B.V. Nagarathna

Supreme Court clarifies land acquisition after reservation lapse: Kolhapur Municipal Corporation vs. Vasant Mahadev Patil (2022)

/ Acquisition of Land, B.V. Nagarathna, Development Plan, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6, M.R. Shah, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 with Section 126, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 with Section 127

Supreme Court on Lapsed Land Reservations: Kolhapur Municipal Corporation vs. Vasant Mahadev Patil LEGAL ISSUE: Can a Municipal Corporation be compelled to acquire land after the reservation for public use has lapsed under the Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966? CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition, Town Planning Case Name: The Kolhapur Municipal Corporation & Ors. […]

Supreme Court clarifies land acquisition after reservation lapse: Kolhapur Municipal Corporation vs. Vasant Mahadev Patil (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court quashes High Court order directing land acquisition: Kolhapur Municipal Corporation vs. Vasant Mahadev Patil (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6, M.R. Shah, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 with Section 126, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 with Section 127, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 with Section 22

Supreme Court quashes High Court order directing land acquisition: Kolhapur Municipal Corporation vs. Vasant Mahadev Patil (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can mandate a municipal corporation to acquire land and pay compensation when the land reservation has lapsed and is unsuitable for its intended purpose. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition and Town Planning. Case

Supreme Court quashes High Court order directing land acquisition: Kolhapur Municipal Corporation vs. Vasant Mahadev Patil (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court on Lapsed Land Reservations: Kolhapur Municipal Corporation vs. Vasant Mahadev Patil (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Judges, Land Acquisition, M.R. Shah, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 with Section 127, Maharashtra Regional and Town Planning Act, 1966 with Section 22

Supreme Court on Lapsed Land Reservations: Kolhapur Municipal Corporation vs. Vasant Mahadev Patil (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can mandate a municipal corporation to acquire land and pay compensation when the land reservation has lapsed and the land is unsuitable for the designated public purpose. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition and Town Planning Case

Supreme Court on Lapsed Land Reservations: Kolhapur Municipal Corporation vs. Vasant Mahadev Patil (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court modifies punishment of removal to compulsory retirement in bank employee case: Umesh Kumar Pahwa vs. Uttarakhand Gramin Bank (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Compulsory Retirement, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Disciplinary Proceedings, Judges, M.R. Shah, Proportionality of Punishment, Service Law

Supreme Court modifies punishment of removal to compulsory retirement in bank employee case: Umesh Kumar Pahwa vs. Uttarakhand Gramin Bank (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the punishment of removal from service was disproportionate to the charges proved against the employee. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Umesh Kumar Pahwa vs. The Board of Directors Uttarakhand Gramin

Supreme Court modifies punishment of removal to compulsory retirement in bank employee case: Umesh Kumar Pahwa vs. Uttarakhand Gramin Bank (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court orders joint hearing of land acquisition appeals: M.P. Housing Board vs. Satish Kumar Batra (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 5-A, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court orders joint hearing of land acquisition appeals: M.P. Housing Board vs. Satish Kumar Batra (2022) Date of the Judgment: February 10, 2022 Judges: M.R. Shah, J. and B.V. Nagarathna, J. Can a High Court decide a case related to land acquisition when a related case concerning the same land is already pending before

Supreme Court orders joint hearing of land acquisition appeals: M.P. Housing Board vs. Satish Kumar Batra (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Reduces Sentence in POCSO Case: Nawabuddin vs. State of Uttarakhand (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 15, Constitutional Law with Article 39, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 376(2)(i), Judges, M.R. Shah, POCSO Act, 2012, POCSO Act, 2012 with Section 3(b), POCSO Act, 2012 with Section 5(m), POCSO Act, 2012 with Section 6

Supreme Court Reduces Sentence in POCSO Case: Nawabuddin vs. State of Uttarakhand (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of “Penetrative Sexual Assault” under the POCSO Act and its application in cases involving digital penetration. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, Child Sexual Abuse, POCSO Act Case Name: Nawabuddin vs. State of Uttarakhand Judgment Date: 08 February 2022 Date of

