Abhay S. Oka

Supreme Court clarifies compensation disbursement in land acquisition cases: Bulandshahr Khurja Development Authority vs. Amir Kuwar (2021)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Civil Procedure, Compensation, High Court, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, Land Acquisition Act with Section 28, Supreme Court

Supreme Court clarifies compensation disbursement in land acquisition cases: Bulandshahr Khurja Development Authority vs. Amir Kuwar (2021) Date of the Judgment: September 28, 2021 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Abhay S. Oka How should compensation be distributed when there’s a dispute over the calculation of […]

Supreme Court clarifies compensation disbursement in land acquisition cases: Bulandshahr Khurja Development Authority vs. Amir Kuwar (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Transfers Divorce Case to Bengaluru Family Court: D. Raja Rajeswari vs. R. Sathish Kumar (2021)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Custody of Child, Divorce, Family Law, Guardians and Wards Act, 1890, Guardians and Wards Act, 1890 with Section 9, Judges, Restitution of Conjugal Rights, Transfer of Cases

Supreme Court Transfers Divorce Case to Bengaluru Family Court: D. Raja Rajeswari vs. R. Sathish Kumar (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether multiple family court proceedings between the same parties should be consolidated in one court for efficiency and convenience. CASE TYPE: Family Law, Transfer Petition. Case Name: D. Raja Rajeswari vs. R. Sathish Kumar. Judgment Date:

Supreme Court Transfers Divorce Case to Bengaluru Family Court: D. Raja Rajeswari vs. R. Sathish Kumar (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Heir’s Right to Compensation in Land Acquisition Case: Manjari Tanty vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2021)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Inheritance Rights, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 30, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Property Law

Supreme Court Upholds Heir’s Right to Compensation in Land Acquisition Case: Manjari Tanty vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of legal heirship and entitlement to compensation in land acquisition cases. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition. Case Name: Manjari Tanty @ Laria vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer and Sub Collector, Ultra Mega Power Project,

Supreme Court Upholds Heir’s Right to Compensation in Land Acquisition Case: Manjari Tanty vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds NCLAT Order in Corporate Insolvency Case: Ashish Saraf vs. Bhuvan Madan (27 September 2021)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Corporate Insolvency, Judges, National Company Law Appellate Tribunal

Supreme Court Upholds NCLAT Order in Corporate Insolvency Case LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) order in a corporate insolvency case warrants interference by the Supreme Court. CASE TYPE: Corporate Insolvency Case Name: Ashish Saraf vs. Bhuvan Madan & Ors. and FACOR Alloys Limited vs. Bhuvan Madan & Ors. [Judgment Date]:

Supreme Court Upholds NCLAT Order in Corporate Insolvency Case: Ashish Saraf vs. Bhuvan Madan (27 September 2021) Read Post »

Reinstatement or Compensation? Supreme Court Decides in National Gandhi Museum Case (24 September 2021)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 106, Industrial Dispute, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 33, Judges

National Gandhi Museum vs. Sudhir Sharma: Supreme Court on Reinstatement and Compensation Date of the Judgment: 24 September 2021 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Abhay S. Oka, J., Ajay Rastogi, J. Can an employee, found guilty of misconduct, be reinstated with full back wages simply because the employer failed to obtain prior approval for

Reinstatement or Compensation? Supreme Court Decides in National Gandhi Museum Case (24 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Tenant Rights Under UP Rent Act: Geeta Gupta vs. Ramesh Chandra Dwivedi (20 September 2021)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Eviction, Judges, Property Law, Tenancy Rights, Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 with Section 12, Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 with Section 14

Supreme Court Upholds Tenant Rights Under UP Rent Act: Geeta Gupta vs. Ramesh Chandra Dwivedi (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of tenancy rights under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972. CASE TYPE: Property Law/Rent Control Law Case Name: Geeta Gupta vs. Ramesh Chandra Dwivedi & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 20

Supreme Court Upholds Tenant Rights Under UP Rent Act: Geeta Gupta vs. Ramesh Chandra Dwivedi (20 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Tenant Rights Under UP Act: Geeta Gupta vs. Ramesh Chandra Dwivedi (20 September 2021)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Civil Law, Judges, Property Law, Tenancy Law, Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 with Section 12, Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings (Regulation of Letting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972 with Section 14

Supreme Court Upholds Tenant Rights Under UP Act: Geeta Gupta vs. Ramesh Chandra Dwivedi (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a tenant inducted by a person claiming to be a power of attorney holder, without explicit objection from the original owners before a specific date, can be considered a lawful tenant under the Uttar Pradesh Urban Buildings

Supreme Court Upholds Tenant Rights Under UP Act: Geeta Gupta vs. Ramesh Chandra Dwivedi (20 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Refuses to Compound Section 326 IPC Offence Despite Compromise: Bhagwan Narayan Gaikwad vs. State of Maharashtra (20 September 2021)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 320, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 357, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 326, Judges, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Refuses to Compound Section 326 IPC Offence Despite Compromise: Bhagwan Narayan Gaikwad vs. State of Maharashtra (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an offense under Section 326 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) can be compounded based on a compromise between the victim and the accused, especially when the offense involves grievous hurt. CASE TYPE:

Supreme Court Refuses to Compound Section 326 IPC Offence Despite Compromise: Bhagwan Narayan Gaikwad vs. State of Maharashtra (20 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds NCLAT Order in Corporate Dispute: Gulabchand Jain vs. Ramchandra D. Choudhary (17 September 2021)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Appellate Procedure, Corporate Law, Judges, National Company Law Appellate Tribunal, Supreme Court Appeals

Supreme Court Upholds NCLAT Order in Gulabchand Jain vs. Ramchandra D. Choudhary (2021) Date of the Judgment: 17 September 2021 Citation: Not Available Judges: Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Abhay S. Oka. Can the Supreme Court interfere with an order passed by the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT)? This question was addressed in a

Supreme Court Upholds NCLAT Order in Corporate Dispute: Gulabchand Jain vs. Ramchandra D. Choudhary (17 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Acquits Husband in Wife’s Death Case Citing Insufficient Circumstantial Evidence: Nagendra Sah vs. The State of Bihar (2021) INSC 597 (14 September 2021)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 101, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 106, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 201, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Acquits Husband in Wife’s Death Case Citing Insufficient Circumstantial Evidence Date of the Judgment: 14 September 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 597 Judges: Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Abhay S. Oka Can a conviction for murder be sustained solely on the basis of a post-mortem report, especially when other evidence suggests an alternative explanation?

Supreme Court Acquits Husband in Wife’s Death Case Citing Insufficient Circumstantial Evidence: Nagendra Sah vs. The State of Bihar (2021) INSC 597 (14 September 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Acquired Land: Bhupendra Ramdhan Pawar vs. Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation (2021)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Section 96, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 23, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Acquired Land: Bhupendra Ramdhan Pawar vs. Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of fair compensation for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, particularly concerning valuation of trees on acquired land and the method of calculating compensation when land value is determined using sales statistics. CASE TYPE:

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Acquired Land: Bhupendra Ramdhan Pawar vs. Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation (2021) Read Post »

Scroll to Top