Judges

Supreme Court clarifies safeguards against misuse of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in service matters (20 March 2018)

/ Adarsh Kumar Goel, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 41, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 438, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 182, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 193, Judges, Offences Against Public Justice, Offences under the Atrocities Act, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 with Section 18, Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 with Section 3(1)(ix), Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies Safeguards Against Misuse of the Atrocities Act LEGAL ISSUE: Safeguards against misuse of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, Service Law Case Name: Dr. Subhash Kashinath Mahajan vs. The State of Maharashtra and Anr. [Judgment Date]: 20 March 2018 Can a public servant […]

Supreme Court clarifies safeguards against misuse of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 in service matters (20 March 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Fresh Voluntary Retirement Application After Disciplinary Proceedings: Dinesh Kumar Gupta vs. State Bank of India (20 March 2018)

/ Disciplinary Proceedings, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Service Law, Service Rules, Voluntary Retirement

Supreme Court Allows Fresh Voluntary Retirement Application After Disciplinary Proceedings: Dinesh Kumar Gupta vs. State Bank of India (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an employee can apply for voluntary retirement after disciplinary proceedings have concluded. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Dinesh Kumar Gupta vs. General Manager 1, State Bank of India & Ors. Judgment Date:

Supreme Court Allows Fresh Voluntary Retirement Application After Disciplinary Proceedings: Dinesh Kumar Gupta vs. State Bank of India (20 March 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Intervenes on Construction Workers’ Welfare: A National Disgrace Uncovered

/ Building and Other Construction Workers Act, 1996, Building and Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Constitutional Law with Article 39, Deepak Gupta, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Labour Law, Madan B. Lokur

Supreme Court Intervenes on Construction Workers’ Welfare: A National Disgrace Uncovered LEGAL ISSUE: Implementation of welfare measures for construction workers CASE TYPE: Public Interest Litigation Case Name: National Campaign Committee for Central Legislation on Construction Labour (NCC -CL) vs. Union of India & Ors. Judgment Date: 19 March 2018 Date of the Judgment: 19 March

Supreme Court Intervenes on Construction Workers’ Welfare: A National Disgrace Uncovered Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Auction Sale of Hotel, Clarifies Section 13(3A) of SARFAESI Act: ITC vs. Blue Coast Hotels (2018)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, Code of Civil Procedure with Order 21, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, S. A. Bobde, Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 with Section 13(2), Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 with Section 13(3A), Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 with Section 31(i)

Supreme Court Upholds Auction Sale of Hotel, Clarifies Section 13(3A) of SARFAESI Act: ITC vs. Blue Coast Hotels (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the failure to reply to a borrower’s representation under Section 13(3A) of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) invalidates subsequent actions by the

Supreme Court Upholds Auction Sale of Hotel, Clarifies Section 13(3A) of SARFAESI Act: ITC vs. Blue Coast Hotels (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court enhances compensation for retrenched workers in service matter: Karshanbhai Ramjibhai Jaladiya vs. District Development Officer (2018)

/ Compensation, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Retrenchment, Service Law, Service Law with Preferential Appointment

Supreme Court enhances compensation for retrenched workers in Karshanbhai Ramjibhai Jaladiya vs. District Development Officer (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the compensation awarded to retrenched workers was adequate. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Karshanbhai Ramjibhai Jaladiya vs. District Development Officer and Anr. [Judgment Date]: 19 March 2018 Can a court enhance the compensation awarded to

Supreme Court enhances compensation for retrenched workers in service matter: Karshanbhai Ramjibhai Jaladiya vs. District Development Officer (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Counter FIR in Fraud Case: P. Sreekumar vs. State of Kerala (2018)

/ Abhay Manohar Sapre, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 482, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 420, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 465, Judges, Multiple FIRs, Offences Relating to Property, R.K. Agrawal

Supreme Court Allows Counter FIR in Fraud Case: P. Sreekumar vs. State of Kerala (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a second FIR is maintainable if it is a counter-complaint arising from the same incident. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: P. Sreekumar vs. State of Kerala & Ors. [Judgment Date]: March 19, 2018 Date of the

Supreme Court Allows Counter FIR in Fraud Case: P. Sreekumar vs. State of Kerala (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Settles Matrimonial Dispute and Loan Settlement: Ramakanth V. Purnima (2018) INSC 171

