Judges

Supreme Court clarifies the process for determining Resolution Professional fees in Corporate Insolvency: Devarajan Raman vs. Bank of India Limited (05 January 2022)

/ A S Bopanna, Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 60(5)(c), Insolvency Resolution Process Cost, Judges

Supreme Court Clarifies Resolution Professional Fee Determination in Insolvency Cases Date of the Judgment: 05 January 2022 Citation: Civil Appeal No 3160 of 2020 Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and A S Bopanna, J. Can an adjudicating authority arbitrarily reduce the fees of a Resolution Professional (RP) without proper justification? The Supreme Court of […]

Supreme Court clarifies the process for determining Resolution Professional fees in Corporate Insolvency: Devarajan Raman vs. Bank of India Limited (05 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Restrictions on Land Transfers to Scheduled Castes from Other States: Bhadar Ram vs. Jassa Ram (2022)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 341, Constitutional Law with Article 342, Judges, M. R. Shah, Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954, Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954 with Section 13, Rajasthan Colonization Act, 1954 with Section 13A, Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955, Rajasthan Tenancy Act, 1955 with Section 42

Supreme Court Upholds Restrictions on Land Transfers to Scheduled Castes from Other States: Bhadar Ram vs. Jassa Ram (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a person belonging to a Scheduled Caste in one state can claim the same benefits in another state for land transactions. CASE TYPE: Civil Law – Land Rights and Scheduled Caste Protections Case

Supreme Court Upholds Restrictions on Land Transfers to Scheduled Castes from Other States: Bhadar Ram vs. Jassa Ram (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Excise Duty on Liquor Destroyed in Fire Due to Negligence: State of UP vs. M/S McDowell and Company Limited (2022)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 265, Constitutional Law with Entry 51 of List II of the Seventh Schedule, Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges, Krishna Murari, U.P. Excise Act, 1910, U.P. Excise Act, 1910 with Section 19, U.P. Excise Act, 1910 with Section 28

Supreme Court Upholds Excise Duty on Liquor Destroyed in Fire Due to Negligence: State of UP vs. M/S McDowell and Company Limited (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a distillery is liable to pay excise duty on liquor destroyed in a fire within its premises. CASE TYPE: Excise Law, Liability for Negligence Case Name: State of UP

Supreme Court Upholds Excise Duty on Liquor Destroyed in Fire Due to Negligence: State of UP vs. M/S McDowell and Company Limited (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restricts Representation by Ex-Employees in Departmental Inquiries: Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank vs. Ramesh Chandra Meena (2022)

/ Departmental Inquiry, Judges, M.R. Shah, Right to Representation, Sanjiv Khanna, Service Law, Service Regulations

Supreme Court Restricts Representation by Ex-Employees in Departmental Inquiries: Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank vs. Ramesh Chandra Meena (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an employee has an absolute right to be represented by a former employee in departmental proceedings. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: The Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank (RMGB) & Anr. vs. Ramesh Chandra Meena

Supreme Court Restricts Representation by Ex-Employees in Departmental Inquiries: Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank vs. Ramesh Chandra Meena (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restricts Representation by Ex-Employees in Departmental Inquiries: Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank vs. Ramesh Chandra Meena (2022) INSC 10

/ Departmental Inquiries, Employee Rights, Judges, M. R. Shah, Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulation, 2010, Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank (Officers and Employees) Service Regulation, 2010 with Regulation 44, Sanjiv Khanna, Service Law

Supreme Court Restricts Representation by Ex-Employees in Departmental Inquiries: Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank vs. Ramesh Chandra Meena (2022) INSC 10 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an employee has the right to be represented by a former employee in departmental proceedings. CASE TYPE: Service Law. Case Name: Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank & Anr. vs. Ramesh Chandra Meena &

Supreme Court Restricts Representation by Ex-Employees in Departmental Inquiries: Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank vs. Ramesh Chandra Meena (2022) INSC 10 Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies Terminal Excise Duty Refund under Foreign Trade Policy: Sandoz vs. Union of India (2022) INSC 1

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 3, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 5A, Deemed Exports, Dinesh Maheshwari, Foreign Trade Policy, Foreign Trade Policy with Para 8.3, Foreign Trade Policy with Para 8.5, Judges, Krishna Murari

Supreme Court Clarifies Terminal Excise Duty Refund under Foreign Trade Policy Date of the Judgment: January 4, 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 1 Judges: A.M. Khanwilkar, J., Dinesh Maheshwari, J., Krishna Murari, J. Can a supplier of goods to an Export Oriented Unit (EOU) claim a refund of Terminal Excise Duty (TED) under the Foreign Trade

