M. R. Shah

MSME Act Jurisdiction Clarified: Supreme Court Rules on Foreign Buyers in Vaishno Enterprises vs. Hamilton Medical AG (24 March 2022)

/ Arbitration Clause, B. V. Nagarathna, Contract Law, Judges, Jurisdiction, M. R. Shah, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 with Section 18, Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 with Section 2(n)

Supreme Court clarifies MSME Act applicability to foreign buyers: Vaishno Enterprises vs. Hamilton Medical AG (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Applicability of the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (MSME Act) to disputes where the buyer is a foreign entity. CASE TYPE: Commercial Dispute Resolution. Case Name: M/s. Vaishno Enterprises vs. Hamilton Medical AG & […]

MSME Act Jurisdiction Clarified: Supreme Court Rules on Foreign Buyers in Vaishno Enterprises vs. Hamilton Medical AG (24 March 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Civil Court Jurisdiction in Land Dispute: Premlata vs. Naseeb Bee (2022)

/ B. V. Nagarathna, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order 7 Rule 11, Judges, M. R. Shah, Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959, Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 with Section 250, Madhya Pradesh Land Revenue Code, 1959 with Section 257

Supreme Court Upholds Civil Court Jurisdiction in Land Dispute: Premlata vs. Naseeb Bee (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a civil court has jurisdiction to hear a suit regarding land when a revenue authority has already rejected a similar claim for lack of jurisdiction. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: Premlata @ Sunita vs. Naseeb Bee & Ors.

Supreme Court Upholds Civil Court Jurisdiction in Land Dispute: Premlata vs. Naseeb Bee (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns High Court order on work contract: Municipal Council Gondia vs. Divi Works & Suppliers (28 February 2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Breach of contract, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Contract Law, Judges, M. R. Shah, Specific Performance, Work Order, Writ Jurisdiction

Supreme Court overturns High Court order on work contract: Municipal Council Gondia vs. Divi Works & Suppliers (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can issue a writ of mandamus for specific performance of a contract in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. CASE TYPE: Contract Law, Writ Jurisdiction Case

Supreme Court overturns High Court order on work contract: Municipal Council Gondia vs. Divi Works & Suppliers (28 February 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Promotion Despite Simultaneous Degrees: A. Dharmaraj vs. Chief Educational Officer (2022)

/ B. V. Nagarathna, Distance Education, Education Law, Eligibility Criteria, Judges, M. R. Shah, Promotion, Service Law, Service Law with Rule 14, Teacher Promotion

Supreme Court Allows Promotion Despite Simultaneous Degrees: A. Dharmaraj vs. Chief Educational Officer (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether obtaining two degrees simultaneously disqualifies a teacher from promotion. CASE TYPE: Service Law. Case Name: A. Dharmaraj vs. The Chief Educational Officer, Pudukkottai & Ors. [Judgment Date]: February 18, 2022 Date of the Judgment: February 18, 2022. Citation:

Supreme Court Allows Promotion Despite Simultaneous Degrees: A. Dharmaraj vs. Chief Educational Officer (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles eligibility for teacher promotions: Simultaneous degrees not a bar in A. Dharmaraj vs. The Chief Educational Officer (2022) INSC 202 (18 February 2022)

/ B. V. Nagarathna, Education Law, Eligibility Criteria, Judges, M. R. Shah, Rule 14, Tamil Nadu Education Rules, Service Law, Tamil Nadu Education Rules, Teacher Promotion Rules

Supreme Court Upholds Teacher’s Promotion: Simultaneous Degrees Not a Bar Date of the Judgment: 18 February 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 202 Judges: M. R. Shah, J. and B. V. Nagarathna, J. Can a teacher be denied promotion for pursuing two degrees concurrently? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a recent case, clarifying

Supreme Court settles eligibility for teacher promotions: Simultaneous degrees not a bar in A. Dharmaraj vs. The Chief Educational Officer (2022) INSC 202 (18 February 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court allows promotion of teacher with dual degrees: A. Dharmaraj vs. The Chief Educational Officer (2022)

/ B. V. Nagarathna, Judges, M. R. Shah, Service Law, Service Law with Rule 14, Teacher Promotion Rules

