Judges

Supreme Court Intervenes in Termination Case, Orders Reinstatement for Retiring Teacher: Dr. T. Murugan vs. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (2018)

/ CCS (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Departmental Inquiry, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Service Law, Termination of Service

Supreme Court Intervenes in Termination Case, Orders Reinstatement for Retiring Teacher: Dr. T. Murugan vs. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the termination of an employee was justified when a departmental inquiry was not conducted properly and a magisterial inquiry exonerated the employee. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Dr. T. Murugan vs. The […]

Supreme Court Intervenes in Termination Case, Orders Reinstatement for Retiring Teacher: Dr. T. Murugan vs. Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies eligibility for Psychologist posts: Ashish Kumar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (31 January 2018)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Eligibility Criteria, Government Jobs, Janjatiya Vikas Shikshan Aur Kermchariverg Sewa Niyamawali, 1991, Judges, Recruitment Rules, Recruitment Rules, 1991, Service Law

Supreme Court rules on Psychologist Post Eligibility: Ashish Kumar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2018) Date of the Judgment: 31 January 2018 Citation: Ashish Kumar vs. The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. (2018) INSC 71 Judges: A.K. Sikri, J., Ashok Bhushan, J. Can a candidate be denied a job after being selected, if the

Supreme Court clarifies eligibility for Psychologist posts: Ashish Kumar vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (31 January 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in NDPS Case Due to Improper Disposal of Contraband: Union of India vs. Jarooparam (2018)

/ Judges, N.V. Ramana, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 with Section 52A, S. Abdul Nazeer

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in NDPS Case Due to Improper Disposal of Contraband: Union of India vs. Jarooparam (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the prosecution’s failure to properly dispose of seized contraband under Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) and produce it as evidence undermines the case. CASE TYPE:

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in NDPS Case Due to Improper Disposal of Contraband: Union of India vs. Jarooparam (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Contract Extension for Technical Assistant: Yogesh Mahajan vs. AIIMS (31 January 2018)

/ Contractual Employment, Deepak Gupta, Judges, Madan B. Lokur, Regularization of Services, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Contract Extension for Technical Assistant: Yogesh Mahajan vs. AIIMS (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a contract employee has a right to the renewal of their contract. CASE TYPE: Service Law. Case Name: Yogesh Mahajan vs. Prof. R.C. Deka, Director, All India Institute of Medical Sciences. [Judgment Date]: 31 January 2018 Introduction

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Contract Extension for Technical Assistant: Yogesh Mahajan vs. AIIMS (31 January 2018) Read Post »

External Development Charges: Supreme Court exempts Government entities in Municipal Council vs. National Fertilizer Ltd. & Gas Authority of India Ltd. (30 January 2018)

/ External Development Charges, Government Notifications, Interpretation of Government Notifications, Judges, Municipal Law, N.V. Ramana, S. Abdul Nazeer

Supreme Court on External Development Charges for Government Entities Date of the Judgment: 30 January 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 73 Judges: N.V. Ramana, J. and S. Abdul Nazeer, J. Can a municipal council demand external development charges from Central Government entities for construction within their limits? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in

External Development Charges: Supreme Court exempts Government entities in Municipal Council vs. National Fertilizer Ltd. & Gas Authority of India Ltd. (30 January 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court grants anticipatory bail and allows withdrawal of deposit in West Bengal case (30 January 2018)

/ Anticipatory Bail, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 438, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail and Allows Withdrawal of Deposit in West Bengal Case Date of the Judgment: 30 January 2018 Citation: 2018 INSC 60 Judges: Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar Can a compromise between the accused and the complainant lead to the grant of anticipatory bail? The Supreme Court addressed this

Supreme Court grants anticipatory bail and allows withdrawal of deposit in West Bengal case (30 January 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns conviction of two accused in murder case: Latesh @ Dadu Baburao Karlekar vs. State of Maharashtra (2018)

/ Amitava Roy, Criminal Appeal, Criminal Law, Evidence Law, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 149, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, N.V. Ramana, Offences Against Human Body, Standard of Proof

