Indian Contract Act, 1872

Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Sale Deed Despite Delayed Registration: Kaushik Premkumar Mishra vs. Kanji Ravaria (2024)

/ Competency to Contract, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 11, Registration Act, 1908, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 17, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 49, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 85, Sale of Immovable Property, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 54

Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Sale Deed Despite Delayed Registration: Kaushik Premkumar Mishra vs. Kanji Ravaria (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a sale deed, duly executed and presented for registration, remains valid despite a significant delay in its actual registration and whether a subsequent purchaser can claim bona fide status if the vendor had already transferred […]

Supreme Court Upholds Validity of Sale Deed Despite Delayed Registration: Kaushik Premkumar Mishra vs. Kanji Ravaria (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Arbitration After Full and Final Settlement: SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Krish Spinning (2024)

/ Accord and Satisfaction, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 16, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 63

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Arbitration After Full and Final Settlement: SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Krish Spinning (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a discharge voucher for full and final settlement bars invocation of arbitration. CASE TYPE: Insurance Law, Arbitration Law Case Name: SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Krish Spinning Judgment Date: 18th July

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Arbitration After Full and Final Settlement: SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Krish Spinning (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies promotional trailers are not offers in consumer dispute: Yash Raj Films vs. Afreen Fatima Zaidi (2024) INSC 328 (22 April 2024)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 19(1)(a), Constitutional Law with Article 19(2), Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 2(1)(r), Contract, Deficiency of Service, Freedom of Speech, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 2(a), Offer, Unfair Trade Practice

Supreme Court clarifies promotional trailers are not offers in consumer dispute: Yash Raj Films vs. Afreen Fatima Zaidi (2024) INSC 328 (22 April 2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a promotional trailer creates a contractual obligation or amounts to unfair trade practice if the content is not shown in the movie. CASE TYPE: Consumer Dispute Case Name:

Supreme Court clarifies promotional trailers are not offers in consumer dispute: Yash Raj Films vs. Afreen Fatima Zaidi (2024) INSC 328 (22 April 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies “Overcharge” vs. “Illegal Charge” in Railway Freight: Union of India vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (21 March 2024)

/ Illegal Charge, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 72, Overcharge, Railways Act, 1989, Railways Act, 1989 with Section 106

Supreme Court Clarifies “Overcharge” vs. “Illegal Charge” in Railway Freight: Union of India vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (2024) Date of the Judgment: 21 March 2024 Citation: 2024 INSC 243 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., Sandeep Mehta, J. Can a railway administration charge freight based on a distance that is later found to be incorrect? The

Supreme Court Clarifies “Overcharge” vs. “Illegal Charge” in Railway Freight: Union of India vs. Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. (21 March 2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies liability of legal heirs in development agreements: Vinayak Dube Case (2024)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 2(11), Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 50, Consumer Law, Development Agreements, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 37, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 40, Indian Succession Act, 1925, Indian Succession Act, 1925 with Section 306, Liability of Legal Representatives

Supreme Court Clarifies Liability of Legal Heirs in Development Agreements: Vinayak Dube Case (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Liability of legal representatives for obligations under a development agreement. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: Vinayak Purshottam Dube (Deceased) Through LRs vs. Jayashree Padamkar Bhat & Others [Judgment Date]: 01 March 2024 Date of the Judgment: 01 March

Supreme Court clarifies liability of legal heirs in development agreements: Vinayak Dube Case (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Forfeiture of Earnest Money in SARFAESI Auctions: Central Bank of India vs. Shanmugavelu (2024) INSC 80 (2 February 2024)

/ Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 73, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 74, SARFAESI Act, 2002, SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 13(4), SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 35, SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 37

Supreme Court Clarifies Forfeiture of Earnest Money in SARFAESI Auctions LEGAL ISSUE: Applicability of contract law principles to forfeiture of earnest money deposit under SARFAESI Act. CASE TYPE: Securitization and Asset Recovery Case Name: Central Bank of India vs. Shanmugavelu Judgment Date: 2 February 2024 Date of the Judgment: 2 February 2024 Citation: (2024) INSC

