B.V. Nagarathna

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 »

Supreme Court Modifies Reinstatement Order in Contractual Employment Case: MSRTC vs. Kalawati Pandurang Fulzele (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Contractual Employment, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 2(oo)(bb), Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 25-F, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 25-G, Judges, Labour Law, M.R. Shah, Unfair Labour Practices

Supreme Court Modifies Reinstatement Order in Contractual Employment Case: MSRTC vs. Kalawati Pandurang Fulzele (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a contractual employee is entitled to reinstatement and back wages upon termination, or if a lump sum compensation is more appropriate. CASE TYPE: Labour Law Case Name: Divisional Controller Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation vs. Kalawati Pandurang

Supreme Court Modifies Reinstatement Order in Contractual Employment Case: MSRTC vs. Kalawati Pandurang Fulzele (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court modifies reinstatement order for contractual employee: Divisional Controller, MSRTC vs. Kalawati Pandurang Fulzele (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 2(oo), Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 25-F, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 25-G, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court modifies reinstatement order for contractual employee: Divisional Controller, MSRTC vs. Kalawati Pandurang Fulzele (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a contractual employee is entitled to reinstatement and back wages upon termination. CASE TYPE: Labour Law. Case Name: Divisional Controller Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation vs. Kalawati Pandurang Fulzele. [Judgment Date]: 31 January 2022 Introduction Date

Supreme Court modifies reinstatement order for contractual employee: Divisional Controller, MSRTC vs. Kalawati Pandurang Fulzele (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Modifies Reinstatement Order in Contractual Employment Case: MSRTC vs. Kalawati Fulzele (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 2(oo)(bb), Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 25-F, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 25-G, Judges, M.R. Shah, Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971, Maharashtra Recognition of Trade Unions & Prevention of Unfair Labour Practices Act, 1971 with Section 28

Supreme Court Modifies Reinstatement Order in Contractual Employment Case: MSRTC vs. Kalawati Fulzele (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a contractual employee is entitled to reinstatement and back wages upon termination under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. CASE TYPE: Labour Law Case Name: Divisional Controller Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation vs. Kalawati Pandurang Fulzele [Judgment Date]: 31

Supreme Court Modifies Reinstatement Order in Contractual Employment Case: MSRTC vs. Kalawati Fulzele (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Prior Partition of Joint Family Property: K. Arumuga Velaiah vs. P.R. Ramasamy (27 January 2022)

/ B.R. Gavai, B.V. Nagarathna, Civil Procedure, Civil Procedure with Order 7 Rule 11, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Registration Act, 1908, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 17(1)(e), Registration Act, 1908 with Section 49, Res Judicata

Supreme Court Upholds Prior Partition of Joint Family Property: K. Arumuga Velaiah vs. P.R. Ramasamy (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a suit for partition is maintainable when a prior partition of joint family property has been established. CASE TYPE: Civil Law – Property Partition Case Name: K. Arumuga Velaiah vs. P.R. Ramasamy and Anr. [Judgment Date]:

Supreme Court Upholds Prior Partition of Joint Family Property: K. Arumuga Velaiah vs. P.R. Ramasamy (27 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Prior Partition in Family Property Dispute: K. Arumuga Velaiah vs. P.R. Ramasamy (27 January 2022)

/ B.R. Gavai, B.V. Nagarathna, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 11, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Registration Act, 1908, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 17(1)(e), Registration Act, 1908 with Section 17(2)(v), Registration Act, 1908 with Section 49, Res Judicata

Supreme Court Upholds Prior Partition in Family Property Dispute: K. Arumuga Velaiah vs. P.R. Ramasamy (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a prior family partition, even if based on an unregistered arbitration award, bars a subsequent suit for partition of the same properties. CASE TYPE: Civil Property Dispute Case Name: K. Arumuga Velaiah vs. P.R. Ramasamy and

Supreme Court Upholds Prior Partition in Family Property Dispute: K. Arumuga Velaiah vs. P.R. Ramasamy (27 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court converts dismissal to compulsory retirement in drunk driving case: Brijesh Chandra Dwivedi vs. Sanya Sahayak (2022)

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

Supreme Court Converts Dismissal to Compulsory Retirement in Drunk Driving Case: Brijesh Chandra Dwivedi vs. Sanya Sahayak (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the punishment of dismissal for a driver found driving under the influence of alcohol is disproportionate to the misconduct proved. CASE TYPE: Service Law. Case Name: Brijesh Chandra Dwivedi (Dead) Thr. LRs. vs. Sanya

Supreme Court converts dismissal to compulsory retirement in drunk driving case: Brijesh Chandra Dwivedi vs. Sanya Sahayak (2022) Read Post »

Drunk Driving Misconduct: Supreme Court Converts Dismissal to Compulsory Retirement

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Compulsory Retirement, Disciplinary Proceedings, Drunk Driving, Judges, M.R. Shah, Motor Vehicle Accidents, Proportionality, Punishment, Service Law

Supreme Court Converts Dismissal to Compulsory Retirement in Drunk Driving Case LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the punishment of dismissal for a driver found driving under the influence of alcohol is disproportionate to the misconduct proved. CASE TYPE: Service Law/Disciplinary Proceedings Case Name: Brijesh Chandra Dwivedi (Dead) Thr. LRs. vs. Sanya Sahayak and Ors. Judgment Date: 25

Drunk Driving Misconduct: Supreme Court Converts Dismissal to Compulsory Retirement Read Post »

Scroll to Top