Introduction Date of the Judgment: May 16, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 725 Judges: Justices J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan Can a confession by a co-accused be used against another accused during an anticipatory bail hearing? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in a recent case involving alleged corruption in the Andhra Pradesh […]
Date of the Judgment: May 15, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 697 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., R. Mahadevan, J. When disputes arise between power transmission companies, who decides on compensation for delays? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this critical question in a case between Power Grid Corporation of India Limited and Madhya Pradesh Power
Introduction Date of the Judgment: 15 May 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 696 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., R. Mahadevan, J. (Majority opinion by J.B. Pardiwala, J.) Is pre-institution mediation mandatory for commercial suits? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in M/S Dhanbad Fuels Private Limited vs. Union of India & Anr., clarifying the
LEGAL ISSUE: Arbitrability of disputes involving trademark rights arising from contractual agreements. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law, Trademark Law. Case Name: K. Mangayarkarasi & Anr. vs. N.J. Sundaresan & Anr. [Judgment Date]: May 9, 2025 Introduction Date of the Judgment: May 9, 2025 The Supreme Court of India recently addressed the question of whether a dispute
Date of the Judgment: May 7, 2025 Citation: (2025) INSC 639 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., R. Mahadevan, J. Can the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) condone delays exceeding the statutorily prescribed limit for filing appeals under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC)? The Supreme Court addressed this critical question in the case of Tata
Date of the Judgment: May 5, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 628 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., R. Mahadevan, J. Can a party recall a witness to fill lacunae in its case under Order 18 Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code? The Supreme Court recently addressed the scope and limitations of Order 18 Rule 17 of
Date of the Judgment: May 02, 2025 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., R. Mahadevan, J. Can a seller forfeit advance money if a buyer fails to complete a property purchase? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in K.R. Suresh vs. R. Poornima, a case concerning the specific performance of a contract. The core issue
Introduction Can unauthorized constructions be regularized by paying a fee, even after violating building regulations? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this critical question in Kaniz Ahmed vs. Sabuddin & Ors., reinforcing the principle that illegal constructions must be dealt with firmly. The Court dismissed a petition seeking to regularize unauthorized construction, emphasizing the
Date of the Judgment: 21 April 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 515 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J. and Manoj Misra, J. When can a magistrate order a police investigation into corruption allegations against a public servant? The Supreme Court of India recently grappled with this question, specifically addressing the interplay between Section 17A of the Prevention of
Introduction Date of the Judgment: April 16, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 490 Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Hon’ble Mr. Justice R. Mahadevan Can a suit for injunction be maintained based solely on an agreement to sell, especially against a third party in possession of the property? The Supreme Court of India addressed this
Date of the Judgment: April 01, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 445 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., R. Mahadevan, J. Can a personal guarantor facing cheque dishonor charges under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (NI Act) avoid prosecution by claiming protection under the interim moratorium granted by Section 96 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy
Introduction Date of the Judgment: April 01, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 418 Judges: J.B. Pardiwala, J., R. Mahadevan, J. When is a commercial transaction not really commercial? The Supreme Court of India recently grappled with this question in a dispute over the valuation of shares that had dragged on for five decades. The court was
