Judges

Continuing Deficiency in Service: Supreme Court rules on Limitation in Consumer Disputes: Samruddhi Co-operative Housing Society vs. Mumbai Mahalaxmi Construction (2022)

/ AS Bopanna, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 2(1)(g), Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 24A, Deficiency in Service, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 22, Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963, Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 with Section 12, Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 with Section 3, Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act, 1963 with Section 6

Supreme Court on Continuing Wrong in Consumer Disputes: Samruddhi Co-operative Housing Society vs. Mumbai Mahalaxmi Construction (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the failure to obtain an occupancy certificate by a builder constitutes a continuing wrong, thereby extending the limitation period for filing a consumer complaint. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: Samruddhi Co-operative Housing Society Ltd. […]

Continuing Deficiency in Service: Supreme Court rules on Limitation in Consumer Disputes: Samruddhi Co-operative Housing Society vs. Mumbai Mahalaxmi Construction (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Pension Rights of Bank Employees, Dismissing Retroactive Rule Change: Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd. vs. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies and Others (2022) INSC 14

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952, Employees Provident Fund and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952 with Section 7A, Judges, Pension, Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Land Mortgage Banks Service (Common Cadre) Rules, 1978, Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Land Mortgage Banks Service (Common Cadre) Rules, 1978 with Rule 15, Retrospective Amendment, Service Law, Vested Rights

Supreme Court Upholds Pension Rights of Bank Employees, Dismissing Retroactive Rule Change Date of the Judgment: 11 January 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 14 Judges: Hon’ble Justices Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S. Oka Can a cooperative bank retroactively withdraw a pension scheme, thereby denying its retired employees their entitled benefits? The Supreme Court of India addressed

Supreme Court Upholds Pension Rights of Bank Employees, Dismissing Retroactive Rule Change: Punjab State Cooperative Agricultural Development Bank Ltd. vs. The Registrar, Cooperative Societies and Others (2022) INSC 14 Read Post »

Supreme Court Reverses High Court Acquittal in Dowry Death Case: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Jogendra & Anr. (2022) INSC 24

/ A.S. Bopanna, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 with Section 2, Hima Kohli, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 113-B, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 304-B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 306, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 498-A, Judges, N.V. Ramana

Supreme Court Reverses High Court Acquittal in Dowry Death Case: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Jogendra & Anr. (2022) INSC 24 LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of “dowry” and “cruelty” in dowry death cases under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law – Dowry Death Case Name: State of Madhya Pradesh vs.

Supreme Court Reverses High Court Acquittal in Dowry Death Case: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Jogendra & Anr. (2022) INSC 24 Read Post »

Supreme Court Expands Dowry Definition in Dowry Death Case: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Jogendra & Anr. (2022) INSC 30

/ A. S. Bopanna, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 with Section 2, Hima Kohli, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 304B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 306, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 498A, Judges, N.V. Ramana

Supreme Court Expands Dowry Definition in Dowry Death Case: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Jogendra & Anr. (2022) INSC 30 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the demand for money to construct a house constitutes a dowry demand under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law (Dowry Death) Case Name: State of Madhya

Supreme Court Expands Dowry Definition in Dowry Death Case: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Jogendra & Anr. (2022) INSC 30 Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitrator’s Award: Haryana Tourism vs. Kandhari Beverages (2022)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitrator’s Award: Haryana Tourism vs. Kandhari Beverages (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Scope of appellate jurisdiction under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law. Case Name: Haryana Tourism Limited vs. M/s Kandhari Beverages Limited. Judgment Date: January 11, 2022 Date of the Judgment: January 11, 2022. Citation: (2022)

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitrator’s Award: Haryana Tourism vs. Kandhari Beverages (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Arbitrator’s Award: Haryana Tourism Ltd. vs. Kandhari Beverages Ltd. (2022)

/ Appellate Review, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Restores Arbitrator’s Award: Haryana Tourism Ltd. vs. Kandhari Beverages Ltd. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: The scope of appellate review under Section 37 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Haryana Tourism Limited vs. M/s Kandhari Beverages Limited [Judgment Date]: January 11, 2022 Introduction Date of the Judgment: January

