Ashok Bhushan

Supreme Court Legalizes Passive Euthanasia, Recognizes Advance Directives: Common Cause vs. Union of India (2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, A.M. Khanwilkar, Ashok Bhushan, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, D.Y. Chandrachud, Dipak Misra, Fundamental Rights, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 306, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 309, Judges

Supreme Court Legalizes Passive Euthanasia, Recognizes Advance Directives: Common Cause vs. Union of India (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether passive euthanasia and advance medical directives are constitutionally valid. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law, Public Interest Litigation Case Name: Common Cause (A Regd. Society) vs. Union of India and Another Judgment Date: 9 March 2018 Date of the […]

Supreme Court Legalizes Passive Euthanasia, Recognizes Advance Directives: Common Cause vs. Union of India (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court quashes Rule 5 of Service Tax Rules: Reimbursable expenses not taxable (2018) INSC 194

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Finance Act, 1994, Finance Act, 1994 with Section 66, Finance Act, 1994 with Section 67, Judges, Service Tax Rules, Service Tax Rules with Rule 5

Supreme Court quashes Rule 5 of Service Tax Rules: Reimbursable expenses not taxable (2018) INSC 194 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether reimbursable expenses incurred by a service provider can be included in the value of taxable services for the purpose of service tax. CASE TYPE: Service Tax Case Name: Union of India & Anr. vs. M/s. Intercontinental

Supreme Court quashes Rule 5 of Service Tax Rules: Reimbursable expenses not taxable (2018) INSC 194 Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Application of Section 195(1)(b)(ii) CrPC in Forgery Cases: Vishnu Chandru Gaonkar vs. N.M. Dessai (2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 195, Criminal Procedure, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 463, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 471, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Application of Section 195(1)(b)(ii) CrPC in Forgery Cases: Vishnu Chandru Gaonkar vs. N.M. Dessai (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a complaint under Section 195(1)(b)(ii) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) can be initiated for forgery of a document when the forgery occurred before the document was produced in court. CASE TYPE:

Supreme Court Clarifies Application of Section 195(1)(b)(ii) CrPC in Forgery Cases: Vishnu Chandru Gaonkar vs. N.M. Dessai (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Regularization to College Employee: Upendra Singh vs. State of Bihar (23 February 2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Appointment of Employees, Ashok Bhushan, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Judges, Regularization of Employees, Service Law, Service Law with Secretary, State of Karnataka & Ors. v. Umadevi & Ors., (2006) 4 SCC 1

Supreme Court Denies Regularization to College Employee: Upendra Singh vs. State of Bihar (2018) Date of the Judgment: 23 February 2018 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 2356 of 2018 Judges: A.K. Sikri, J. and Ashok Bhushan, J. Can a college employee, initially appointed by a private college, claim regularization and regular salary after the college becomes

Supreme Court Denies Regularization to College Employee: Upendra Singh vs. State of Bihar (23 February 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds SARFAESI Act Invocation by Successor-in-Interest in Indiabulls Housing Finance vs. Deccan Chronicle Holdings (2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 9, Ashok Bhushan, Judges, SARFAESI Act, 2002, SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 13(2), SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 2(1)(f), SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 35

Supreme Court Upholds SARFAESI Act Invocation by Successor-in-Interest in Indiabulls Housing Finance vs. Deccan Chronicle Holdings (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a successor-in-interest, like Indiabulls Housing Finance Limited, can invoke the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) when the original lender, Indiabulls Financial Services Limited (IBFSL), was

Supreme Court Upholds SARFAESI Act Invocation by Successor-in-Interest in Indiabulls Housing Finance vs. Deccan Chronicle Holdings (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies price adjustment formula in highway contracts: National Highway Authority of India vs. M/S. ProgressiveMVR (JV) (23 February 2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Arbitration, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration with Section 34, Ashok Bhushan, Contract Law, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, Price Adjustment Clause

Supreme Court Clarifies Price Adjustment Formula in Highway Contracts Date of the Judgment: 23 February 2018 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 458 of 2018 Judges: A.K. Sikri, J., Ashok Bhushan, J. Can a contractual clause be interpreted in a way that leads to unrealistic price adjustments? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question in

