Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud

Supreme Court settles the definition of ‘Financial Establishment’ under MPID Act: State of Maharashtra vs. 63 Moons Technologies Ltd. (2022) INSC 465 (22 April 2022)

/ Bela M Trivedi, Companies Act, 1956, Companies Act, 1956 with Section 396, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Financial Establishment, Judges, Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1999, Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1999 with Section 2(c), Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors Act, 1999 with Section 2(d), Surya Kant

Supreme Court Upholds MPID Act: NSEL Deemed Financial Establishment LEGAL ISSUE: Whether National Spot Exchange Ltd (NSEL) is a ‘financial establishment’ under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 (MPID Act). CASE TYPE: Civil Law, Financial Law Case Name: The State of Maharashtra vs. 63 Moons Technologies Ltd. Judgment Date: […]

Supreme Court settles the definition of ‘Financial Establishment’ under MPID Act: State of Maharashtra vs. 63 Moons Technologies Ltd. (2022) INSC 465 (22 April 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies remission process for life convicts: Ram Chander vs. State of Chhattisgarh (22 April 2022)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 432, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 433A, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 149, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court clarifies remission process for life convicts: Ram Chander vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the opinion of the presiding judge is binding on the government when considering the premature release of a life convict. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Ram Chander vs. The State of Chhattisgarh & Anr. Judgment Date: 22

Supreme Court clarifies remission process for life convicts: Ram Chander vs. State of Chhattisgarh (22 April 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the applicability of Section 18 of the Limitation Act to IBC proceedings: State Bank of India vs. Krishidhan Seeds Private Limited (2022) INSC 189

/ Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 7, Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Article 137, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 18, Surya Kant

Supreme Court clarifies the applicability of Section 18 of the Limitation Act to IBC proceedings: State Bank of India vs. Krishidhan Seeds Private Limited (2022) INSC 189 Date of the Judgment: April 18, 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 189 Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J. and Surya Kant, J. Can a one-time settlement (OTS) offer or

Supreme Court clarifies the applicability of Section 18 of the Limitation Act to IBC proceedings: State Bank of India vs. Krishidhan Seeds Private Limited (2022) INSC 189 Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds NEET-PG Internship Deadline: Shikhar vs. National Board of Examination (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 32, Cut-off Date, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Education Law, Internship, Judges, NEET-PG, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Upholds NEET-PG Internship Deadline: Shikhar vs. National Board of Examination (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the cut-off date for completion of internship for NEET-PG 2022 can be extended further beyond 31st July 2022. CASE TYPE: Education Law, Writ Petition Case Name: Shikhar & Anr. vs. National Board of Examination & Ors. Judgment Date: 05

Supreme Court Upholds NEET-PG Internship Deadline: Shikhar vs. National Board of Examination (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes Detention Order for White Collar Offender: Mallada K Sri Ram vs. State of Telangana (2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Chapter XVIII, Judges, Surya Kant, Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986, Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986 with Section 13, Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986 with Section 2, Telangana Prevention of Dangerous Activities Act, 1986 with Section 3

Supreme Court Quashes Detention Order for White Collar Offender: Mallada K Sri Ram vs. State of Telangana (2022) Date of the Judgment: April 4, 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 359 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and Surya Kant, J Can a person be detained under preventive detention laws months after the alleged crime, especially when

Supreme Court Quashes Detention Order for White Collar Offender: Mallada K Sri Ram vs. State of Telangana (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Challenge to Gandhi Ashram Redevelopment Plan: Tushar Arun Gandhi vs. State of Gujarat (2022) INSC 167 (01 April 2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, PIL Procedure, Public Interest Litigation, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Restores Challenge to Gandhi Ashram Redevelopment Plan LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Gujarat High Court was correct in dismissing a Public Interest Litigation (PIL) challenging the redevelopment of the Gandhi Ashram based on the State’s undertaking, without a full hearing. CASE TYPE: Public Interest Litigation, Constitutional Law Case Name: Tushar Arun Gandhi vs. State

Supreme Court Restores Challenge to Gandhi Ashram Redevelopment Plan: Tushar Arun Gandhi vs. State of Gujarat (2022) INSC 167 (01 April 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Compulsory Retirement in Bribery Case Despite Acquittal: State of Karnataka vs. Umesh (2022)

/ Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Disciplinary Proceedings, Judges, Judicial Review, Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957, Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984, Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 with Section 12(3), Karnataka Lokayukta Act, 1984 with Section 7(2), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 7, Service Law, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Upholds Compulsory Retirement in Bribery Case Despite Acquittal: State of Karnataka vs. Umesh (2022) Date of the Judgment: March 22, 2022 Citation: Civil Appeal Nos. 1763-1764 of 2022 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and Surya Kant, J. Can a government employee be penalized for misconduct in a disciplinary proceeding even after being

Supreme Court Upholds Compulsory Retirement in Bribery Case Despite Acquittal: State of Karnataka vs. Umesh (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Transfer of Writ Petition in Promotion Dispute: Pankaj Prakash vs. United India Insurance Company (22 March 2022)

/ Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (APAR), Bela M Trivedi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, Promotion, Service Law, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Orders Transfer of Writ Petition in Promotion Dispute: Pankaj Prakash vs. United India Insurance Company (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a writ petition regarding non-promotion should be transferred to another High Court to be heard with a related pending petition. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Pankaj Prakash vs. United India Insurance Company Limited

Supreme Court Orders Transfer of Writ Petition in Promotion Dispute: Pankaj Prakash vs. United India Insurance Company (22 March 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds One Rank One Pension Policy with Periodic Revision: Indian Ex Servicemen Movement vs. Union of India (2022) INSC 244

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP), Pension, Service Law, Surya Kant, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds One Rank One Pension Policy with Periodic Revision: Indian Ex Servicemen Movement vs. Union of India (2022) INSC 244 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the implementation of the One Rank One Pension (OROP) policy for ex-servicemen, with revisions at periodic intervals, is constitutionally valid and non-discriminatory. CASE TYPE: Service Law, Pension Case Name: Indian

Supreme Court Upholds One Rank One Pension Policy with Periodic Revision: Indian Ex Servicemen Movement vs. Union of India (2022) INSC 244 Read Post »

Supreme Court permits age relaxation for Delhi Judicial Services Exam: High Court of Delhi vs. Devina Sharma (2022)

/ A S Bopanna, Age Relaxation, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 233, Constitutional Law with Article 235, Delhi Judicial Service Rules 1970, Delhi Judicial Service Rules 1970 with Rule 14(c), Delhi Judicial Service Rules 1970 with Rule 9(3), Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Hima Kohli, Judges, Judicial Service Exams, Service Law

Supreme Court permits age relaxation for Delhi Judicial Services Exam: High Court of Delhi vs. Devina Sharma (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court can fix age criteria for judicial service exams, and whether candidates should get age relaxation due to delayed exams. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: High Court of Delhi vs. Devina

Supreme Court permits age relaxation for Delhi Judicial Services Exam: High Court of Delhi vs. Devina Sharma (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Meaning of “Execution” in Registration Act: Veena Singh vs. District Registrar (2022)

/ A S Bopanna, Bela M Trivedi, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, Registration Act, 1908, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 35, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 72, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 74

Supreme Court Clarifies Meaning of “Execution” in Registration Act: Veena Singh vs. District Registrar (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: What constitutes “execution” of a document under the Registration Act, 1908? CASE TYPE: Property Law/Registration Law Case Name: Veena Singh (Dead) Through LR vs. The District Registrar/Additional Collector (F/R) And Another [Judgment Date]: May 10, 2022 Introduction Date

Supreme Court Clarifies Meaning of “Execution” in Registration Act: Veena Singh vs. District Registrar (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Inter-Commissionerate Transfers: SK Nausad Rahaman vs. Union of India (2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 309, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Recruitment Rules, Service Conditions, Service Law, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Inter-Commissionerate Transfers: SK Nausad Rahaman vs. Union of India (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Inter-Commissionerate Transfers (ICTs) are permissible under the Central Excise and Customs Commissionerates Inspector (Central Excise, Preventive Officer and Examiner) Group ‘B’ Posts Recruitment Rules 2016, and whether the ban on ICTs violates fundamental rights. CASE TYPE: Service

Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Inter-Commissionerate Transfers: SK Nausad Rahaman vs. Union of India (2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top