B.R. Gavai

Supreme Court Affirms Rigorous Imprisonment as Part of Life Sentence in Murder Cases

/ B.R. Gavai, Criminal Law, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 224, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Life Imprisonment, Offences Against Human Body, Rigorous Imprisonment, Sentencing

Supreme Court Clarifies Rigorous Imprisonment in Life Sentences for Murder Cases LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a life sentence automatically includes rigorous imprisonment. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: MD. ALFAZ ALI vs. THE STATE OF ASSAM [Judgment Date]: 14 September 2021 Date of the Judgment: 14 September 2021 Citation: Not Available Judges: L. Nageswara Rao J., […]

Supreme Court Affirms Rigorous Imprisonment as Part of Life Sentence in Murder Cases Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Extension of Enforcement Director’s Tenure: Common Cause vs. Union of India (2021)

/ Appointment and Tenure of Director of Enforcement, B.R. Gavai, Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003, Central Vigilance Commission Act, 2003 with Section 25, General Clauses Act, 1897, General Clauses Act, 1897 with Section 21, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao

Supreme Court Upholds Extension of Enforcement Director’s Tenure: Common Cause vs. Union of India (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Union Government can extend the tenure of the Director of Enforcement beyond the initial two-year period, especially when the incumbent has reached retirement age. CASE TYPE: Service Law, Public Interest Litigation Case Name: Common Cause (A

Supreme Court Upholds Extension of Enforcement Director’s Tenure: Common Cause vs. Union of India (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies maintainability of suit for injunction without declaration of title: Kayalulla Parambath Moidu Haji vs. Namboodiyil Vinodan (2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Civil Law, Injunctions, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Property Law, Specific Relief Act, 1963, Specific Relief Act, 1963 with Section 38, Title Disputes

Supreme Court on Suit for Injunction Without Declaration of Title: Kayalulla Parambath Moidu Haji vs. Namboodiyil Vinodan (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a suit for permanent injunction can be maintained without seeking a declaration of title. CASE TYPE: Civil Law – Property Dispute Case Name: Kayalulla Parambath Moidu Haji vs. Namboodiyil Vinodan [Judgment Date]: September 7,

Supreme Court clarifies maintainability of suit for injunction without declaration of title: Kayalulla Parambath Moidu Haji vs. Namboodiyil Vinodan (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies maintainability of suit for injunction without declaration of title in property dispute: T.V. Ramakrishna Reddy vs. M. Mallappa (2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976, Bangalore Development Authority Act, 1976 with Section 64, Bangalore Mahanagar Palike Act, Bangalore Mahanagar Palike Act with Section 114-A, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order 39, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao

Supreme Court on Suit for Injunction Without Declaration of Title: T.V. Ramakrishna Reddy vs. M. Mallappa (2021) Date of the Judgment: September 7, 2021 Citation: 2021 INSC 584 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., B.R. Gavai, J. Can a suit for a permanent injunction be maintained without seeking a declaration of title, especially when the defendant

Supreme Court clarifies maintainability of suit for injunction without declaration of title in property dispute: T.V. Ramakrishna Reddy vs. M. Mallappa (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Title Suit: P. Ishwari Bai vs. Anjani Bai (2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Civil Law, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XLI Rule 27, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XLI Rule 4, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Property Dispute

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Title Suit: P. Ishwari Bai vs. Anjani Bai (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was correct in admitting additional evidence under Order XLI Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 and dismissing the suit for declaration of title and recovery of possession. CASE TYPE: Civil Law –

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Title Suit: P. Ishwari Bai vs. Anjani Bai (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies Municipal Authority’s Power in Building Plan Disputes: Debabrata Saha vs. Serampore Municipality (2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Civil Court, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Municipal Authority, Property Dispute, Property Law, West Bengal Municipal Act, 1996, West Bengal Municipal Act, 1996 with Section 217, West Bengal Municipal Act, 1996 with Section 218

Supreme Court clarifies Municipal Authority’s Power in Building Plan Disputes: Debabrata Saha vs. Serampore Municipality (2021) Date of the Judgment: September 01, 2021 Citation: Debabrata Saha vs. Serampore Municipality & Ors. Civil Appeal No. 3657 of 2010 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J. and B.R. Gavai, J. Can a municipal authority revoke a building plan based