Supreme Court clarifies price adjustment formula in highway contracts: National Highway Authority of India vs. M/S. ProgressiveMVR (JV) (23 February 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies incorporation of arbitration clauses by reference in construction contracts: Elite Engineering vs. Techtrans Construction (23 February 2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Arbitration Agreement, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 7, Ashok Bhushan, Construction Contracts, Contract Law, Incorporation by reference, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges

Supreme Court clarifies incorporation of arbitration clauses by reference: Elite Engineering vs. Techtrans Construction (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an arbitration clause from a main contract can be incorporated into a sub-contract by reference. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: M/S. Elite Engineering and Construction (Hyd.) Private Limited vs. M/S. Techtrans Construction India Private Limited Judgment

Supreme Court clarifies incorporation of arbitration clauses by reference in construction contracts: Elite Engineering vs. Techtrans Construction (23 February 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Appointment of Additional Judges: Sunil Samdaria vs. Union of India (23 February 2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 217, Constitutional Law with Article 224, Judges

Supreme Court Upholds Appointment of Additional Judges: Sunil Samdaria vs. Union of India (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the appointment of Additional Judges for a term less than two years is valid under Article 224 of the Constitution of India, and whether a retired judicial officer is eligible for appointment as an Additional Judge. CASE TYPE:

Supreme Court Upholds Appointment of Additional Judges: Sunil Samdaria vs. Union of India (23 February 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order for Not Providing Opportunity to Rebut Additional Evidence in Partition Suit: Akhilesh Singh vs. Lal Babu Singh (2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Additional Evidence, Appellate Procedure, Ashok Bhushan, Civil Procedure, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Judges, Natural Justice, Order XLI Rule 2, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Order XLI Rule 27, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order for Not Providing Opportunity to Rebut Additional Evidence in Partition Suit: Akhilesh Singh vs. Lal Babu Singh (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an appellate court must provide an opportunity to the contesting party to rebut or explain additional evidence admitted under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court Order for Not Providing Opportunity to Rebut Additional Evidence in Partition Suit: Akhilesh Singh vs. Lal Babu Singh (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Higher Pay Scale to Pre-1996 Retired Armed Forces Officers: Suchet Singh Yadav & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (21 February 2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Government Orders, Government Orders with Order dated 07.06.1999, Government Orders with Order dated 14.01.2000, Government Orders with Order dated 21.11.1997, Judges, Pay Scale, Pension, Retirement Benefits, Service Law

Supreme Court Denies Higher Pay Scale to Pre-1996 Retired Armed Forces Officers Date of the Judgment: 21 February 2018 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: A.K. Sikri, J., Ashok Bhushan, J. (authored the judgment) Can retired armed forces officers who retired before 01.01.1996 claim a higher pay scale based on a government order meant for

Supreme Court Denies Higher Pay Scale to Pre-1996 Retired Armed Forces Officers: Suchet Singh Yadav & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (21 February 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Limits Bar Council’s Review Power in Misconduct Case: Advanta India Ltd. vs. B.N. Shivanna (2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Advocates Act, 1961, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 35, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 36B, Advocates Act, 1961 with Section 48AA, Ashok Bhushan, Disciplinary Proceedings, Judges, Professional Misconduct

Supreme Court Limits Bar Council’s Review Power in Misconduct Case: Advanta India Ltd. vs. B.N. Shivanna (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of review powers of the Disciplinary Committee of the Bar Council of India. CASE TYPE: Professional Misconduct of an Advocate Case Name: M/S. Advanta India Ltd. vs. B.N. Shivanna [Judgment Date]: 21 February 2018 Introduction

Supreme Court Limits Bar Council’s Review Power in Misconduct Case: Advanta India Ltd. vs. B.N. Shivanna (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles service tax valuation in construction: Free materials excluded (19 February 2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Construction Services, Exemptions, Finance Act, 1994, Finance Act, 1994 with Section 65(105)(zzq), Finance Act, 1994 with Section 65(25b), Finance Act, 1994 with Section 67, Judges, Service Tax Law, Valuation of Taxable Services

Supreme Court Clarifies Service Tax on Construction: Free Materials Not Included (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the value of goods/materials supplied free of cost by a service recipient should be included in the gross amount charged by the service provider for calculating service tax. CASE TYPE: Service Tax, Construction Law Case Name: Commissioner of Service Tax

Supreme Court settles service tax valuation in construction: Free materials excluded (19 February 2018) Read Post »

Scroll to Top