Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Interest Calculation Under Employee’s Compensation Act: Shobha vs. Vithalrao Shinde (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Compensation Payment, Employee's Compensation Act, 1923, Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 with Section 4A, Interest on Compensation, Judges, Labour Law, Labour Rights, M.R. Shah, Workplace Accidents

Supreme Court Clarifies Interest Calculation Under Employee’s Compensation Act: Shobha vs. Vithalrao Shinde (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Calculation of interest on compensation under the Employee’s Compensation Act, 1923. CASE TYPE: Labour Law Case Name: Shobha & Ors. vs. The Chairman, Vithalrao Shinde Sahakari Sakhar Karkhana Ltd. & Ors. [Judgment Date]: March 11, 2022 Introduction Date of […]

Supreme Court Clarifies Interest Calculation Under Employee’s Compensation Act: Shobha vs. Vithalrao Shinde (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Meaning of “Execution” in Registration Act: Veena Singh vs. District Registrar (2022)

/ A S Bopanna, Bela M Trivedi, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, Registration Act, 1908, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 35, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 72, Registration Act, 1908 with Section 74

Supreme Court Clarifies Meaning of “Execution” in Registration Act: Veena Singh vs. District Registrar (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: What constitutes “execution” of a document under the Registration Act, 1908? CASE TYPE: Property Law/Registration Law Case Name: Veena Singh (Dead) Through LR vs. The District Registrar/Additional Collector (F/R) And Another [Judgment Date]: May 10, 2022 Introduction Date

Supreme Court Clarifies Meaning of “Execution” in Registration Act: Veena Singh vs. District Registrar (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of second appeals in Punjab and Haryana: Hardial Singh vs. Balbir Kaur (2022)

/ Civil Law, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Punjab Courts Act, 1918, Punjab Courts Act, 1918 with Section 41, Second Appeal

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of second appeals in Punjab and Haryana: Hardial Singh vs. Balbir Kaur (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of second appeal jurisdiction in Punjab and Haryana High Court CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: Hardial Singh vs. Balbir Kaur & Anr. Judgment Date: March 10, 2022 Date of the Judgment: March 10, 2022

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of second appeals in Punjab and Haryana: Hardial Singh vs. Balbir Kaur (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court enhances land compensation, modifies High Court order: Jai Parkash vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6, M.R. Shah, Market Value Determination

Supreme Court enhances land compensation, modifies High Court order: Jai Parkash vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of fair market value for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, and the appropriate deduction to be applied from the sale price of exemplar land. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: Jai Parkash Etc

Supreme Court enhances land compensation, modifies High Court order: Jai Parkash vs. Union Territory, Chandigarh (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Inter-Commissionerate Transfers: SK Nausad Rahaman vs. Union of India (2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 309, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Recruitment Rules, Service Conditions, Service Law, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Inter-Commissionerate Transfers: SK Nausad Rahaman vs. Union of India (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Inter-Commissionerate Transfers (ICTs) are permissible under the Central Excise and Customs Commissionerates Inspector (Central Excise, Preventive Officer and Examiner) Group ‘B’ Posts Recruitment Rules 2016, and whether the ban on ICTs violates fundamental rights. CASE TYPE: Service

Supreme Court Upholds Ban on Inter-Commissionerate Transfers: SK Nausad Rahaman vs. Union of India (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Increases Mesne Profits in Property Dispute: Anar Devi vs. Vasudev Mangal (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, Licensee, M.R. Shah, Mesne Profits, Property Law, Recovery of Possession

Supreme Court Increases Mesne Profits in Property Dispute: Anar Devi vs. Vasudev Mangal (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of fair mesne profits in a property dispute. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: Anar Devi (D) through LR vs. Vasudev Mangal Etc. Etc. [Judgment Date]: March 10, 2022 Date of the Judgment: March 10, 2022 Citation: Civil Appeal

Supreme Court Increases Mesne Profits in Property Dispute: Anar Devi vs. Vasudev Mangal (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Remands Land Acquisition Case for Proper Market Value Assessment: Pramina Devi vs. State of Jharkhand (2022)