Supreme Court allows promotion of teacher with dual degrees: A. Dharmaraj vs. The Chief Educational Officer (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a teacher who obtained two degrees, B.A. (English) and M.A. (Tamil), through distance education in overlapping academic years is ineligible for promotion. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: A. Dharmaraj vs. The Chief Educational Officer,

Supreme Court allows promotion of teacher with dual degrees: A. Dharmaraj vs. The Chief Educational Officer (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court quashes High Court order in auction dispute: SRS Advertising vs. Kamal Garg (2022)

/ B. V. Nagarathna, Debt Recovery, Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Judges, Jurisdiction, M. R. Shah, Writ Jurisdiction

Supreme Court quashes High Court order in auction dispute: SRS Advertising vs. Kamal Garg (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction by granting final relief in a matter where an interim relief was sought, while the main appeal was pending before the Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal (DRAT). CASE TYPE: Debt Recovery/Auction Dispute

Supreme Court quashes High Court order in auction dispute: SRS Advertising vs. Kamal Garg (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Labour Court’s Jurisdiction Under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act in Wage Dispute: M/s Bombay Chemical Industries vs. Deputy Labour Commissioner & Anr. (04 February 2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 10, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 33(C)(2), Judges, Labour Court Jurisdiction, M. R. Shah

Supreme Court Clarifies Labour Court’s Jurisdiction Under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act Date of the Judgment: 04 February 2022 Citation: M/s Bombay Chemical Industries vs. Deputy Labour Commissioner & Anr. (2022) INSC 117 Judges: M. R. Shah, J., B.V. Nagarathna, J. Can a Labour Court decide on a wage dispute under Section 33(C)(2)

Supreme Court Clarifies Labour Court’s Jurisdiction Under Section 33(C)(2) of the Industrial Disputes Act in Wage Dispute: M/s Bombay Chemical Industries vs. Deputy Labour Commissioner & Anr. (04 February 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction Based on Magistrate’s Dying Declaration in Murder Case

/ B. V. Nagarathna, Criminal Law, Dying Declaration, Evidentiary Value, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, M. R. Shah, Murder

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction Based on Magistrate’s Dying Declaration in Murder Case LEGAL ISSUE: Admissibility and evidentiary value of multiple dying declarations, particularly when one is recorded by a Magistrate. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law – Murder Case Name: State of U.P. vs. Veerpal & Anr. [Judgment Date]: 01 February 2022 Date of the Judgment: 01

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction Based on Magistrate’s Dying Declaration in Murder Case Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme: Directorate of Enforcement vs. K. Sudheesh Kumar (28 January 2022)

/ Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 with Section 1, Part A of the First Schedule, Financial Upgradation, Judges, M. R. Shah, Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme, Pension, Sanjiv Khanna, Service Law

Supreme Court clarifies Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme: Directorate of Enforcement vs. K. Sudheesh Kumar (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme regarding grade pay upon financial upgradation. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: The Director, Directorate of Enforcement & Anr. vs. K. Sudheesh Kumar & Ors. Judgment Date: 28

Supreme Court clarifies Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme: Directorate of Enforcement vs. K. Sudheesh Kumar (28 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies MACP Scheme: Grade Pay for Central Government Employees (28 January 2022)

/ Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008 with Section 1, Part A of the First Schedule, Judges, M. R. Shah, Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme, Sanjiv Khanna, Service Law

Supreme Court clarifies MACP Scheme: Grade Pay for Central Government Employees LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme regarding grade pay for central government employees. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: The Director, Directorate of Enforcement & Anr. vs. K. Sudheesh Kumar & Ors. Judgment Date: 28 January 2022 Date of

Supreme Court clarifies MACP Scheme: Grade Pay for Central Government Employees (28 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Murder Case: Manno Lal Jaiswal vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (25 January 2022)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 439, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 149, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, M. R. Shah, Offences Against Human Body, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Murder Case: Manno Lal Jaiswal vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court erred in granting bail to the accused in a murder case by misapplying facts and not considering the gravity of the offense. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Manno Lal Jaiswal vs. The State

Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Murder Case: Manno Lal Jaiswal vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (25 January 2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top