A.S. Bopanna

Supreme Court rules on extent of fire damage compensation in insurance claim: M/s Super Label Mfg. Co. vs. New India Assurance Company Limited (2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Consumer Law, Dipankar Datta, Insurance Claims, Insurance Law, Judges, Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy

Supreme Court rules on extent of fire damage compensation in insurance claim: M/s Super Label Mfg. Co. vs. New India Assurance Company Limited (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the extent of compensation payable under a ‘Standard Fire and Special Perils’ insurance policy following a fire accident. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law, Insurance Claim Case Name: M/s Super […]

Supreme Court rules on extent of fire damage compensation in insurance claim: M/s Super Label Mfg. Co. vs. New India Assurance Company Limited (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Full Insurance Claim for Fire Damage: M/s Super Label Mfg. Co. vs. New India Assurance Company Limited (2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Consumer Disputes, Consumer Law, Dipankar Datta, Fire Insurance, Insurance Law, Insurance Law with Standard Fire and Special Perils Policy, Judges, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Proximate Cause

Supreme Court Orders Full Insurance Claim for Fire Damage: M/s Super Label Mfg. Co. vs. New India Assurance Company Limited (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an insurance company can deny a claim based on a narrow interpretation of a surveyor’s report when other expert evidence suggests a different conclusion regarding the cause of damage. CASE TYPE:

Supreme Court Orders Full Insurance Claim for Fire Damage: M/s Super Label Mfg. Co. vs. New India Assurance Company Limited (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies “as far as practicable” in sexual harassment inquiries: Aureliano Fernandes vs. State of Goa (2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 311, Disciplinary Proceedings, Fundamental Rights, Hima Kohli, Judges, Service Law

Supreme Court on Fair Inquiry in Sexual Harassment Cases: Aureliano Fernandes vs. State of Goa (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: The extent of adherence to principles of natural justice during inquiries into sexual harassment complaints at the workplace. CASE TYPE: Service Law, Sexual Harassment Case Name: Aureliano Fernandes vs. State of Goa and Others Judgment Date: 12

Supreme Court clarifies “as far as practicable” in sexual harassment inquiries: Aureliano Fernandes vs. State of Goa (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes Dismissal in Sexual Harassment Case, Emphasizes Fair Inquiry: Aureliano Fernandes vs. State of Goa (2023) INSC 527 (12 May 2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 311, Disciplinary Proceedings, Fundamental Rights, Hima Kohli, Judges, Service Law, Service Law with CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, Sexual Harassment at Workplace

Supreme Court Quashes Dismissal in Sexual Harassment Case, Emphasizes Fair Inquiry: Aureliano Fernandes vs. State of Goa (2023) INSC 527 (12 May 2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the inquiry conducted by the Complaints Committee adhered to principles of natural justice and the “as far as practicable” norm in a sexual harassment case, and whether the subsequent

Supreme Court Quashes Dismissal in Sexual Harassment Case, Emphasizes Fair Inquiry: Aureliano Fernandes vs. State of Goa (2023) INSC 527 (12 May 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies liability for delay compensation in real estate project: Parsvnath Developers vs. Gagandeep Brar (2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Arbitration Awards, Arbitration Law, Consumer Forum, Consumer Law, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 9(c), Flat Buyer Agreements, Judges, M.R. Shah, Real Estate Disputes, Tripartite Agreements

Supreme Court clarifies liability for delay compensation in real estate project: Parsvnath Developers vs. Gagandeep Brar (2023) The Supreme Court of India clarifies the responsibility for paying compensation to homebuyers for project delays, addressing a dispute between a developer and a housing board. Can a real estate developer be solely liable for compensation to homebuyers

Supreme Court clarifies liability for delay compensation in real estate project: Parsvnath Developers vs. Gagandeep Brar (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies compensation liability in real estate disputes: Parsvnath Developers vs. Gagandeep Brar (2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Arbitration Law, Contract Law, Contract Law with Clause 9(c), Enforcement of Award, Interpretation of Clauses, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court clarifies compensation liability in real estate disputes: Parsvnath Developers vs. Gagandeep Brar (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the apportionment of liability for compensation between a developer and a housing board in a real estate project delay. CASE TYPE: Consumer. Case Name: Parsvnath Developers Ltd. vs. Gagandeep Brar and Another. Judgment Date: 13 April 2023