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, M.R. Shah, Market Value Assessment

Supreme Court Remands Land Acquisition Case for Proper Market Value Assessment: Pramina Devi vs. State of Jharkhand (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of Fair Market Value in Land Acquisition Cases. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition. Case Name: Pramina Devi (Dead) Thr. LRs. vs. State of Jharkhand. Judgment Date: 10 March 2022 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 10

Supreme Court Remands Land Acquisition Case for Proper Market Value Assessment: Pramina Devi vs. State of Jharkhand (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Seniority of Compassionate Appointees over Direct Recruits in Engineering Services

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Compassionate Appointment, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Judges, Seniority, Service Law, Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1955, Tamil Nadu State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1955 with Rule 35(aa)

Supreme Court Upholds Seniority of Compassionate Appointees over Direct Recruits in Engineering Services LEGAL ISSUE: Whether compassionate appointees are entitled to seniority over direct recruits in the Tamil Nadu Highways Engineering Service. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: M. Kendra Devi vs. The Government of Tamil Nadu and Others Judgment Date: 10 March 2022 Introduction

Supreme Court Upholds Seniority of Compassionate Appointees over Direct Recruits in Engineering Services Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Additional Evidence in Land Acquisition Case: Sanjay Kumar Singh vs. State of Jharkhand (2022)

/ Additional Evidence, B.V. Nagarathna, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order 41 Rule 27, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Allows Additional Evidence in Land Acquisition Case: Sanjay Kumar Singh vs. State of Jharkhand (2022) Date of the Judgment: March 10, 2022 Judges: M.R. Shah, J. and B.V. Nagarathna, J. Can an appellate court allow additional evidence in a land acquisition case to ensure fair compensation? The Supreme Court addressed this question in

Supreme Court Allows Additional Evidence in Land Acquisition Case: Sanjay Kumar Singh vs. State of Jharkhand (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Murder Case Due to Lack of Reasoning: Puran Mal vs. State of Haryana (2022)

/ Aniruddha Bose, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 439, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Murder Case Due to Lack of Reasoning: Puran Mal vs. State of Haryana (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court can grant bail in a murder case when the Trial Court has rejected it twice without providing strong reasons. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Puran Mal vs. State of Haryana

Supreme Court Cancels Bail in Murder Case Due to Lack of Reasoning: Puran Mal vs. State of Haryana (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Holds Contemnors Guilty for Disobeying Orders in Arbitration Case: Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund vs. Dharmesh S. Jain (2022) INSC 200 (10 March 2022)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 36, B.V. Nagarathna, Civil Contempt, Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Holds Contemnors Guilty for Disobeying Orders in Arbitration Case Date of the Judgment: 10 March 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 200 Judges: M.R. Shah, J. and B.V. Nagarathna, J. Can a party repeatedly delay compliance with court orders and then claim they are not bound by them? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed

Supreme Court Holds Contemnors Guilty for Disobeying Orders in Arbitration Case: Urban Infrastructure Real Estate Fund vs. Dharmesh S. Jain (2022) INSC 200 (10 March 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Bangalore Development Authority’s Right to Alter Site Prices: Bangalore Development Authority vs. R. Jayakumar & Ors. (9 March 2022)

/ Allotment of Sites, Bangalore Development Authority Rules, 1984, Bangalore Development Authority Rules, 1984 with Rule 12, Bela M. Trivedi, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Judges, Sanjiv Khanna, Specific Performance

Supreme Court Upholds Bangalore Development Authority’s Right to Alter Site Prices: Bangalore Development Authority vs. R. Jayakumar & Ors. (2022) Date of the Judgment: 9 March 2022 Citation: Not Available Judges: Sanjiv Khanna, J. and Bela M. Trivedi, J. Can a development authority alter the price of a site after the initial application? The Supreme

Supreme Court Upholds Bangalore Development Authority’s Right to Alter Site Prices: Bangalore Development Authority vs. R. Jayakumar & Ors. (9 March 2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top