Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Supreme Court clarifies the rights of tenants under the SARFAESI Act in mortgage disputes: Bajarang Agarwal vs. Central Bank of India (2019)

/ Enforcement of Security Interest, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Leases of Immovable Property, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana, SARFAESI Act, 2002, SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 13, SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 14, Transfer of Property Act, Transfer of Property Act with Section 107

Supreme Court Clarifies Tenant Rights Under SARFAESI Act: Bajarang Agarwal vs. Central Bank of India (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: The interplay between the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) and the rights of tenants, particularly concerning eviction from mortgaged properties. CASE TYPE: Real Estate/Mortgage Law, focusing on […]

Supreme Court clarifies the rights of tenants under the SARFAESI Act in mortgage disputes: Bajarang Agarwal vs. Central Bank of India (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Abduction and Murder Case Due to Lack of Evidence: Umesh Tukaram Padwal vs. State of Maharashtra (2019)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 27, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 364, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Abduction and Murder Case Due to Lack of Evidence: Umesh Tukaram Padwal vs. State of Maharashtra (2019) Date of the Judgment: September 3, 2019 Citation: Umesh Tukaram Padwal & Anr. vs. The State of Maharashtra (2019) INSC 793 Judges: N.V. Ramana, J., Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J., Ajay Rastogi, J. Can

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Abduction and Murder Case Due to Lack of Evidence: Umesh Tukaram Padwal vs. State of Maharashtra (2019) Read Post »

Limitation for Arbitration Claims: Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Geo Miller & Co. Case (03 September 2019)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration Law, Arbitration Law with Section 21, Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Article 137, Limitation Period, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana

Geo Miller & Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs. Rajasthan Vidyut Utpadan Nigam Ltd.: Supreme Court on Limitation in Arbitration LEGAL ISSUE: Whether arbitration claims are barred by limitation based on the date the cause of action arose or the date of dispute. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: M/s Geo Miller & Co. Pvt. Ltd. vs.

Limitation for Arbitration Claims: Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Geo Miller & Co. Case (03 September 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies “Specific Endowment” under Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Act: M.J. Thulasiraman vs. Commissioner (2019)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Endowment, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana, Private Trusts, Property Law, Public Trusts, Religious Charity, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959, Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 with Section 6(16), Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959 with Section 6(19)

Supreme Court Clarifies “Specific Endowment” under Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Act: M.J. Thulasiraman vs. Commissioner (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of “specific endowment” under the Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1959. CASE TYPE: Religious and Charitable Endowments Law Case Name: M.J. Thulasiraman and Another vs. The Commissioner, Hindu Religious & Charitable Endowment Administration

Supreme Court clarifies “Specific Endowment” under Tamil Nadu Hindu Religious Act: M.J. Thulasiraman vs. Commissioner (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies rules on multiple dismissal orders in service law: Rajasthan Housing Board vs. Roshan Lal Saini (29 July 2019)

/ Disciplinary Proceedings, Dismissal, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Rajasthan Service Rules, Rajasthan Service Rules with Rule 86(3), Sanjiv Khanna, Service Law

Rajasthan Housing Board vs. Roshan Lal Saini: Supreme Court on Double Dismissal LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an employee can be subjected to multiple dismissal orders for the same misconduct. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Rajasthan Housing Board vs. Roshan Lal Saini and Others Judgment Date: 29 July 2019 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 29 July

Supreme Court clarifies rules on multiple dismissal orders in service law: Rajasthan Housing Board vs. Roshan Lal Saini (29 July 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies FERV Apportionment in Power Tariffs: Power Grid Corporation vs. Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Co. (2019)

/ Electricity Regulatory Commissions Act, 1998, Electricity Regulatory Commissions Act, 1998 with Regulation 1.13(a), Electricity Regulatory Commissions Act, 1998 with Regulations 1.3 and 1.7, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana, Tariff Regulations, 2001