Supreme Court clarifies compensation liability in real estate disputes: Parsvnath Developers vs. Gagandeep Brar (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies ‘cost of improvement’ under Section 55(1)(b) of the IT Act: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s. Paville Projects Pvt. Ltd. (2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Capital Gains, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 263, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 55(1)(b), Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court clarifies ‘cost of improvement’ under Section 55(1)(b) of the IT Act: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s. Paville Projects Pvt. Ltd. (2023) Date of the Judgment: April 06, 2023 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 6126 of 2021 (@ SLP (C) NO. 13380 OF 2018) Judges: M.R. Shah, J. and A.S. Bopanna, J. Can payments

Supreme Court clarifies ‘cost of improvement’ under Section 55(1)(b) of the IT Act: Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s. Paville Projects Pvt. Ltd. (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Inheritance Rights in Ancestral Property Partition: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo & Ors. vs. Charulata Sahu & Ors. (29 March 2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XLI Rule 22, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXIII Rule 3, Coparcenary Rights, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 6, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Inheritance Rights in Ancestral Property Partition LEGAL ISSUE: The central legal question revolves around the inheritance rights of daughters in ancestral property under the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, particularly concerning the impact of the 2005 amendment. CASE TYPE: Civil, Property Partition Case Name: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo & Ors. vs. Charulata Sahu

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Inheritance Rights in Ancestral Property Partition: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo & Ors. vs. Charulata Sahu & Ors. (29 March 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Equal Rights in Ancestral Property, Invalidates Prior Settlement: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo vs. Charulata Sahu (2023) INSC 3192 (29 March 2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XLI Rule 22, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXIII Rule 3, Coparcenary Rights, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 6, J.B. Pardiwala, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Equal Rights in Ancestral Property, Invalidates Prior Settlement: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo vs. Charulata Sahu (2023) INSC 3192 (29 March 2023) LEGAL ISSUE: The core legal issue revolves around the interpretation of Section 6 of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, as amended in 2005, concerning the rights of daughters in ancestral property

Supreme Court Clarifies Daughters’ Equal Rights in Ancestral Property, Invalidates Prior Settlement: Prasanta Kumar Sahoo vs. Charulata Sahu (2023) INSC 3192 (29 March 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Cancels Anticipatory Bail in Rape Case: Ms. X vs. State of Maharashtra (2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 438, Hima Kohli, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 354, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 376, Judges, Offences Against Women

Supreme Court Cancels Anticipatory Bail in Rape Case: Ms. X vs. State of Maharashtra (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was correct in granting anticipatory bail to the accused despite the gravity of the offense and the victim’s allegations of rape. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Ms. X vs. The State of Maharashtra

Supreme Court Cancels Anticipatory Bail in Rape Case: Ms. X vs. State of Maharashtra (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes Compulsory Retirement Order: Captain Pramod Kumar Bajaj vs. Union of India (2023)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Compulsory Retirement, Fundamental Rules, Fundamental Rules with Rule 56(j), Hima Kohli, Judges, Service Law, Service Law with Fundamental Rule 56(j)

Supreme Court Quashes Compulsory Retirement Order: Captain Pramod Kumar Bajaj vs. Union of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the order of compulsory retirement of a government employee was justified under Fundamental Rule 56(j). CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Captain Pramod Kumar Bajaj vs. Union of India and Another Judgment Date: 03 March 2023 Date

Supreme Court Quashes Compulsory Retirement Order: Captain Pramod Kumar Bajaj vs. Union of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Refuses CBI Probe in NDPS Case, Upholds Trial Court Proceedings

/ A.S. Bopanna, Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 227, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Judges, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 with Section 22, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 with Section 29

Supreme Court Refuses CBI Probe in NDPS Case, Upholds Trial Court Proceedings LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a case warrants investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) based on allegations of illegal detention and a foisted case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, NDPS Act Case Name:

Supreme Court Refuses CBI Probe in NDPS Case, Upholds Trial Court Proceedings Read Post »

Scroll to Top