Supreme Court Restores Arbitrator’s Award: Haryana Tourism Ltd. vs. Kandhari Beverages Ltd. (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Petition Regarding Teacher Recruitment: Sunil Kumar Yadav vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2022)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Judges, Review Petition, Service Law, Supreme Court Judgments, Teacher Recruitment, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Petition Regarding Teacher Recruitment: Sunil Kumar Yadav vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2022) Date of the Judgment: January 11, 2022 Citation: Not Available in the document Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J. and Ajay Rastogi, J. Can a review petition be entertained if it does not present any new substantial arguments?

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Petition Regarding Teacher Recruitment: Sunil Kumar Yadav vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition on Allahabad High Court Order: Abhinitam Upadhyay vs. Allahabad High Court (2022)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Civil Law, Judges, Judicial Review, Review Petition, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition on Allahabad High Court Order: Abhinitam Upadhyay vs. Allahabad High Court (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Review of a previous order of the Supreme Court. CASE TYPE: Civil Review Petition. Case Name: Abhinitam Upadhyay vs. Hon’ble Allahabad High Court. [Judgment Date]: January 11, 2022. Introduction Date of the Judgment: January 11, 2022.

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition on Allahabad High Court Order: Abhinitam Upadhyay vs. Allahabad High Court (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition on Allahabad High Court Order: Abhinitam Upadhyay vs. Allahabad High Court (2022)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Judges, Review Jurisdiction, Review Jurisdiction Principles, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition on Allahabad High Court Order: Abhinitam Upadhyay vs. Allahabad High Court (2022) Date of the Judgment: January 11, 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 40 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J. and Ajay Rastogi, J. Can a review petition be entertained if it does not point out any error apparent on the record?

Supreme Court Dismisses Review Petition on Allahabad High Court Order: Abhinitam Upadhyay vs. Allahabad High Court (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court dismisses review petition due to delay in filing: Surender Mohan vs. State of Haryana (2022)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Judges, Limitation, Review Jurisdiction, Review Petition, Supreme Court Procedure, Uday Umesh Lalit

Date of the Judgment: January 11, 2022 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit J., Ajay Rastogi J. Can a review petition be entertained if there is an inordinate delay in filing the special leave petition? The Supreme Court addressed this issue in a recent case where a review petition was dismissed due to a significant delay in

Supreme Court dismisses review petition due to delay in filing: Surender Mohan vs. State of Haryana (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds 26-Year Sentence for Drug Offense: Union of India vs. Shaikh Istiyaq Ahmed (2022)

/ B.R. Gavai, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1994, Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1994 with Section 21, Repatriation of Prisoners Act, 2003, Repatriation of Prisoners Act, 2003 with Section 12, Repatriation of Prisoners Act, 2003 with Section 13

Supreme Court Upholds 26-Year Sentence for Drug Offense: Union of India vs. Shaikh Istiyaq Ahmed (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the sentence of a prisoner transferred from a foreign country can be reduced to align with Indian law. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, Repatriation of Prisoners Case Name: Union of India & Anr. vs. Shaikh Istiyaq Ahmed

Supreme Court Upholds 26-Year Sentence for Drug Offense: Union of India vs. Shaikh Istiyaq Ahmed (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Sentence of Transferred Prisoner: Union of India vs. Shaikh Istiyaq Ahmed (2022)

/ B.R. Gavai, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1994, Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1994 with Section 21, Repatriation of Prisoners Act, 2003, Repatriation of Prisoners Act, 2003 with Section 12, Repatriation of Prisoners Act, 2003 with Section 13

Supreme Court Upholds Sentence of Transferred Prisoner: Union of India vs. Shaikh Istiyaq Ahmed (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the receiving state is bound by the sentence of the transferring state in cases of prisoner transfer, and the scope of adaptation of sentences. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, Repatriation of Prisoners Case Name: Union of India &

Supreme Court Upholds Sentence of Transferred Prisoner: Union of India vs. Shaikh Istiyaq Ahmed (2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top