B.R. Gavai

Supreme Court clarifies definition of “International Commercial Arbitration” in Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. Ravindranath Rao Sindhia & Anr. (2021) INSC 105 (04 March 2021)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 2(1)(f), B.R. Gavai, International Commercial Arbitration, Judges, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Clarifies “International Commercial Arbitration” in Amway Dispute Date of the Judgment: 04 March 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 105 Judges: R.F. Nariman, J., B.R. Gavai, J. Can a dispute between an Indian company and individuals who are nationals and residents of the USA be considered an “international commercial arbitration,” even if the business is […]

Supreme Court clarifies definition of “International Commercial Arbitration” in Amway India Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs. Ravindranath Rao Sindhia & Anr. (2021) INSC 105 (04 March 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Employee’s Claim: N. Subramanian vs. M/S Aruna Hotels Ltd. (2021)

/ Acknowledgment of Debt, B.R. Gavai, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Hrishikesh Roy, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 9, Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Period, Operational Creditor, Rohinton Fali Nariman

Supreme Court Upholds Employee’s Claim: N. Subramanian vs. M/S Aruna Hotels Ltd. (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a claim for arrears of salary is time-barred under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) when there are acknowledgements of liability. CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: N. Subramanian vs. M/S Aruna Hotels Ltd. & Anr. [Judgment Date]:

Supreme Court Upholds Employee’s Claim: N. Subramanian vs. M/S Aruna Hotels Ltd. (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns conviction in alleged dowry death case: Shivaji Chintappa Patil vs. State of Maharashtra (2 March 2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 313, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 106, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 8, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court overturns conviction in alleged dowry death case: Shivaji Chintappa Patil vs. State of Maharashtra (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the prosecution has proven beyond reasonable doubt that the death was homicidal in a case based on circumstantial evidence and whether the burden of proof shifts to the accused under Section 106 of the Indian

Supreme Court overturns conviction in alleged dowry death case: Shivaji Chintappa Patil vs. State of Maharashtra (2 March 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies tax exemptions for religious and educational buildings: Government of Kerala vs. Mother Superior Adoration Convent (2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Judges, Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975, Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 with Section 2(e), Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 with Section 3(1)(b), Kerala Building Tax Act, 1975 with Section 5A, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Clarifies Building Tax Exemptions for Religious and Educational Institutions in Kerala LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of tax exemption for buildings used for religious and educational purposes. CASE TYPE: Tax Law. Case Name: Government of Kerala & Anr. vs. Mother Superior Adoration Convent. [Judgment Date]: March 1, 2021. Introduction Date of the Judgment: March 1,

Supreme Court clarifies tax exemptions for religious and educational buildings: Government of Kerala vs. Mother Superior Adoration Convent (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court on Requisitioned Property: Punalur Paper Mills vs. West Bengal Mineral Development (2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Compensation for Requisitioned Property, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 17, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, R.F. Nariman, West Bengal Premises Requisition And Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1947, West Bengal Premises Requisition And Control (Temporary Provisions) Act, 1947 with Section 10B

Supreme Court on Requisitioned Property: Punalur Paper Mills vs. West Bengal Mineral Development (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the State can invoke urgency provisions under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, to acquire property previously requisitioned, after the requisition period has expired. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition and Requisition Case Name: Punalur Paper Mills Ltd. vs. West Bengal

Supreme Court on Requisitioned Property: Punalur Paper Mills vs. West Bengal Mineral Development (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds IBC’s Primacy Over Winding Up: A. Navinchandra Steels vs. SREI Equipment Finance (2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 446, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 238, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 7, Insolvency Resolution, Judges, Rohinton Fali Nariman, Winding Up

Supreme Court Upholds IBC’s Primacy Over Winding Up: A. Navinchandra Steels vs. SREI Equipment Finance (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC) overrides the Companies Act, 1956/2013 in cases of conflict, particularly when a winding-up petition has been admitted. CASE TYPE: Insolvency and Corporate Law Case Name: A. Navinchandra Steels Private

Supreme Court Upholds IBC’s Primacy Over Winding Up: A. Navinchandra Steels vs. SREI Equipment Finance (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction, Rejects Juvenile Claim Based on Arms License: Ram Vijay Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2021)

/ B.R. Gavai, Hemant Gupta, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015, Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015 with Section 94, Rohinton Fali Nariman

