Bela M. Trivedi

Supreme Court clarifies insurance claim rules for vehicle theft: Delay in intimation not always fatal: Jaina Construction Company vs. Oriental Insurance Company (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Consumer Law, Consumer Rights, Gurshinder Singh vs. Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd., Insurance Claims, Insurance Law, Insurance Law with Condition No. 1 of the Insurance Policy, Judges, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court on Delay in Insurance Claim for Vehicle Theft: Jaina Construction Company vs. Oriental Insurance Company (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an insurance company can reject a claim for vehicle theft solely due to a delay in informing the company, despite a timely police report. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: Jaina Construction Company vs. […]

Supreme Court clarifies insurance claim rules for vehicle theft: Delay in intimation not always fatal: Jaina Construction Company vs. Oriental Insurance Company (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation in Motor Accident Case: O.S. Kannan vs. A. Alima (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Judges, Motor Accident Claims, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Inherent Jurisdiction, S. Ravindra Bhat, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation in Motor Accident Case: O.S. Kannan vs. A. Alima (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Review of Motor Accident Compensation Award. CASE TYPE: Motor Accident Claims. Case Name: O.S. Kannan vs. A. Alima and Anr. [Judgment Date]: February 10, 2022 Date of the Judgment: February 10, 2022. Citation: (Not Available in Source). Judges: Uday

Supreme Court Upholds Compensation in Motor Accident Case: O.S. Kannan vs. A. Alima (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of compromise orders in service matters: R. Muthukumar & Ors. vs. TANGEDCO & Ors. (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Compromise Orders, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Judges, Parity in Service Matters, Public Employment, S. Ravindra Bhat, Service Law, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of compromise orders in service matters: R. Muthukumar & Ors. vs. TANGEDCO & Ors. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a compromise order passed by a court can be the basis for extending similar benefits to non-parties. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: R. Muthukumar & Ors. vs. The Chairman and Managing

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of compromise orders in service matters: R. Muthukumar & Ors. vs. TANGEDCO & Ors. (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Limits on Registrar’s Power in Public Trust Property Sales: Parsi Zoroastrian Anjuman vs. Registrar of Public Trusts (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Judges, Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act, 1951, Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act, 1951 with Section 14, Registrar of Public Trusts, S. Ravindra Bhat, Sale of Trust Property, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies Limits on Registrar’s Power in Public Trust Property Sales: Parsi Zoroastrian Anjuman vs. Registrar of Public Trusts (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of the Registrar’s power to grant or refuse sanction for the sale of public trust property under Section 14 of the Madhya Pradesh Public Trusts Act, 1951. CASE TYPE: Public Trust

Supreme Court Clarifies Limits on Registrar’s Power in Public Trust Property Sales: Parsi Zoroastrian Anjuman vs. Registrar of Public Trusts (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Pension Upgrade Based on ‘Equal Pay’ Principle: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. R.D. Sharma (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 227, Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Indian Forest Service (Pay) Rules, 2007, Indian Forest Service (Pay) Second Amendment Rules, 2008, Judges, Pension Benefits, Service Law

Supreme Court Denies Pension Upgrade Based on ‘Equal Pay’ Principle: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. R.D. Sharma (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Applicability of ‘equal pay for equal work’ principle to pension benefits for retired government employees. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. R.D. Sharma and Anr. [Judgment Date]: 27 January 2022

Supreme Court Denies Pension Upgrade Based on ‘Equal Pay’ Principle: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. R.D. Sharma (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies pension benefits for retired forest officers: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. R.D. Sharma (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 227, Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Judges, Pension Benefits, Service Law, Service Rules

Supreme Court clarifies pension benefits for retired forest officers: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. R.D. Sharma (2022) Date of the Judgment: 27 January 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 1012 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, J., Bela M. Trivedi, J. Can a retired government employee claim pension benefits based on rules introduced after their retirement? The Supreme

