Judges

Supreme Court Allows Felling of 177 Trees for Mumbai Metro Project Despite Initial Order

/ Afforestation, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Environmental Law, J B Pardiwala, Judges, Order of Court, Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha, Public Interest Litigation, Tree Felling

Supreme Court Allows Felling of 177 Trees for Mumbai Metro Project Despite Initial Order LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Mumbai Metro Rail Corporation Limited (MMRCL) could fell more trees than initially permitted by the Supreme Court for the Metro Car Shed Land at Aarey Colony. CASE TYPE: Public Interest Litigation Case Name: In Re: Felling of […]

Supreme Court Allows Felling of 177 Trees for Mumbai Metro Project Despite Initial Order Read Post »

Supreme Court Restricts High Court Interference in SARFAESI Act Cases: South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. Naveen Mathew Philip (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Sanjiv Khanna, SARFAESI Act, 2002, SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 13, SARFAESI Act, 2002 with Section 17

Supreme Court Restricts High Court Interference in SARFAESI Act Cases: South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. Naveen Mathew Philip (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether High Courts can interfere in matters under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) when an effective alternative remedy is available. CASE TYPE: Banking/Financial

Supreme Court Restricts High Court Interference in SARFAESI Act Cases: South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. Naveen Mathew Philip (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes Discretionary Allotment of Land: Improvement Trust, Ropar vs. Shashi Bala (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Land Allotment, Land Law, Punjab Town Improvement (Utilization of Land and Allotment of Plots) Rules, 1983, Sanjay Kumar, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Quashes Discretionary Allotment of Land: Improvement Trust, Ropar vs. Shashi Bala (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a land allotment made under a discretionary quota can be upheld if the discretionary quota itself is deemed unconstitutional. CASE TYPE: Civil Law – Land Allotment Case Name: Improvement Trust, Ropar vs. Shashi Bala & Anr. Judgment Date:

Supreme Court Quashes Discretionary Allotment of Land: Improvement Trust, Ropar vs. Shashi Bala (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restricts High Court Interference in SARFAESI Act Cases: South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. Naveen Mathew Philip (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Sanjiv Khanna, SARFAESI Act, 2002, Section 13(2), Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, Section 13(4), Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002, Writ Jurisdiction

Supreme Court Restricts High Court Interference in SARFAESI Act Cases: South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. Naveen Mathew Philip (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether High Courts can interfere in matters related to the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (SARFAESI Act) when an effective alternative remedy is available. CASE TYPE:

Supreme Court Restricts High Court Interference in SARFAESI Act Cases: South Indian Bank Ltd. vs. Naveen Mathew Philip (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Mandatory Penalty and Interest Under Gujarat Sales Tax Act: State of Gujarat vs. M/s Saw Pipes Ltd. (2023) INSC 355

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 with Section 45, Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 with Section 47, Interest, Judges, M.R. Shah, Penalty, Tax Law

Supreme Court Upholds Mandatory Penalty and Interest Under Gujarat Sales Tax Act: State of Gujarat vs. M/s Saw Pipes Ltd. (2023) INSC 355 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether penalty and interest under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 can be waived based on a taxpayer’s bonafide belief and payment of the principal tax amount. CASE TYPE: Tax

Supreme Court Upholds Mandatory Penalty and Interest Under Gujarat Sales Tax Act: State of Gujarat vs. M/s Saw Pipes Ltd. (2023) INSC 355 Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Penalty and Interest Under Gujarat Sales Tax Act: State of Gujarat vs. M/s Saw Pipes Ltd. (2023) INSC 376

/ B.V. Nagarathna, Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969, Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 with Section 45, Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969 with Section 47(4A), Judges, M.R. Shah

Supreme Court Upholds Penalty and Interest Under Gujarat Sales Tax Act: State of Gujarat vs. M/s Saw Pipes Ltd. (2023) INSC 376 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether mens rea (guilty mind) is necessary for imposing penalty and interest under the Gujarat Sales Tax Act, 1969. CASE TYPE: Tax Law. Case Name: State of Gujarat and Anr. vs.

