Dinesh Maheshwari

Domicile-Based Reservation for PG Medical Courses: Supreme Court Refers Issue to Larger Bench (9 December 2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 15, Dinesh Maheshwari, Fundamental Rights, Indian Medical Council Act, 1956, Indian Medical Council Act, 1956 with Section 10D, Judges, Post-Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000

Supreme Court Refers Domicile-Based Reservation in PG Medical Courses to Larger Bench LEGAL ISSUE: Whether domicile/residence-based reservation in Post Graduate medical admissions is constitutionally valid. CASE TYPE: Education Law/Medical Admissions Case Name: Dr. Tanvi Behl vs. Shrey Goel & Ors. Judgment Date: 9 December 2019 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 9 December 2019 Citation: (2019) […]

Domicile-Based Reservation for PG Medical Courses: Supreme Court Refers Issue to Larger Bench (9 December 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Defines “Document” to Include Electronic Records: Implications for Fair Trial in Rape Cases (29 November 2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 207, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Dinesh Maheshwari, Fundamental Rights, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 3, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 65B, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 29, Judges, Offences Against Women

Supreme Court Clarifies “Document” Definition to Include Electronic Records in Rape Cases LEGAL ISSUE: Whether electronic records like memory cards/pen drives qualify as “documents” under the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 and the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and whether an accused is entitled to a copy of such records. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law (Rape and related

Supreme Court Defines “Document” to Include Electronic Records: Implications for Fair Trial in Rape Cases (29 November 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Property Rights of Grandson over Granddaughter in Ancestral Property Dispute: Radha Bai vs. Ram Narayan (22 November 2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Coparcenary Property, Dinesh Maheshwari, Hindu Law, Hindu Law with Section 6, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Judges, Partition of Property, Property Law, Property Rights, Transfer of Property

Supreme Court Upholds Property Rights of Grandson over Granddaughter in Ancestral Property Dispute: Radha Bai vs. Ram Narayan (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: The case addresses the devolution of ancestral property under Hindu law, specifically concerning the rights of a granddaughter whose father predeceased his grandfather, in light of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956. CASE TYPE: Civil

Supreme Court Upholds Property Rights of Grandson over Granddaughter in Ancestral Property Dispute: Radha Bai vs. Ram Narayan (22 November 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Tax Rebate for Fly Ash Industries: State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Birla Corporation Limited (2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 301, Dinesh Maheshwari, General Clauses Act, 1897, General Clauses Act, 1897 with Section 21, Judges, Tax Rebates, Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948, Uttar Pradesh Trade Tax Act, 1948 with Section 5

Supreme Court Upholds Tax Rebate for Fly Ash Industries: State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Birla Corporation Limited (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the State can rescind a tax rebate notification for industries that had already commenced production based on the promise of the rebate. CASE TYPE: Tax Law Case Name: State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr.

Supreme Court Upholds Tax Rebate for Fly Ash Industries: State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Birla Corporation Limited (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the effect of Amendment of Agreement on Arbitration Clause in construction contracts: WAPCOS Ltd. vs. Salma Dam Joint Venture (2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Accord and Satisfaction, Amendment of Agreement, Arbitration Agreement, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11(6), Arbitration Law, Contract Law, Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges

Supreme Court clarifies the effect of Amendment of Agreement on Arbitration Clause in construction contracts: WAPCOS Ltd. vs. Salma Dam Joint Venture (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an Amendment of Agreement (AoA) supersedes the original arbitration clause in a contract. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: WAPCOS Ltd. vs. Salma Dam Joint Venture & Anr. Judgment

Supreme Court clarifies the effect of Amendment of Agreement on Arbitration Clause in construction contracts: WAPCOS Ltd. vs. Salma Dam Joint Venture (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court extends CIRP timeline for Jaypee Infratech: Jaiprakash Associates Ltd vs. IDBI Bank Ltd (2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Dinesh Maheshwari, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 12, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 7, Insolvency Resolution Process, Judges

