Dinesh Maheshwari

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Resolution Plan Due to Ineligibility and Procedural Lapses: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. Periasamy Palani Gounder (2023)

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 164, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 166, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dinesh Maheshwari, Indian Trusts Act, 1882, Indian Trusts Act, 1882 with Section 88, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 29A, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 30, Judges, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Resolution Plan Due to Ineligibility and Procedural Lapses: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. Periasamy Palani Gounder (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a resolution plan can be approved despite the resolution applicant’s ineligibility and procedural irregularities in the Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP). CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. […]

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Resolution Plan Due to Ineligibility and Procedural Lapses: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. Periasamy Palani Gounder (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Classification of Homeopathic Hair Oil as Medicament: Commissioner of Customs vs. Ashwani Homeo Pharmacy (2023)

/ Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11-A, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 11-AA, Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 with Chapter 30, Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 with Chapter 33, Dinesh Maheshwari, Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 with Schedule K, Judges, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds Classification of Homeopathic Hair Oil as Medicament: Commissioner of Customs vs. Ashwani Homeo Pharmacy (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a homeopathic hair oil should be classified as a medicament or a cosmetic for tax purposes. CASE TYPE: Central Excise Law Case Name: Commissioner of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Hyderabad vs. Ashwani

Supreme Court Upholds Classification of Homeopathic Hair Oil as Medicament: Commissioner of Customs vs. Ashwani Homeo Pharmacy (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds ‘Aswini Homeo Arnica Hair Oil’ as Medicament Under Chapter 30: Commissioner of Customs vs. Ashwani Homeo Pharmacy (2023) INSC 4832 (03 May 2023)

/ Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985, Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 with Chapter 30, Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985 with Chapter 33, Dinesh Maheshwari, Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940, Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 with Drugs and Cosmetics Rules, 1945, Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940 with Schedule K, Judges, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds ‘Aswini Homeo Arnica Hair Oil’ as Medicament Under Chapter 30 Date of the Judgment: 03 May 2023 Citation: (2023) INSC 4832 Judges: Dinesh Maheshwari, J., Vikram Nath, J. Can a product containing homeopathic medicines, applied topically, be classified as a cosmetic or a medicament? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this

Supreme Court Upholds ‘Aswini Homeo Arnica Hair Oil’ as Medicament Under Chapter 30: Commissioner of Customs vs. Ashwani Homeo Pharmacy (2023) INSC 4832 (03 May 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Valuation and Eligibility in Corporate Insolvency: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. Periasamy Palani Gounder (2023)

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 164, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 166, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dinesh Maheshwari, Indian Trusts Act, 1882, Indian Trusts Act, 1882 with Section 88, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 29A, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 30, Judges, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Clarifies Valuation and Eligibility in Corporate Insolvency: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. Periasamy Palani Gounder (2023) Date of the Judgment: 03 May 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 486 Judges: Justice Dinesh Maheshwari, Justice Vikram Nath. Can a resolution applicant be disqualified for a conflict of interest arising from their role in a charitable trust? The

Supreme Court Clarifies Valuation and Eligibility in Corporate Insolvency: M.K. Rajagopalan vs. Dr. Periasamy Palani Gounder (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Arbitration in Complex Multi-Party Dispute: Gujarat Composite Ltd. vs. A Infrastructure Ltd. (2023)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 8, Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges, Sudhanshu Dhulia

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Arbitration in Complex Multi-Party Dispute: Gujarat Composite Ltd. vs. A Infrastructure Ltd. (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a dispute involving multiple parties and agreements, some of which lack arbitration clauses, can be referred to arbitration based on a clause in one of the agreements. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Gujarat

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Arbitration in Complex Multi-Party Dispute: Gujarat Composite Ltd. vs. A Infrastructure Ltd. (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Non-Arbitrability of Disputes Involving Multiple Agreements: Gujarat Composite Ltd. vs. A Infrastructure Ltd. (2023)

/ Arbitrability of Disputes, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 8, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Dinesh Maheshwari, Interpretation of Contracts, Judges, Sudhanshu Dhulia