Supreme Court on Foreign Exchange Rate Variation (FERV) Apportionment in Power Tariffs LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Foreign Exchange Rate Variation (FERV) should be apportioned between debt and equity after being added to the capital cost in power tariffs. CASE TYPE: Electricity Regulatory Law Case Name: Power Grid Corporation of India vs. Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution

Supreme Court clarifies FERV Apportionment in Power Tariffs: Power Grid Corporation vs. Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Co. (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Concurrent Findings on Collusive Decree in Property Dispute: Jaswant Singh & Ors. vs. Jaspal Singh & Ors. (2019) INSC 459 (07 May 2019)

/ Civil Law, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Collusive Decree, Decree, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana, Property Law, Sale Deed

Supreme Court Upholds Concurrent Findings on Collusive Decree in Property Dispute Date of the Judgment: 07 May 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 459 Judges: N.V. Ramana, J. and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J. Can a court decree be challenged if it is found to be collusive and aimed at circumventing the law? The Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court Upholds Concurrent Findings on Collusive Decree in Property Dispute: Jaswant Singh & Ors. vs. Jaspal Singh & Ors. (2019) INSC 459 (07 May 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns conviction based on unreliable dying declaration: Poonam Bai vs. State of Chhattisgarh (30 April 2019)

/ Criminal Law, Dying Declaration, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana, S. Abdul Nazeer

Supreme Court overturns conviction based on unreliable dying declaration: Poonam Bai vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Admissibility and reliability of dying declarations as sole evidence for conviction. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Poonam Bai vs. The State of Chhattisgarh Judgment Date: 30 April 2019 Date of the Judgment: 30 April 2019 Citation: (2019)

Supreme Court overturns conviction based on unreliable dying declaration: Poonam Bai vs. State of Chhattisgarh (30 April 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case Based on Circumstantial Evidence: Sadayappan vs. State (26 April 2019)

/ Circumstantial Evidence, Criminal Law, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Interested Witness, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Murder, N.V. Ramana

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case Based on Circumstantial Evidence: Sadayappan vs. State (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the conviction of the accused for murder based on circumstantial evidence and the testimonies of related witnesses is valid. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Sadayappan @ Ganesan vs. State, Represented by Inspector of Police Judgment Date:

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case Based on Circumstantial Evidence: Sadayappan vs. State (26 April 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies liability under Section 149 IPC in mob violence case: Bal Mukund Sharma vs. State of Bihar (2019)

/ Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 149, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana, Offences Against Human Body, S. Abdul Nazeer

Supreme Court clarifies liability under Section 149 IPC in mob violence case: Bal Mukund Sharma vs. State of Bihar (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether all members of an unlawful assembly are liable for murder if one member commits the act, under Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Bal Mukund

Supreme Court clarifies liability under Section 149 IPC in mob violence case: Bal Mukund Sharma vs. State of Bihar (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Possession After Ex-Parte Decree Set Aside: Om Prakash Ram vs. State of Bihar (2019)

/ Civil Law, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order IX, Due Process, Ex-parte Decree, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana, Restoration of Possession

Supreme Court Restores Possession After Ex-Parte Decree Set Aside: Om Prakash Ram vs. State of Bihar (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether possession obtained through an ex-parte decree can be sustained if the decree is subsequently set aside. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: Om Prakash Ram vs. The State of Bihar & Ors. Judgment Date: April 15,

Supreme Court Restores Possession After Ex-Parte Decree Set Aside: Om Prakash Ram vs. State of Bihar (2019) Read Post »

Mental Illness and Sentencing: Supreme Court Commutes Death Penalty in Landmark Decision (12 April 2019)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 235(2), Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Fundamental Rights, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N. V. Ramana, Offences Against Human Body

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence to Life Imprisonment for Mentally Ill Convict Date of the Judgment: 12 April 2019 Citation: Not Available Judges: N. V. Ramana, J., Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J., Indira Banerjee, J. Can a person with a mental illness be executed? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in a recent

Mental Illness and Sentencing: Supreme Court Commutes Death Penalty in Landmark Decision (12 April 2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top