Supreme Court Clarifies Forfeiture of Earnest Money in SARFAESI Auctions: Central Bank of India vs. Shanmugavelu (2024) INSC 80 (2 February 2024) Read Post »

Loss of Profit Claims: Supreme Court clarifies evidence requirements in Unibros vs. All India Radio (2023)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 73

Supreme Court on Loss of Profit Claims in Contract Delays: Unibros vs. All India Radio (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: What constitutes sufficient evidence for a claim of loss of profit due to delays in contract execution? CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: M/s Unibros vs. All India Radio [Judgment Date]: 19th October 2023 Date of the

Loss of Profit Claims: Supreme Court clarifies evidence requirements in Unibros vs. All India Radio (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court sets aside specific performance decree due to Limitation Act: A. Valliammai vs. K.P. Murali (2023)

/ Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 63, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Article 54, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 9

Supreme Court sets aside specific performance decree due to Limitation Act: A. Valliammai vs. K.P. Murali (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the suit for specific performance was barred by limitation under Article 54 of the Limitation Act, 1963. CASE TYPE: Civil (Specific Performance) Case Name: A. Valliammai vs. K.P. Murali and Others [Judgment Date]: September 12,

Supreme Court sets aside specific performance decree due to Limitation Act: A. Valliammai vs. K.P. Murali (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles taxability of credit notes for warranty replacements in automobile sales: M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (2023) INSC 469 (15 May 2023)

/ Ahsanuddin Amanullah, B.V. Nagarathna, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 2 (d), Judges, K.M. Joseph, Sale, Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 12, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 4, Sales Tax Law, Sales Tax Law with Section 2(38)

Supreme Court Clarifies Tax on Warranty Replacements in Automobile Sales (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether credit notes issued by manufacturers to dealers for replacing defective auto parts under warranty are subject to sales tax. CASE TYPE: Sales Tax Law Case Name: M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes(SPL) & Anr. [Judgment Date]:

Supreme Court settles taxability of credit notes for warranty replacements in automobile sales: M/s. Tata Motors Ltd. vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes (2023) INSC 469 (15 May 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Dealership Contract: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. M/S. Sathyanarayana Service Station (2023)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 34, Arbitration Law with Section 37, B.V. Nagarathna, Contract Law, Contract Law with Section 5, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Termination of Contract

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Dealership Contract: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. M/S. Sathyanarayana Service Station (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a dealership agreement can be terminated by either party by giving a three-month notice, and if such termination requires acceptance by the other party. CASE TYPE: Contract Law, Arbitration Law. Case Name: Indian Oil Corporation

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Dealership Contract: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. M/S. Sathyanarayana Service Station (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Dealership Contract: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. M/S. Sathyanarayana Service Station (2023)

/ Arbitration, Arbitration Award, B.V. Nagarathna, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 3, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 5, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Termination of Contract

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Dealership Contract: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. M/S. Sathyanarayana Service Station (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a dealership agreement can be terminated by either party by giving a three-month notice, and whether the acceptance of such a notice is required for termination. CASE TYPE: Contract Law, Arbitration Case Name: Indian Oil

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Dealership Contract: Indian Oil Corporation Ltd. vs. M/S. Sathyanarayana Service Station (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights of Secured Creditors with Pledged Shares in Insolvency Cases: Vistra ITCL vs. Dinkar Venkatasubramanian (2023)

/ Financial Creditor, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 172, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 52, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 53, Judges, M. R. Shah, Pledge, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights of Secured Creditors with Pledged Shares in Insolvency Cases LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a secured creditor holding pledged shares of a corporate debtor can be considered a financial creditor or operational creditor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC), and how their interests should be protected in a resolution plan. CASE

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights of Secured Creditors with Pledged Shares in Insolvency Cases: Vistra ITCL vs. Dinkar Venkatasubramanian (2023) Read Post »

Scroll to Top