Supreme Court Reduces Sentence in POCSO Case: Nawabuddin vs. State of Uttarakhand (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction in “Phakadiyat” Attack Case: State of Uttarakhand vs. Sachendra Singh Rawat (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Criminal Law, Culpable Homicide, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 300, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, M.R. Shah, Murder, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction in “Phakadiyat” Attack Case: State of Uttarakhand vs. Sachendra Singh Rawat (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was correct in altering the conviction of murder to culpable homicide not amounting to murder based on the exception of sudden fight. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law – Murder Case Name: State of

Supreme Court Upholds Murder Conviction in “Phakadiyat” Attack Case: State of Uttarakhand vs. Sachendra Singh Rawat (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Labour Court’s Jurisdiction Under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act in Wage Dispute: M/s Bombay Chemical Industries vs. Deputy Labour Commissioner & Anr. (04 February 2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 10, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 33(C)(2), Judges, Labour Court Jurisdiction, M. R. Shah

Supreme Court Clarifies Labour Court’s Jurisdiction Under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act Date of the Judgment: 04 February 2022 Citation: M/s Bombay Chemical Industries vs. Deputy Labour Commissioner & Anr. (2022) INSC 117 Judges: M. R. Shah, J., B.V. Nagarathna, J. Can a Labour Court decide on a wage dispute under Section 33(C)(2)

Supreme Court Clarifies Labour Court’s Jurisdiction Under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act in Wage Dispute: M/s Bombay Chemical Industries vs. Deputy Labour Commissioner & Anr. (04 February 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court quashes criminal proceedings against bona fide purchasers in property fraud case: Rekha Jain vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2022) INSC 123 (03 February 2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 482, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120-B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 420, Judges, M.R. Shah, Offences Related to Property

Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Proceedings Against Bona Fide Purchasers in Property Fraud Case Date of the Judgment: 03 February 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 123 Judges: Justice M.R. Shah and Justice B.V. Nagarathna Can a person be subjected to criminal proceedings for purchasing a property, without any knowledge of the property being attached? The Supreme Court

Supreme Court quashes criminal proceedings against bona fide purchasers in property fraud case: Rekha Jain vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2022) INSC 123 (03 February 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Repeal of Manipur Parliamentary Secretary Act, but Strikes Down Saving Clause

/ B.R. Gavai, B.V. Nagarathna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Constitutional Law with Article 194, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Legislative Competence

Supreme Court Upholds Repeal of Manipur Parliamentary Secretary Act, but Strikes Down Saving Clause LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Manipur State Legislature had the competence to enact the Manipur Parliamentary Secretary (Appointment, Salary and Allowances and Miscellaneous Provisions) Act, 2012 and subsequently repeal it with a saving clause. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law Case Name: The State

Supreme Court Upholds Repeal of Manipur Parliamentary Secretary Act, but Strikes Down Saving Clause Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Manipur’s Repeal of Parliamentary Secretary Act, Limits Saving Clause: State of Manipur vs. Surjakumar Okram (2022)

/ B.R. Gavai, B.V. Nagarathna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Constitutional Law with Article 164, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Legislative Competence

Supreme Court Upholds Manipur’s Repeal of Parliamentary Secretary Act, Limits Saving Clause: State of Manipur vs. Surjakumar Okram (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Manipur Legislature had the competence to enact a saving clause in the Repealing Act of the Manipur Parliamentary Secretary Act, 2012, after the Assam Act of 2004, which is in pari materia,

Supreme Court Upholds Manipur’s Repeal of Parliamentary Secretary Act, Limits Saving Clause: State of Manipur vs. Surjakumar Okram (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Repeal of Manipur Act but Strikes Down Saving Clause: State of Manipur vs. Surjakumar Okram (2022)

/ B.R. Gavai, B.V. Nagarathna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Constitutional Law with Article 246, Fundamental Rights, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Legislative Competence, Legislative Competence with List II Entry 39, Legislative Competence with List II Entry 40, State Legislature Powers

Supreme Court Upholds Repeal of Manipur Act but Strikes Down Saving Clause: State of Manipur vs. Surjakumar Okram (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Legislative competence of a state legislature to enact laws regarding parliamentary secretaries and the validity of saving clauses in repealing acts. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law/Legislative Competence Case Name: State of Manipur & Ors. vs.

Supreme Court Upholds Repeal of Manipur Act but Strikes Down Saving Clause: State of Manipur vs. Surjakumar Okram (2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top