Supreme Court clarifies pension benefits for retired forest officers: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. R.D. Sharma (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Pension Upgrade Based on Equal Pay for Retired Forest Officer: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. R.D. Sharma (2022)

/ All India Services Act, 1951, Bela M. Trivedi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 227, Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, Equal Pay for Equal Work, Indian Forest Service (Pay) Rules, 2007, Indian Forest Service (Pay) Second Amendment Rules, 2008, Judges, Pension, Service Law

Supreme Court Denies Pension Upgrade Based on Equal Pay for Retired Forest Officer: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. R.D. Sharma (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a retired government employee is entitled to a pension upgrade based on the principle of “equal pay for equal work” when the upgrade is for a post he did not hold

Supreme Court Denies Pension Upgrade Based on Equal Pay for Retired Forest Officer: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. R.D. Sharma (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Environmental Case: Kantha Vibhag Yuva Koli Samaj Parivartan Trust vs. State of Gujarat (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Environmental Law, Environmental Pollution, Judges, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 with Section 14, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 with Section 15, Solid Waste Management

Supreme Court Restores Environmental Case: Kantha Vibhag Yuva Koli Samaj Parivartan Trust vs. State of Gujarat (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Green Tribunal (NGT) can delegate its adjudicatory functions to an administrative expert committee. CASE TYPE: Environmental Law Case Name: Kantha Vibhag Yuva Koli Samaj Parivartan Trust and Others vs. State of Gujarat and

Supreme Court Restores Environmental Case: Kantha Vibhag Yuva Koli Samaj Parivartan Trust vs. State of Gujarat (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Revisional Powers in Consumer Cases: Sunil Kumar Maity vs. State Bank of India (21 January 2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 21(b), Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 5, National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Revisional Jurisdiction, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Clarifies Revisional Powers in Consumer Cases: Sunil Kumar Maity vs. State Bank of India (2022) Date of the Judgment: 21 January 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 38 Judges: Justice Sanjiv Khanna, Justice Bela M. Trivedi Can a National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) call for a report from a party during the revision stage?

Supreme Court Clarifies Revisional Powers in Consumer Cases: Sunil Kumar Maity vs. State Bank of India (21 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Consumer Forum Order in Bank Error Case: Sunil Kumar Maity vs. State Bank of India (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Code of Civil Procedure, Code of Civil Procedure with Order 41, Rule 27, Consumer Disputes Redressal, Consumer Protection Act, Consumer Protection Act with Section 21(b), Judges, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Restores Consumer Forum Order in Bank Error Case: Sunil Kumar Maity vs. State Bank of India (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) can overturn orders of lower consumer forums based on a report obtained suo moto during the revision process. CASE TYPE: Consumer Protection Case Name: Sunil Kumar

Supreme Court Restores Consumer Forum Order in Bank Error Case: Sunil Kumar Maity vs. State Bank of India (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Consumer Forum Order in Bank Error Case: Sunil Kumar Maity vs. State Bank of India (2022) INSC 43

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 21(b), Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 5, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Restores Consumer Forum Order in Bank Error Case Date of the Judgment: 21 January 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 43 Judges: Sanjiv Khanna, J., Bela M. Trivedi, J. Can a bank be held liable for crediting funds to the wrong account due to its own error? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this

Supreme Court Restores Consumer Forum Order in Bank Error Case: Sunil Kumar Maity vs. State Bank of India (2022) INSC 43 Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the date for possession in housing projects: IREO Private Limited vs. Aloke Anand (2022)

/ Apartment Buyers Agreement, Bela M. Trivedi, Breach of contract, Consumer, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 2(1)(d), Contract Law, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges

Supreme Court clarifies the date for possession in housing projects: IREO Private Limited vs. Aloke Anand (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the commencement date for calculating the period for handing over possession of an apartment in a housing project. CASE TYPE: Consumer Case Name: M/s IREO Private Limited vs. Aloke Anand and Others Judgment Date: 21

Supreme Court clarifies the date for possession in housing projects: IREO Private Limited vs. Aloke Anand (2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top