Supreme Court Upholds Non-Arbitrability of Disputes Involving Multiple Agreements: Gujarat Composite Ltd. vs. A Infrastructure Ltd. (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether disputes arising from a primary agreement containing an arbitration clause can be referred to arbitration when subsequent agreements, lacking such a clause and involving additional parties, are inextricably linked to the dispute. CASE TYPE: Arbitration

Supreme Court Upholds Non-Arbitrability of Disputes Involving Multiple Agreements: Gujarat Composite Ltd. vs. A Infrastructure Ltd. (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court on Delay in Enforcing Rights under the Karnataka SC/ST Act: Shakuntala vs. State of Karnataka (28 April 2023)

/ Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges, Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978, Land Law, Land Law with Section 4, Land Law with Section 5, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court on Delay in Enforcing Rights under the Karnataka SC/ST Act: Shakuntala vs. State of Karnataka (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether significant delay in initiating proceedings impacts the enforcement of statutory rights under the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978. CASE TYPE: Land Law, Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe

Supreme Court on Delay in Enforcing Rights under the Karnataka SC/ST Act: Shakuntala vs. State of Karnataka (28 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Rules Delay Fatal in Land Restitution Cases: Shakuntala vs. State of Karnataka (28 April 2023)

/ Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges, Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978, Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 with Section 4, Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 with Section 5, Land Restitution, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Rules Delay Fatal in Land Restitution Cases: Shakuntala vs. State of Karnataka (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether delay impacts the enforcement of statutory rights, specifically in the context of land restitution under the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978. CASE TYPE: Land Law, Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe

Supreme Court Rules Delay Fatal in Land Restitution Cases: Shakuntala vs. State of Karnataka (28 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Limits State Residency Quota in B.Ed Admissions: Veena Vadini Teachers Training Institute vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (28 April 2023)

/ Admission Policy, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Dinesh Maheshwari, Education Law, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Reservation Policy, Sudhanshu Dhulia

Supreme Court Limits State Residency Quota in B.Ed Admissions: Veena Vadini Teachers Training Institute vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a state government can reserve seats for residents in B.Ed courses and, if so, what is the permissible extent of such reservation. CASE TYPE: Education Law. Case Name: Veena Vadini Teachers Training

Supreme Court Limits State Residency Quota in B.Ed Admissions: Veena Vadini Teachers Training Institute vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (28 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Eviction Based on Bona Fide Need: Kusum Lata Sharma vs. Arvind Singh (25 April 2023)

/ Bona Fide Requirement, Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 with Section 14(1)(e), Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 with Section 25-B(8), Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Upholds Eviction Based on Bona Fide Need: Kusum Lata Sharma vs. Arvind Singh (2023) Date of the Judgment: 25 April 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 377 Judges: Justice Dinesh Maheshwari and Justice Sanjay Kumar Can a landlord evict a tenant based on the need of her extended family, even if the property description has

Supreme Court Upholds Eviction Based on Bona Fide Need: Kusum Lata Sharma vs. Arvind Singh (25 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Eviction Order Based on Landlord’s Bona Fide Need: Kusum Lata Sharma vs. Arvind Singh (25 April 2023)

/ Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958, Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 with Section 14(1)(e), Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 with Section 25-B(8), Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Upholds Eviction Order Based on Landlord’s Bona Fide Need LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a landlord’s claim for eviction based on bona fide requirement can be rejected due to a perceived misdescription of the property, especially when the landlord resides in a joint family. CASE TYPE: Eviction under Delhi Rent Control Act, 1958 Case Name:

Supreme Court Upholds Eviction Order Based on Landlord’s Bona Fide Need: Kusum Lata Sharma vs. Arvind Singh (25 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Double Murder and Robbery Case: Dakkata Balaram Reddy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 136, Dinesh Maheshwari, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 106, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 114, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 27, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 397, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Double Murder and Robbery Case: Dakkata Balaram Reddy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the circumstantial evidence presented by the prosecution was sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused in a case of double murder and robbery. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Dakkata Balaram Reddy

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Double Murder and Robbery Case: Dakkata Balaram Reddy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh (2023) Read Post »

Scroll to Top