M.M. Sundresh

Supreme Court Clarifies Limited Estate Under Will: Jogi Ram vs. Suresh Kumar (2022)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 97(1), Hindu Succession Act, 1956, Hindu Succession Act, 1956 with Section 14, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Property Rights of a Female Hindu, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 41

Supreme Court Clarifies Limited Estate Under Will: Jogi Ram vs. Suresh Kumar (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a limited estate granted to a Hindu female under a will becomes an absolute estate under Section 14(1) of the Hindu Succession Act, 1956, or remains a limited estate under Section 14(2). CASE TYPE: Civil Law, Property Law, Testamentary […]

Supreme Court Clarifies Limited Estate Under Will: Jogi Ram vs. Suresh Kumar (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Pappu Tiwary vs. State of Jharkhand (2022)

/ Arms Act, 1959, Arms Act, 1959 with Section 27, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Offences Against Human Body, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Pappu Tiwary vs. State of Jharkhand (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the prosecution successfully proved the charges of murder and use of firearms beyond a reasonable doubt, and whether the defense’s alibi and discrepancies in evidence were sufficient to overturn the conviction. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Pappu

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Pappu Tiwary vs. State of Jharkhand (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Pappu Tiwary vs. State of Jharkhand (2022)

/ Arms Act, 1959, Arms Act, 1959 with Section 27, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Offences Against Human Body, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Pappu Tiwary vs. State of Jharkhand (2022) Date of the Judgment: January 31, 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 118 Judges: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. and M.M. Sundresh, J. Can discrepancies in the inquest report and post-mortem report be grounds for overturning a murder conviction? The Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Pappu Tiwary vs. State of Jharkhand (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case, Dismisses Alibi Plea: Pappu Tiwary vs. State of Jharkhand (2022)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 157, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 174, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Offences Against Human Body, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case, Dismisses Alibi Plea: Pappu Tiwary vs. State of Jharkhand (2022) Date of the Judgment: January 31, 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 87 Judges: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J., M.M. Sundresh, J. Can a plea of alibi be accepted without concrete evidence? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case, Dismisses Alibi Plea: Pappu Tiwary vs. State of Jharkhand (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court directs reconsideration of premature release policy for life convicts: Mata Prasad vs. State of U.P. (31 January 2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 161, Constitutional Law with Article 32, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 307, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Offences Against Human Body, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court directs reconsideration of premature release policy for life convicts: Mata Prasad vs. State of U.P. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Premature release of life convicts CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Mata Prasad vs. State of U.P. & Anr. Judgment Date: 31 January 2022 Date of the Judgment: 31st January 2022 Citation: [Not Available in Source]

Supreme Court directs reconsideration of premature release policy for life convicts: Mata Prasad vs. State of U.P. (31 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Section 50 of the NDPS Act regarding personal search: Dayalu Kashyap vs. State of Chhattisgarh (25 January 2022)

/ Criminal Law, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 with Section 50, Narcotics, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Search and Seizure

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 50 of NDPS Act in Dayalu Kashyap vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the recovery of contraband from a bag carried by an individual, rather than a personal search, is subject to the requirements of Section 50 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Section 50 of the NDPS Act regarding personal search: Dayalu Kashyap vs. State of Chhattisgarh (25 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Section 50 of the NDPS Act in relation to personal search: Dayalu Kashyap vs. State of Chhattisgarh (25 January 2022)

/ Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 with Section 50, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Section 50 of NDPS Act in Dayalu Kashyap vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the option given to the accused to be searched by the officer himself, in addition to the options mentioned in Section 50 of the NDPS Act, vitiates the search and recovery. CASE TYPE: Criminal

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of Section 50 of the NDPS Act in relation to personal search: Dayalu Kashyap vs. State of Chhattisgarh (25 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Bank Employee’s Fraud and Misconduct: Indian Overseas Bank vs. Om Prakash Lal Srivastava (2022)

/ Disciplinary Proceedings, Dismissal of Employee, Evidence Act, 1872, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Section 45, Evidence Act, 1872, Section 73, Evidence Act, 1872, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Bank Employee’s Fraud and Misconduct: Indian Overseas Bank vs. Om Prakash Lal Srivastava (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a bank employee’s dismissal for fraud and misconduct was justified. CASE TYPE: Service Law/Disciplinary Proceedings. Case Name: Indian Overseas Bank & Ors. vs. Om Prakash Lal Srivastava. [Judgment Date]: 19 January 2022 Date

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal for Bank Employee’s Fraud and Misconduct: Indian Overseas Bank vs. Om Prakash Lal Srivastava (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Bank’s Dismissal of Employee for Fraud and Forgery: Indian Overseas Bank vs. Om Prakash Lal Srivastava (2022)

/ Banking Law, Constitution of India, Constitution of India with Article 226, Disciplinary Proceedings, Forgery, Fraud, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 45, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 47, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 73, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Upholds Bank’s Dismissal of Employee for Fraud and Forgery: Indian Overseas Bank vs. Om Prakash Lal Srivastava (2022) Date of the Judgment: January 19, 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 49 Judges: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J. and M.M. Sundresh, J. Can a bank employee be dismissed for forging signatures and misappropriating funds, even if a

Supreme Court Upholds Bank’s Dismissal of Employee for Fraud and Forgery: Indian Overseas Bank vs. Om Prakash Lal Srivastava (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of Competition Commission in Lottery Tender Case: Competition Commission of India vs. State of Mizoram & Ors. (2022) INSC 31

/ Anti-Competitive Agreements, Competition Act, 2002, Competition Act, 2002 with Section 3, Competition Act, 2002 with Section 4, Definition of Goods, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 2(7), Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of Competition Commission in Lottery Tender Case LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Competition Commission of India (CCI) has jurisdiction to investigate allegations of bid rigging and cartelization in the tender process for appointment of lottery distributors, specifically when lotteries are considered ‘res extra commercium’. CASE TYPE: Competition Law, Tender Process, Lottery Regulation

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of Competition Commission in Lottery Tender Case: Competition Commission of India vs. State of Mizoram & Ors. (2022) INSC 31 Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of Competition Commission in Lottery Tender Cases: Competition Commission of India vs. State of Mizoram (2022) INSC 64 (19 January 2022)

/ Bid Rigging, Competition Act, 2002, Competition Act, 2002 with Section 2(u), Competition Act, 2002 with Section 3, Judges, Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998, M.M. Sundresh, Sanjay Kishan Kaul

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of Competition Commission in Lottery Tender Cases Date of the Judgment: 19 January 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 64 Judges: Sanjay Kishan Kaul, J., M.M. Sundresh, J. Can the Competition Commission of India (CCI) investigate potential bid rigging in the tender process for state lotteries? This was the core question before the

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction of Competition Commission in Lottery Tender Cases: Competition Commission of India vs. State of Mizoram (2022) INSC 64 (19 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Bank’s Dismissal of Employee for Fraud and Forgery in Indian Overseas Bank vs. Om Prakash Lal Srivastava (2022)

/ Bank Employees, Disciplinary Proceedings, Evidence Act, Evidence Act with Section 73, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Bank’s Dismissal of Employee for Fraud and Forgery in Indian Overseas Bank vs. Om Prakash Lal Srivastava (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a bank employee can be dismissed for misconduct, including fraud and forgery, based on a preponderance of evidence in departmental proceedings, and whether the High Court can interfere with the Industrial

Supreme Court Upholds Bank’s Dismissal of Employee for Fraud and Forgery in Indian Overseas Bank vs. Om Prakash Lal Srivastava (2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top