (2018) Read Post »

Scroll to Top