/ Banking Law, Civil Procedure, Financial Settlement, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Loan Settlement, Matrimonial Law, Mediation, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Settlement, Settlement of Disputes

Supreme Court Settles Matrimonial Dispute: Ramakanth V. Purnima (2018) INSC 171 Date of the Judgment: March 19, 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 171 Judges: Kurian Joseph, J., Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J. Can a long-standing matrimonial dispute be resolved through mediation, and can a bank’s loan settlement be included in the final resolution? The Supreme Court of

Supreme Court Settles Matrimonial Dispute and Loan Settlement: Ramakanth V. Purnima (2018) INSC 171 Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Probationary Employee: ARIES vs. Devendra Joshi (2018)

/ Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Probationary Employee Termination, S.A. Bobde, Service Law, Termination Simpliciter

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Probationary Employee: ARIES vs. Devendra Joshi (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the termination of a probationary employee’s service is punitive if a preliminary inquiry for misconduct was conducted but not pursued, and the termination order is framed as a termination simpliciter. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Director Aryabhatta Research Institute

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Probationary Employee: ARIES vs. Devendra Joshi (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court allows exemption from personal appearance under Section 205 CrPC in matrimonial dispute: Rameshwar Yadav vs. State of Bihar (2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 205, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 317, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 482, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 498A, Judges

Supreme Court Allows Exemption from Personal Appearance Under Section 205 CrPC: Rameshwar Yadav vs. State of Bihar (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Magistrate can reject an application for exemption from personal appearance under Section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) solely on the grounds that the accused is healthy or that their presence

Supreme Court allows exemption from personal appearance under Section 205 CrPC in matrimonial dispute: Rameshwar Yadav vs. State of Bihar (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Transfer of Gorkhaland Agitation Cases to Independent Agency: Bimal Gurung vs. Union of India (2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 154, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 19, Constitutional Law with Article 32, Fundamental Rights, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Offences against Public Tranquility

Supreme Court Denies Transfer of Gorkhaland Agitation Cases to Independent Agency: Bimal Gurung vs. Union of India (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the investigation of criminal cases related to the Gorkhaland agitation should be transferred to an independent agency. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Bimal Gurung vs. Union of India & Ors. Judgment Date: 16 March

Supreme Court Denies Transfer of Gorkhaland Agitation Cases to Independent Agency: Bimal Gurung vs. Union of India (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds No-Interest Rule on Security Deposits for Money Lenders and Pawn Brokers: State of Karnataka vs. Karnataka Pawn Brokers Assn. (2018) INSC 190 (15 March 2018)

/ Business Regulation, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Deepak Gupta, Doctrine of Separation of Powers, Judges, Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961, Karnataka Money Lenders Act, 1961 with Section 7-A, Karnataka Pawn Brokers Act, 1961, Karnataka Pawn Brokers Act, 1961 with Section 4-A, Madan B. Lokur, Security Deposit

Supreme Court Upholds No-Interest Rule on Security Deposits for Money Lenders and Pawn Brokers Date of the Judgment: 15 March 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 190 Judges: Madan B. Lokur J., Deepak Gupta J. Can the government mandate that security deposits from money lenders and pawn brokers not earn interest? The Supreme Court of India addressed

Supreme Court Upholds No-Interest Rule on Security Deposits for Money Lenders and Pawn Brokers: State of Karnataka vs. Karnataka Pawn Brokers Assn. (2018) INSC 190 (15 March 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of 2015 Amendment Act to Arbitration Proceedings: BCCI vs. Kochi Cricket (2018) INSC 227

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 36, Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, General Clauses Act, 1897, General Clauses Act, 1897 with Section 6, Judges, Navin Sinha, R.F. Nariman

Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of 2015 Amendment Act to Arbitration Proceedings: BCCI vs. Kochi Cricket (2018) INSC 227 LEGAL ISSUE: Applicability of the Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 to pending arbitral and court proceedings. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: Board of Control for Cricket in India vs. Kochi Cricket Pvt. Ltd. and Others

Supreme Court Clarifies Applicability of 2015 Amendment Act to Arbitration Proceedings: BCCI vs. Kochi Cricket (2018) INSC 227 Read Post »

Scroll to Top