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction, Rejects Juvenile Claim Based on Arms License: Ram Vijay Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of juvenility in criminal cases and the evidentiary value of ossification tests and self-declared age in official documents. CASE TYPE: Criminal Appeal Case Name: Ram Vijay Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction, Rejects Juvenile Claim Based on Arms License: Ram Vijay Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Essentiality Certificate for Medical College: V.N. Public Health and Educational Trust vs. State of Kerala (2021)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, B.R. Gavai, Establishment of Medical College Regulations, Grant of Affiliation, Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 with Section 10-A, Judges, Kerala University of Health Sciences First Statute, 2013, Krishna Murari, Medical Council of India Regulations, 1999, Medical Council of India Regulations, 1999 with Essentiality Certificate

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Essentiality Certificate for Medical College: V.N. Public Health and Educational Trust vs. State of Kerala (2021) Date of the Judgment: 24 February 2021 Citation: V.N. Public Health and Educational Trust vs. State of Kerala & Ors. (2021) INSC 100 Judges: A.M. Khanwilkar, J., B.R. Gavai, J., Krishna Murari, J. (Majority

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Essentiality Certificate for Medical College: V.N. Public Health and Educational Trust vs. State of Kerala (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds 9% Interest on Share Sale in Company Dispute: Vinod Krishan Khanna & Ors. vs. Amritsar Swadeshi Woollen Mills Private Limited (23 February 2021)

/ Appellate Review, B.R. Gavai, Civil Procedure, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 397, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 398, Equity, Judges, Oppression and Mismanagement, Principles of Equity, Rohinton Fali Nariman, Suo Moto Powers, Unjust Enrichment

Supreme Court Upholds 9% Interest on Share Sale in Company Dispute: Vinod Krishan Khanna & Ors. vs. Amritsar Swadeshi Woollen Mills Private Limited (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) was correct in reducing the interest rate awarded by the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) on the sale of shares in

Supreme Court Upholds 9% Interest on Share Sale in Company Dispute: Vinod Krishan Khanna & Ors. vs. Amritsar Swadeshi Woollen Mills Private Limited (23 February 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Dismisses Contempt Petition in Family Business Dispute: Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Narang (2021)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, B.R. Gavai, Civil Contempt, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 397, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 139-A, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 with Section 2(b), Judges, Oppression and Mismanagement

Supreme Court Dismisses Contempt Petition in Family Business Dispute: Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Narang (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the respondents’ actions constituted contempt of court for violating a prior consent order, despite subsequent orders from the Company Law Board (CLB). CASE TYPE: Contempt of Court, Family Business Dispute Case Name: Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Narang

Supreme Court Dismisses Contempt Petition in Family Business Dispute: Rama Narang vs. Ramesh Narang (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petitions on Aadhaar Act as Money Bill: Beghar Foundation vs. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) (2021) INSC 12

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Ashok Bhushan, B.R. Gavai, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 110, Constitutional Law with Article 122, Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Judges, Money Bill, Parliamentary Procedure, S. Abdul Nazeer, Speaker's Decision

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petitions on Aadhaar Act as Money Bill Date of the Judgment: January 11, 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 12 Judges: A.M. Khanwilkar, Ashok Bhushan, S. Abdul Nazeer, B.R. Gavai, and Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud (dissenting). This was a 4:1 majority decision, with Justice Khanwilkar writing the majority opinion and Justice Chandrachud dissenting.

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petitions on Aadhaar Act as Money Bill: Beghar Foundation vs. Justice K.S. Puttaswamy (Retd.) (2021) INSC 12 Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition for Chennai-Salem Highway Project: Project Director vs. P.V. Krishnamoorthy (2020)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, B.R. Gavai, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Entry 13 of List II, Constitutional Law with Entry 23 of List I, Environment (Protection) Act, 1986, Judges, Krishna Murari, National Highways Act, 1956, National Highways Act, 1956 with Section 2(2), National Highways Act, 1956 with Section 3A, National Highways Act, 1956 with Section 3D

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition for Chennai-Salem Highway Project LEGAL ISSUE: Whether land can be acquired for a new national highway project, and the stage at which environmental clearances are required. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition, Infrastructure Development. Case Name: The Project Director, Project Implementation Unit vs. P.V. Krishnamoorthy & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 8 December 2020

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition for Chennai-Salem Highway Project: Project Director vs. P.V. Krishnamoorthy (2020) Read Post »

Scroll to Top