Supreme Court clarifies Municipal Authority’s Power in Building Plan Disputes: Debabrata Saha vs. Serampore Municipality (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Removal of Panchayat Samiti Party Leader: Sangeeta vs. State of Maharashtra (2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Defection Law, Democratic Principles, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Local Government Law, Maharashtra Local Authorities Members Disqualification Act, 1986, Maharashtra Local Authorities Members Disqualification Act, 1986 with Section 2(l), Maharashtra Local Authorities Members Disqualification Act, 1986 with Section 3, Maharashtra Local Authorities Members Disqualification Rules, 1987, Panchayat Samiti

Supreme Court Upholds Removal of Panchayat Samiti Party Leader: Sangeeta vs. State of Maharashtra (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Panchayat Samiti party leader can be removed by a resolution passed by the majority of the party members, or if the leader is entitled to continue for a fixed term, irrespective of the party’s confidence. CASE

Supreme Court Upholds Removal of Panchayat Samiti Party Leader: Sangeeta vs. State of Maharashtra (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Foreign Award Against Non-Signatories Under Alter Ego Doctrine: Gemini Bay Transcription Pvt. Ltd. vs. Integrated Sales Service Ltd. (2021) INSC 482 (10 August 2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 44, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 48, B.R. Gavai, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Contract Law with Alter Ego Doctrine, Enforcement of Foreign Awards, Judges, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Upholds Foreign Award Against Non-Signatories Under Alter Ego Doctrine Date of the Judgment: 10 August 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 482 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J and B.R. Gavai, J. The judgment was authored by R.F. Nariman, J. Can a foreign arbitral award be enforced against entities that were not direct signatories to the arbitration

Supreme Court Upholds Foreign Award Against Non-Signatories Under Alter Ego Doctrine: Gemini Bay Transcription Pvt. Ltd. vs. Integrated Sales Service Ltd. (2021) INSC 482 (10 August 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Terms: PSA Sical Terminals Loses Appeal Against V.O. Chidambaranar Port Trust (28 July 2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Arbitration Law, B.R. Gavai, Contract Law, Contract Law with Article 14, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Terms: PSA Sical Terminals vs. V.O. Chidambaranar Port Trust (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of “Change in Law” clause in a contract and the extent of the Arbitral Tribunal’s power to modify contractual terms. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law, Contract Law Case Name: PSA Sical Terminals Pvt. Ltd. vs. The Board of Trustees

Supreme Court Upholds Contractual Terms: PSA Sical Terminals Loses Appeal Against V.O. Chidambaranar Port Trust (28 July 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Declares Part IXB of Constitution Ultra Vires for State Co-operative Societies: Union of India vs. Rajendra N Shah (2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 246, Constitutional Law with Article 368, Fundamental Rights, Judges, K.M. Joseph, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Declares Part IXB of Constitution Ultra Vires for State Co-operative Societies LEGAL ISSUE: Constitutional validity of Part IXB of the Constitution of India concerning co-operative societies. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law Case Name: Union of India vs. Rajendra N Shah & Anr. Judgment Date: 20 July 2021 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 20 July

Supreme Court Declares Part IXB of Constitution Ultra Vires for State Co-operative Societies: Union of India vs. Rajendra N Shah (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the scope of Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in land acquisition cases under the National Highways Act, 1956 (20 July 2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, B.R. Gavai, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 12, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Judges, Land Acquisition, National Highways Act, 1956, National Highways Act, 1956 with Section 3G, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 34 of Arbitration Act in National Highway Land Acquisition Cases Date of the Judgment: 20 July 2021 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: R.F. Nariman, J and B.R. Gavai, J. Can a court modify an arbitral award under Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, or is

Supreme Court settles the scope of Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 in land acquisition cases under the National Highways Act, 1956 (20 July 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Union’s Locus Standi in Standing Order Modification: Bank Employees Union vs. Rajarshi Shahu Bank (2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Locus Standi, Maharashtra Industrial Relations Act, 1946, Maharashtra Industrial Relations Act, 1946 with Section 27A, Maharashtra Industrial Relations Act, 1946 with Section 38(2), Maharashtra Industrial Relations Act, 1946 with Section 42, Rohinton Fali Nariman, Trade Unions

Supreme Court Upholds Union’s Locus Standi in Standing Order Modification: Bank Employees Union vs. Rajarshi Shahu Bank (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a registered trade union has the locus standi to apply for modification of a standing order under Section 38(2) of the Maharashtra Industrial Relations Act, 1946. CASE TYPE: Industrial Relations Case Name: Bank Employees

Supreme Court Upholds Union’s Locus Standi in Standing Order Modification: Bank Employees Union vs. Rajarshi Shahu Bank (2021) Read Post »

Scroll to Top