Supreme Court extends CIRP timeline for Jaypee Infratech: Jaiprakash Associates Ltd vs. IDBI Bank Ltd (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) has the authority to exclude certain periods from the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) timeline and restart the CIRP with revised resolution plans. CASE TYPE: Corporate Insolvency Case Name:

Supreme Court extends CIRP timeline for Jaypee Infratech: Jaiprakash Associates Ltd vs. IDBI Bank Ltd (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Rohtas & Anr. vs. State of Haryana (2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Rohtas & Anr. vs. State of Haryana (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the concurrent findings of guilt by lower courts were justified in a murder case, despite some inconsistencies in evidence and acquittal of co-accused. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Rohtas & Anr. vs. The State of Haryana [Judgment

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Rohtas & Anr. vs. State of Haryana (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the authority of Chief Judicial Magistrate under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act in secured asset possession cases (23 September 2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Banking Law, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges, SARFAESI Act, 2002, SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 37, Section 14, SARFAESI Act, 2002, Secured Creditor

Supreme Court Clarifies Powers Under Section 14 of SARFAESI Act: CJM Competent in Non-Metropolitan Areas LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) is competent to process requests from secured creditors to take possession of secured assets under Section 14 of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

Supreme Court settles the authority of Chief Judicial Magistrate under Section 14 of the SARFAESI Act in secured asset possession cases (23 September 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns conviction in murder case: Smt. Gargi vs. State of Haryana (2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Dinesh Maheshwari, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 106, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 32(1), Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court overturns conviction in murder case: Smt. Gargi vs. State of Haryana (2019) Date of the Judgment: 19th September 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 917 Judges: A.M. Khanwilkar, J., Dinesh Maheshwari, J. Can a conviction for murder be upheld solely on circumstantial evidence, even when significant doubts exist about the prosecution’s case? The Supreme Court

Supreme Court overturns conviction in murder case: Smt. Gargi vs. State of Haryana (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Refuses to Direct Parliament to Enact Standalone Law on Custodial Torture: Ashwani Kumar vs. Union of India (2019)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Dinesh Maheshwari, Fundamental Rights, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 330, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Ranjan Gogoi, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Refuses to Direct Parliament to Enact Standalone Law on Custodial Torture: Ashwani Kumar vs. Union of India (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Supreme Court can direct Parliament to enact a specific law. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law, Public Interest Litigation Case Name: Dr. Ashwani Kumar vs. Union of India and Another Judgment Date: 05

Supreme Court Refuses to Direct Parliament to Enact Standalone Law on Custodial Torture: Ashwani Kumar vs. Union of India (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Deadly Court Attack Case: Manjit Singh vs. State of Punjab (2019)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 313, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 319, Dinesh Maheshwari, 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 Upholds Conviction in Deadly Court Attack Case: Manjit Singh vs. State of Punjab (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the accused were part of an unlawful assembly and liable for the death of a person during a court attack. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Manjit Singh vs. The State of Punjab [Judgment Date]: 3rd September

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Deadly Court Attack Case: Manjit Singh vs. State of Punjab (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Pre-emptive Purchase of Land Under Income Tax Act: Krishna Kumar Rawat vs. Union of India (29 July 2019)

/ Abhay Manohar Sapre, Dinesh Maheshwari, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 269UC, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 269UD, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 269UG, Judges

Supreme Court Upholds Pre-emptive Purchase of Land Under Income Tax Act: Krishna Kumar Rawat vs. Union of India (2019) Date of the Judgment: 29 July 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 760 Judges: Abhay Manohar Sapre, J., Dinesh Maheshwari, J. Can the government compulsorily purchase a property if it believes the sale price is significantly undervalued? The

Supreme Court Upholds Pre-emptive Purchase of Land Under Income Tax Act: Krishna Kumar Rawat vs. Union of India (29 July 2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top