Judges

Supreme Court Sets Aside Order Due to Lack of Opportunity to Be Heard: Charanjit Singh vs. State of J&K (08 September 2008)

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 08 September 2008 The Supreme Court of India addressed the critical issue of whether a High Court can reverse a decision without providing the affected party an opportunity to be heard. This principle, rooted in natural justice, ensures fairness and equity in judicial proceedings. In Charanjit Singh vs. State of […]

Supreme Court Sets Aside Order Due to Lack of Opportunity to Be Heard: Charanjit Singh vs. State of J&K (08 September 2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Sets Aside Order Due to Lack of Notice in Criminal Proceedings: Neelakanteswaraswamy vs. M. Mahadevamurthy (2008)

Date of the Judgment: September 08, 2008 Judges: Tarun Chatterjee, J., Aftab Alam, J. Did you know that failing to properly notify an accused person about a court hearing can lead to the entire legal proceeding being overturned? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this critical issue of procedural fairness in the case of

Supreme Court Sets Aside Order Due to Lack of Notice in Criminal Proceedings: Neelakanteswaraswamy vs. M. Mahadevamurthy (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court sets aside eviction decree, recognizing firm as statutory tenant: Gautham Bhavan vs. Sakuntala Sahu (2008)

Date of the Judgment: September 05, 2008 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 5516 of 2008 (Arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 5500 of 2008) Judges: B.N. Agrawal, J. and G.S. Singhvi, J. Can a court disregard prior judgments establishing tenancy rights in an eviction suit? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in a

Supreme Court sets aside eviction decree, recognizing firm as statutory tenant: Gautham Bhavan vs. Sakuntala Sahu (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of orders regarding Mahantship succession: Mahant Rajendra Das Vaishanav vs. Gopal Das & Ors. (2008)

Date of the Judgment: September 04, 2008 Citation: [Citation not available in the provided text] Judges: Justice R.V. Raveendran, Justice Dalveer Bhandari Can previous orders of the Supreme Court be interpreted as final directives on the succession of a religious office, even without a formal adjudication? The Supreme Court addressed this question in the case

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of orders regarding Mahantship succession: Mahant Rajendra Das Vaishanav vs. Gopal Das & Ors. (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Amended Promotion Rules for UP Higher Judicial Service: V.K. Srivastava vs. Govt. of U.P. (2008)

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 4th September 2008 The Supreme Court of India, in V.K. Srivastava & Ors. vs. Govt. of U.P. & Anr., addressed a critical question regarding the retrospective application of amended service rules concerning promotions within the Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service. This case highlights the conflict between established seniority rights and

Supreme Court Upholds Amended Promotion Rules for UP Higher Judicial Service: V.K. Srivastava vs. Govt. of U.P. (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Against Order Denying Interest on Excise Refund: Union of India vs. Sterlite Industries (2008)

Date of the Judgment: September 03, 2008 Judges: S.H. Kapadia, B. Sudershan Reddy When a government department delays a refund, is it obligated to pay interest on the delayed amount? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case involving Sterlite Industries and the Union of India. The core issue revolved around whether

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Against Order Denying Interest on Excise Refund: Union of India vs. Sterlite Industries (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Tribunal Decision on Promotion Based on Relaxed Qualification: Vijay Bala Bhanot vs. Government of NCT Delhi (2008)

Introduction Date of the Judgment: September 03, 2008 The Supreme Court of India addressed the legality of promotions granted by relaxing educational qualifications, questioning whether such relaxations can be applied to individuals rather than a class or category of employees. The case revolves around Lab Technicians promoted to Technical Assistants based on relaxed criteria. The

Supreme Court Upholds Tribunal Decision on Promotion Based on Relaxed Qualification: Vijay Bala Bhanot vs. Government of NCT Delhi (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal on Excise Refund Interest Claim: Union of India vs. Sterlite Industries (2008)

Date of the Judgment: September 03, 2008 Judges: S.H. Kapadia, J. and B. Sudershan Reddy, J. When a company is entitled to a refund of excise duty, is it also entitled to interest on that refund? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case involving Sterlite Industries. The court set aside a

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal on Excise Refund Interest Claim: Union of India vs. Sterlite Industries (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles deduction calculation under Section 80HHC for export businesses: M/s. Mysodet (P) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore (2008)

Introduction Date of the Judgment: September 03, 2008 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 5475 of 2008 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 7323 of 2007) Judges: Justice S.H. Kapadia and Justice B. Sudershan Reddy How should deductions be calculated for export businesses under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act when a company has both export and

Supreme Court settles deduction calculation under Section 80HHC for export businesses: M/s. Mysodet (P) Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore (2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court sets aside High Court order regarding regularization of Khalasis: Union of India vs. Laxman Singh Champalal (01 September 2008)

Date of the Judgment: 01 September 2008 Judges: S.B. Sinha and Cyriac Joseph, JJ. Can a High Court judgment be sustained if it lacks reasoning? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a case concerning the regularization of employees in the post of Khalasis. The Court emphasized the necessity for the High Court to provide

Supreme Court sets aside High Court order regarding regularization of Khalasis: Union of India vs. Laxman Singh Champalal (01 September 2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restores Trial Court Order in Ex-Parte Decree Setting Aside Case: Pavan Sachdeva & Anr. vs. S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. & Anr. (01 September 2008)

Date of the Judgment: 01 September 2008 Judges: B.N. Agrawal, J. and G.S. Singhvi, J. Can a High Court interfere with a Trial Court’s order that doesn’t show jurisdictional errors or material irregularities? The Supreme Court addressed this question in a case regarding the setting aside of an ex-parte decree. The Supreme Court allowed the

Supreme Court Restores Trial Court Order in Ex-Parte Decree Setting Aside Case: Pavan Sachdeva & Anr. vs. S.M.S. Pharmaceuticals Ltd. & Anr. (01 September 2008) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction under Section 498A IPC Despite Acquittal under Section 304B IPC: Dinesh Seth vs. State of N.C.T. of Delhi (18 August 2008)

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 18 August 2008 Judges: Altamas Kabir, J. and G.S. Singhvi, J. Can a person be convicted under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) if they have been acquitted of the charge under Section 304B IPC, especially when the charge under Section 498A IPC was not specifically framed? The

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction under Section 498A IPC Despite Acquittal under Section 304B IPC: Dinesh Seth vs. State of N.C.T. of Delhi (18 August 2008) Read Post »

Scroll to Top