Supreme Court Upholds Eviction on Sub-letting: Flora Elias Nahoum & Ors. vs. Idrish Ali Laskar (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a tenant has sub-let premises without the landlord’s consent, warranting eviction under the West Bengal Premises Tenancy Act, 1956. CASE TYPE: Property Law, Tenancy Dispute Case Name: Flora Elias Nahoum & Ors. vs. Idrish Ali Laskar […]
Supreme Court Reduces Sentence in Dowry Death Case: Anusuiya @ Saraswatibai vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was correct in upholding the conviction of the appellants under Sections 306 and 498A of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, and whether the sentence awarded was appropriate. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, Dowry
Supreme Court Upholds Licensing for Live Bands in Restaurants: Karnataka Live Band Restaurants Association vs. State of Karnataka (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the requirement for restaurants to obtain a license to host live band performances is a reasonable restriction on their right to conduct business. CASE TYPE: Regulatory/Constitutional Law Case Name: Karnataka Live Band Restaurants
Supreme Court Upholds Sentence for Grievous Hurt in 1988 Assault Case: Subhash Chander Bansal vs. Gian Chand and Ors. (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was justified in imposing a sentence of imprisonment already undergone and a fine for a conviction under Section 325 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
Supreme Court Orders Fresh Trial Due to Procedural Errors in Specific Performance Suit Date of the Judgment: 25 January 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 73 Judges: R.K. Agrawal, J., Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. Can a court set aside an ex-parte decree against all defendants when only some of them applied for it? The Supreme Court of
Supreme Court clarifies eligibility for Guest Lecturers based on M.Phil. Degrees: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Manoj Sharma (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether M.Phil. degrees obtained through distance education before 11.07.2009 are valid for appointment as Guest Lecturers. CASE TYPE: Education Law, Service Law Case Name: The State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. vs. Manoj Sharma
Supreme Court Remands Land Acquisition Case for Fresh Determination of Compensation Date of the Judgment: January 25, 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 25 Judges: R.K. Agrawal, J., Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. When land is acquired for public purposes, how should the compensation be determined? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this crucial question in a
Supreme Court Enhances Land Compensation: Maya Devi vs. State of Haryana (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of fair market value for land acquisition. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: Maya Devi (D) Through LRs & Ors. vs. State of Haryana & Anr. Judgment Date: 25 January 2018 Date of the Judgment: 25 January 2018 Citation: (2018)
Supreme Court Enhances Land Compensation: Maya Devi vs. State of Haryana (2018) Read Post »
Supreme Court Grants Bail in Non-Commercial Ganja Case: Birbal Prasad vs. State of Bihar (2018) Date of the Judgment: 25 January 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 48 Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar Can an individual be granted bail when caught with a non-commercial quantity of an illegal substance,
Supreme Court Upholds Will of 1980, Declares Compromise Decree Non-Binding: H.V. Nirmala vs R. Sharmila (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Validity of a registered will and its precedence over a subsequent compromise decree. CASE TYPE: Civil – Property Dispute. Case Name: H.V. Nirmala & Anr. vs R. Sharmila & Anr. Judgment Date: 25 January 2018 Date of
Supreme Court Allows Amendment of Pleadings and Filing of Documents in Civil Suit: N.C. Bansal vs. Uttar Pradesh Financial Corporation (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a plaintiff should be allowed to amend their pleadings and file additional documents at an initial stage of a civil suit. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: N.C. Bansal vs. Uttar Pradesh
Supreme Court on Market Access Denial Under Competition Act: Competition Commission of India vs. Fast Way Transmission (2018) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether termination of a broadcast agreement by a dominant Multi-System Operator (MSO) constitutes “denial of market access” under Section 4(2)(c) of the Competition Act, 2002, even if the broadcaster and MSO are not direct competitors.
