Arun Mishra Archives

Supreme Court Orders Completion of Amrapali Group Projects, Protecting Homebuyers: Bikram Chatterji & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019)

July 23, 2019 / Arun Mishra, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Constitutional Law with Article 32, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 12(1)(c), Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 53, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 7, Judges, Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016, Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 with Section 11(4), Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 with Section 4(2)(l)(D), Real Estate (Regulation and Development) Act, 2016 with Section 8, Uday Umesh Lalit

Amrapali Group Homebuyers Win Relief: Supreme Court Orders Project Completion LEGAL ISSUE: Protection of homebuyers’ rights and completion of stalled real estate projects. CASE TYPE: Real Estate/Consumer Law. Case Name: Bikram Chatterji & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 23 July 2019 Date of the Judgment: 23 July 2019 Citation: Not Available […]

Supreme Court Orders Completion of Amrapali Group Projects, Protecting Homebuyers: Bikram Chatterji & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition: Haryana vs. Sunder Lal (2019)

July 22, 2019 / Arun Mishra, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, M.R. Shah, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 with Section 24(2), Taking Possession

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition: Haryana vs. Sunder Lal (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether possession of land was legally taken by the State after the award was passed in land acquisition proceedings. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: State of Haryana & Ors. vs. Sunder Lal [Judgment Date]: July 22, 2019 Date of the Judgment: July

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition: Haryana vs. Sunder Lal (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) for Candidates Pursuing Teacher Training Courses: Omkar Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2019)

July 16, 2019 / Arun Mishra, Education Law, Judges, M.R. Shah, National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), Right to Education Act, 2009, Right to Education Act, 2009 with Section 23, S. Abdul Nazeer, Teacher Eligibility Test (TET), Teacher Training Course (TTC), Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Act, 1972, Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Act, 1972 with Section 19, Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Act, 1972 with Section 2(1)(b)

Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) for Candidates Pursuing Teacher Training Courses: Omkar Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether candidates pursuing a Teacher Training Course (TTC) are eligible to appear for the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET). CASE TYPE: Education Law Case Name: Omkar Singh & Ors. vs. State

Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for Teacher Eligibility Test (TET) for Candidates Pursuing Teacher Training Courses: Omkar Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Fee Regulatory Committee’s Authority in Private Engineering Colleges: Vasavi Engineering College Parents Association vs. State of Telangana (2019)

July 1, 2019 / Arun Mishra, Education Law, Fee Regulation, Judges, Navin Sinha, Private Institutions, Regulatory Bodies, Telangana Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983, Telangana Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983 with Rule 3(i), Telangana Educational Institutions (Regulation of Admission and Prohibition of Capitation Fee) Act, 1983 with Rule 4

Supreme Court Upholds Fee Regulatory Committee’s Authority in Private Engineering Colleges: Vasavi Engineering College Parents Association vs. State of Telangana (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: The core legal issue in this case is the extent of the High Court’s power to interfere with the fee structure determined by the Telangana Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee (TAFRC) for

Supreme Court Upholds Fee Regulatory Committee’s Authority in Private Engineering Colleges: Vasavi Engineering College Parents Association vs. State of Telangana (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Partially Upholds Arbitration Award on Coal Price Escalation: Parsa Kente Collieries vs. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam (2019)

May 27, 2019 / Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Arun Mishra, Contract Interpretation, Contract Law, Force Majeure, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Partially Upholds Arbitration Award on Coal Price Escalation: Parsa Kente Collieries vs. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was justified in interfering with the arbitral award passed by the learned Arbitrator, confirmed by the learned Commercial Court, in an appeal under Section 37 of the Arbitration and

Supreme Court Partially Upholds Arbitration Award on Coal Price Escalation: Parsa Kente Collieries vs. Rajasthan Rajya Vidyut Utpadan Nigam (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Khairlanji Killings: CBI vs. Sakru Mahagu Binjewar (2019)

May 24, 2019 / Arun Mishra, Bhushan Ramkrishna Gavai, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 149, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 with Section 3(1)(x), Surya Kant

Supreme Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Khairlanji Killings: CBI vs. Sakru Mahagu Binjewar (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was justified in commuting the death sentence to life imprisonment with a condition that the respondents–accused shall have to undergo actual sentence of not less than 25 years, and whether the case falls under the