Supreme Court overturns conviction of two accused in murder case: Latesh @ Dadu Baburao Karlekar vs. State of Maharashtra (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt in a case of murder and assault. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Latesh @ Dadu Baburao Karlekar vs. The State of

Supreme Court overturns conviction of two accused in murder case: Latesh @ Dadu Baburao Karlekar vs. State of Maharashtra (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds SARFAESI Act, Limits High Court Intervention in Loan Recovery: State Bank of Travancore vs. Mathew K.C. (2018)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Judges, Navin Sinha, Recovery of Debts Due to Banks and Financial Institutions Act, 1993, Rohinton Fali Nariman, SARFAESI Act, 2002, SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 13(2), SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 13(4), SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 17

Supreme Court Upholds SARFAESI Act, Limits High Court Intervention in Loan Recovery: State Bank of Travancore vs. Mathew K.C. (2018) Date of the Judgment: January 30, 2018 Citation: 2018 INSC 75 Judges: Rohinton Fali Nariman, J., Navin Sinha, J. Can a High Court interfere with loan recovery proceedings initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of

Supreme Court Upholds SARFAESI Act, Limits High Court Intervention in Loan Recovery: State Bank of Travancore vs. Mathew K.C. (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the requirements for a valid reference application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act: Shahid Jamal vs. State of U.P. (30 January 2018)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 18, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Supreme Court Clarifies Requirements for Land Acquisition Reference Applications: Shahid Jamal vs. State of U.P. (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: What constitutes a valid application for reference to the court under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act, 1894, specifically regarding the timing and content of such applications? CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: Shahid Jamal &

Supreme Court clarifies the requirements for a valid reference application under Section 18 of the Land Acquisition Act: Shahid Jamal vs. State of U.P. (30 January 2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Admissibility of Electronic Evidence and Use of Videography in Crime Scenes

/ Adarsh Kumar Goel, Admissibility of Evidence, Electronic Evidence, Evidence Act, 1872, Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 65B, Information Technology Act, 2000, Information Technology Act, 2000 with Section 2(o), Information Technology Act, 2000 with Section 2(t), Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies Admissibility of Electronic Evidence and Use of Videography in Crime Scenes LEGAL ISSUE: Admissibility of electronic evidence and the use of videography in crime scene investigations. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, Evidence Law Case Name: Shafhi Mohammad v. The State of Himachal Pradesh Judgment Date: 30 January 2018 Introduction Date of the Judgment:

Supreme Court Clarifies Admissibility of Electronic Evidence and Use of Videography in Crime Scenes Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision on Substituted Service in Specific Performance Suit: Neerja Realtors vs. Janglu (2018)

/ A.M. Khanwilkar, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order V Rule 17, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order V Rule 20, D.Y. Chandrachud, Dipak Misra, Judges, Order V, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908

Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision on Substituted Service in Specific Performance Suit: Neerja Realtors vs. Janglu (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the procedure for substituted service of summons was correctly followed in a suit for specific performance. CASE TYPE: Civil (Specific Performance) Case Name: M/S Neerja Realtors Pvt Ltd vs. Janglu (Dead) Thr. Lr. [Judgment

Supreme Court Upholds High Court Decision on Substituted Service in Specific Performance Suit: Neerja Realtors vs. Janglu (2018) Read Post »

Supreme Court Enhances Land Compensation in Land Acquisition Case: Shivangouda Ninganagouda Keri vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (29 January 2018)

/ Compensation, Equal Compensation, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Land Acquisition, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar

Supreme Court Enhances Land Compensation in Land Acquisition Case: Shivangouda Ninganagouda Keri vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of fair land value in land acquisition cases. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition. Case Name: Shivangouda Ninganagouda Keri (Since Deceased) by His Lrs. vs. The Special Land Acquisition Officer, UKP, Bilagi District Bagalkot. Judgment Date:

Supreme Court Enhances Land Compensation in Land Acquisition Case: Shivangouda Ninganagouda Keri vs. Special Land Acquisition Officer (29 January 2018) Read Post »

Scroll to Top