Supreme Court Upholds Penalty and Interest Under Gujarat Sales Tax Act: State of Gujarat vs. M/s Saw Pipes Ltd. (2023) INSC 376 Read Post »

Supreme Court Grants Bail in UAPA Case Citing Lack of Prima Facie Evidence: Yedala Subba Rao vs. Union of India (2023) INSC 349

/ Abhay S. Oka, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Fundamental Rights, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 25, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 27, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences related to terrorist acts, Rajesh Bindal, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 with Section 43D

Supreme Court Grants Bail in UAPA Case Citing Lack of Prima Facie Evidence: Yedala Subba Rao vs. Union of India (2023) INSC 349 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the accused should be granted bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) when there is a lack of prima facie evidence. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Yedala

Supreme Court Grants Bail in UAPA Case Citing Lack of Prima Facie Evidence: Yedala Subba Rao vs. Union of India (2023) INSC 349 Read Post »

Supreme Court Grants Bail to Accused in UAPA Case: Yedala Subba Rao & Anr. vs. Union of India (17 April 2023)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Criminal Conspiracy, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 27, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences under UAPA, Rajesh Bindal, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 with Section 43D

Supreme Court Grants Bail in UAPA Case: Yedala Subba Rao vs. Union of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the accused are entitled to bail under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA) given the stringent conditions for bail under the act. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA) Case Name: Yedala Subba Rao

Supreme Court Grants Bail to Accused in UAPA Case: Yedala Subba Rao & Anr. vs. Union of India (17 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court acquits Sub-Registrar due to lack of evidence of demand for bribe: Soundarajan vs. State (2023) INSC 353

/ Abhay S. Oka, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 464, Judges, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 20, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 7, Rajesh Bindal

Supreme Court acquits Sub-Registrar due to lack of evidence of demand for bribe: Soundarajan vs. State (2023) INSC 353 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the demand for gratification is a necessary element for an offense under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law, Prevention of Corruption Case Name: Soundarajan vs. State

Supreme Court acquits Sub-Registrar due to lack of evidence of demand for bribe: Soundarajan vs. State (2023) INSC 353 Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Siju Kurian vs. State of Karnataka (2023)

/ Aravind Kumar, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 313, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 106, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 27, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 8, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 201, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Siju Kurian vs. State of Karnataka (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the High Court was correct in reversing the Trial Court’s acquittal based on circumstantial evidence and the admissibility of a confessional statement leading to the discovery of a fact. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Siju Kurian vs.

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Siju Kurian vs. State of Karnataka (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case Based on Circumstantial Evidence: Siju Kurian vs. State of Karnataka (2023)

/ Aravind Kumar, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 106, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 27, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 8, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 201, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case Based on Circumstantial Evidence: Siju Kurian vs. State of Karnataka (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a conviction can be upheld based on circumstantial evidence when there is no direct evidence linking the accused to the crime. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law – Murder Case Name: Siju Kurian vs. State of

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case Based on Circumstantial Evidence: Siju Kurian vs. State of Karnataka (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Power Purchase Agreements in Renewable Energy Sector: Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Limited vs. Renew Wind Energy (Rajkot) Private Limited (2023)

/ Contract Law, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 181, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 86, Judges, M.M. Sundresh, Power Purchase Agreements, S. Ravindra Bhat, Sanctity of Contracts, Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Tariff Determination

Supreme Court Upholds Power Purchase Agreements in Renewable Energy Sector: Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Limited vs. Renew Wind Energy (Rajkot) Private Limited (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a change in regulations regarding the pricing of renewable energy certificates (RECs) can retroactively alter the terms of existing Power Purchase Agreements (PPAs). CASE TYPE: Electricity Law, Contract Law

Supreme Court Upholds Power Purchase Agreements in Renewable Energy Sector: Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Limited vs. Renew Wind Energy (Rajkot) Private Limited (2023) Read Post »

Scroll to Top