Supreme Court Upholds Life Imprisonment for Khairlanji Killings: CBI vs. Sakru Mahagu Binjewar (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Contempt Conviction, Modifies Sentence for Advocate Misconduct (10 May 2019)

May 10, 2019 / Arun Mishra, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 156(3), Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 with Section 2(c), Criminal Contempt, Judges, Navin Sinha

Supreme Court Upholds Contempt Conviction, Modifies Sentence for Advocate Misconduct Date of the Judgment: 10 May 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 449 Judges: Arun Mishra, J. and Navin Sinha, J. Can an advocate’s misconduct towards a judge be excused? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in a case involving an advocate who was

Supreme Court Upholds Contempt Conviction, Modifies Sentence for Advocate Misconduct (10 May 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Class Action in Consumer Case: Anjum Hussain vs. Intellicity Business Park (2019)

May 10, 2019 / Arun Mishra, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order I Rule 8, Consumer, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 12(1)(c), Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 2(1)(b), Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Allows Class Action in Consumer Case: Anjum Hussain vs. Intellicity Business Park (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a group of consumers with a common grievance can file a class action under the Consumer Protection Act, 1986, even if they don’t all have the same individual purpose for purchasing a commercial unit. CASE TYPE: Consumer

Supreme Court Allows Class Action in Consumer Case: Anjum Hussain vs. Intellicity Business Park (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989: Narad Patel vs. State of Chhattisgarh (10 May 2019)

May 10, 2019 / Arun Mishra, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 294, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 506, Judges, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 with Section 3(1)(x), Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989: Narad Patel vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2019) Date of the Judgment: 10 May 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 448 Judges: Arun Mishra, J. and Uday Umesh Lalit, J. Can a person be convicted under Section 3(1)(x)

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Section 3(1)(x) of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989: Narad Patel vs. State of Chhattisgarh (10 May 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Demolition of Illegal Constructions in CRZ-III Zone: Kerala State Coastal Zone Management Authority vs. State of Kerala (2019)

May 8, 2019 / Arun Mishra, Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ), Environment Protection Act, 1986, Environment Protection Act, 1986 with Section 3, Judges, Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999, Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999 with Rule 23(4), Navin Sinha

Supreme Court Orders Demolition of Illegal Constructions in CRZ-III Zone: Kerala State Coastal Zone Management Authority vs. State of Kerala (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether constructions made in violation of Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) notifications should be demolished. CASE TYPE: Environmental Law. Case Name: The Kerala State Coastal Zone Management Authority vs. The State of Kerala

Supreme Court Orders Demolition of Illegal Constructions in CRZ-III Zone: Kerala State Coastal Zone Management Authority vs. State of Kerala (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the mandatory requirement of prior approval for termination of teachers in private unaided colleges: Lal Bahadur Gautam vs. State of U.P. (2019) INSC 426 (08 May 2019)

May 8, 2019 / Arun Mishra, Conditions of Service of Teachers, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 12, Judges, Navin Sinha, Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973, Uttar Pradesh State Universities Act, 1973 with Section 35(2)

Supreme Court Upholds Mandatory Prior Approval for Teacher Termination in Private Colleges Date of the Judgment: 08 May 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 426 Judges: Arun Mishra, J. and Navin Sinha, J. Can a private unaided college terminate a teacher without prior approval from the Vice-Chancellor? The Supreme Court of India addressed this crucial question, emphasizing

Supreme Court settles the mandatory requirement of prior approval for termination of teachers in private unaided colleges: Lal Bahadur Gautam vs. State of U.P. (2019) INSC 426 (08 May 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Additional Documents in Corruption Case: CBI vs. Subrahmanyam (2019)

May 7, 2019 / Arun Mishra, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 242, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 362, Judges, Navin Sinha, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 17

Supreme Court Allows Additional Documents in Corruption Case: CBI vs. Subrahmanyam (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a court can allow additional documents to be submitted after the charge sheet has been filed, especially in cases of corruption. CASE TYPE: Criminal (Prevention of Corruption Act) Case Name: State Represented by Inspector of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation

Supreme Court Allows Additional Documents in Corruption Case: CBI vs. Subrahmanyam (2019) Read Post »