Supreme Court clarifies Terminal Excise Duty Refund under Foreign Trade Policy: Sandoz vs. Union of India (2022) INSC 1 Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies Terminal Excise Duty refunds for Export Oriented Units and Domestic Tariff Area Suppliers: Sandoz vs. Union of India (2022) INSC 82 (4 January 2022)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 5A, Deemed Exports, Dinesh Maheshwari, Foreign Trade Policy, Foreign Trade Policy with Para 6.11, Foreign Trade Policy with Para 8.3(c), Judges, Krishna Murari

Supreme Court Clarifies Terminal Excise Duty Refunds for EOUs and DTA Suppliers LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Export Oriented Units (EOUs) and Domestic Tariff Area (DTA) suppliers are entitled to refunds of Terminal Excise Duty (TED) on goods supplied to EOUs, and which authority should process these claims. CASE TYPE: Tax Law, Foreign Trade Policy Case Name:

Supreme Court clarifies Terminal Excise Duty refunds for Export Oriented Units and Domestic Tariff Area Suppliers: Sandoz vs. Union of India (2022) INSC 82 (4 January 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Arbitration Petition Due to Appellant’s Inaction: Durga Welding Works vs. Chief Engineer, Railway Electrification (2022)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Ajay Rastogi, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11(6), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Judges

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Arbitration Petition Due to Appellant’s Inaction: Durga Welding Works vs. Chief Engineer, Railway Electrification (2022) Date of the Judgment: 04 January 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 1 Judges: Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Abhay S. Oka. The judgment was authored by Justice Ajay Rastogi. Can a party, after filing an arbitration

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Arbitration Petition Due to Appellant’s Inaction: Durga Welding Works vs. Chief Engineer, Railway Electrification (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Invalidates Arbitral Tribunal Composition: Ellora Paper Mills vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 12(5), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Seventh Schedule, B.V. Nagarathna, Constitutional Law, Judges, Judicial Review, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Invalidates Arbitral Tribunal: Ellora Paper Mills vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022) Date of the Judgment: January 04, 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 14 Judges: M.R. Shah, J. and B.V. Nagarathna, J. Can an arbitral tribunal composed of officers of one of the disputing parties be considered valid under the Arbitration and Conciliation Act,

Supreme Court Invalidates Arbitral Tribunal Composition: Ellora Paper Mills vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Declares Government Employee Arbitrators Ineligible Under Amended Arbitration Act: Ellora Paper Mills vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 12, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Seventh Schedule, Arbitrator's Impartiality, B.V. Nagarathna, Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Declares Government Employee Arbitrators Ineligible Under Amended Arbitration Act: Ellora Paper Mills vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether government employees can act as arbitrators in disputes involving the government, considering amendments to the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Ellora Paper Mills Limited vs. The

Supreme Court Declares Government Employee Arbitrators Ineligible Under Amended Arbitration Act: Ellora Paper Mills vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Terminal Excise Duty Refunds for Export-Oriented Units and Domestic Tariff Area Suppliers: Sandoz Private Limited vs. Union of India (2022) INSC 1

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Central Excise Act, 1944, Central Excise Act, 1944 with Section 5A, Cenvat Credit, Deemed Exports, Dinesh Maheshwari, Foreign Trade Policy, Foreign Trade Policy with Para 6.11, Foreign Trade Policy with Para 8.3, Judges, Krishna Murari

Supreme Court Clarifies Terminal Excise Duty Refunds for Export-Oriented Units and Domestic Tariff Area Suppliers Date of the Judgment: January 4, 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 1 Judges: A.M. Khanwilkar, J., Dinesh Maheshwari, J., Krishna Murari, J. Can Export Oriented Units (EOUs) directly claim refunds for Terminal Excise Duty (TED) on goods procured from Domestic Tariff

Supreme Court Clarifies Terminal Excise Duty Refunds for Export-Oriented Units and Domestic Tariff Area Suppliers: Sandoz Private Limited vs. Union of India (2022) INSC 1 Read Post »

Supreme Court Restricts Representation by Ex-Employees in Disciplinary Proceedings: Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank vs. Ramesh Chandra Meena (2022) INSC 1

/ Disciplinary Proceedings, Judges, M. R. Shah, Right to Representation, Sanjiv Khanna, Service Law, Service Law with Regulation 44

Supreme Court Restricts Representation by Ex-Employees in Disciplinary Proceedings: Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank vs. Ramesh Chandra Meena (2022) INSC 1 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an employee facing disciplinary proceedings has the right to be represented by a former employee of the same organization. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: The Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank (RMGB) &

Supreme Court Restricts Representation by Ex-Employees in Disciplinary Proceedings: Rajasthan Marudhara Gramin Bank vs. Ramesh Chandra Meena (2022) INSC 1 Read Post »

Scroll to Top