S.A. Bobde

Supreme Court Allows Video Conferencing in Matrimonial Cases Due to Pandemic: Anjali Brahmawar Chauhan vs. Navin Chauhan (22 January 2021)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Family Law, Inherent Powers, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Matrimonial Disputes, S.A. Bobde, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Allows Video Conferencing in Matrimonial Cases Due to Pandemic: Anjali Brahmawar Chauhan vs. Navin Chauhan (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether video conferencing can be allowed in matrimonial disputes. CASE TYPE: Matrimonial Dispute Case Name: Anjali Brahmawar Chauhan vs. Navin Chauhan Judgment Date: 22 January 2021 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 22 January 2021 Citation: […]

Supreme Court Allows Video Conferencing in Matrimonial Cases Due to Pandemic: Anjali Brahmawar Chauhan vs. Navin Chauhan (22 January 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies eligibility for Punjab Pension Scheme: Darshan Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Ors. (22 January 2021)

/ Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Pension Scheme, S.A. Bobde, Service Law, Service Law with Cut-off Date, Vineet Saran

Punjab Pension Scheme: Supreme Court Clarifies Eligibility for 214 Employees (22 January 2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Clarification of pension eligibility for employees under the Punjab Pension Scheme. CASE TYPE: Service Law. Case Name: Darshan Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 22 January 2021 Date of the Judgment: 22 January 2021Citation: Not

Supreme Court clarifies eligibility for Punjab Pension Scheme: Darshan Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Ors. (22 January 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Directs Delhi University to Declare Results After Student Detained for Low Attendance: Ankita Meena vs. University of Delhi (22 January 2021)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Attendance Rules, Bar Council of India Rules, Bar Council of India Rules with Rule 10, Education Law, Judges, S.A. Bobde, Student Rights, University Regulations, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Directs Delhi University to Declare Results After Student Detained for Low Attendance: Ankita Meena vs. University of Delhi (22 January 2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a student who was detained for low attendance due to childbirth and a teachers’ strike should be allowed to complete her course and receive her degree. CASE TYPE: Education

Supreme Court Directs Delhi University to Declare Results After Student Detained for Low Attendance: Ankita Meena vs. University of Delhi (22 January 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Chief Justice’s Power to Set Qualifications for Promotions: Ashok Kumar vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir (2021)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Classification of Employees, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 229, Judges, Promotions, S.A. Bobde, Service Law, Service Rules, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Chief Justice’s Power to Set Qualifications for Promotions: Ashok Kumar vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a Chief Justice of a High Court can prescribe educational qualifications for promotions within the High Court’s staff, and whether such classifications based on qualifications are valid. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case

Supreme Court Upholds Chief Justice’s Power to Set Qualifications for Promotions: Ashok Kumar vs. State of Jammu and Kashmir (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court permits sale of already mined ore to pay compensation: Common Cause vs. Union of India (06 January 2021)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Bijoy Krishna Patel, Judges, Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957, Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 with Section 21(5), Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 with Section 8A(6), S.A. Bobde, S.C. Parija, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court permits sale of already mined ore to pay compensation: Common Cause vs. Union of India (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether mining leaseholders can be permitted to sell already mined ore to pay compensation for excess production. CASE TYPE: Mining Law Case Name: Common Cause vs. Union of India & Ors. Judgment Date: 06 January

Supreme Court permits sale of already mined ore to pay compensation: Common Cause vs. Union of India (06 January 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Vote Cast Before Disqualification: Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia vs. Dhiraj Prasad Sahu (2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 191, Disqualification of Legislators, Disqualification of Members, Judges, Representation of the People Act, 1951, Representation of the People Act, 1951 with Section 8(3), S.A. Bobde, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Vote Cast Before Disqualification: Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia vs. Dhiraj Prasad Sahu (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a vote cast by a Member of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) before being disqualified on the same day is valid. CASE TYPE: Election Law Case Name: Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia vs. Dhiraj Prasad Sahu @ Dhiraj Sahu &

Supreme Court Upholds Vote Cast Before Disqualification: Pradeep Kumar Sonthalia vs. Dhiraj Prasad Sahu (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the effect of suspended sentences on disqualification under Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951: Saritha S. Nair vs. Hibi Eden (9 December 2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order VI, Rule 15, Disqualification of Members of Parliament, Election Petitions, Indian Constitution, Indian Constitution with Article 102(1)(e), Judges, Representation of the People Act, 1951, Representation of the People Act, 1951 with Section 8(3), Representation of the People Act, 1951 with Section 86, S.A. Bobde, V. Ramasubramanian, Verification of Pleadings

Supreme Court Clarifies Disqualification of Candidates Under Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951 Date of the Judgment: 9 December 2020 Citation: 2020 INSC 914 Judges: S.A. Bobde, CJI, A.S. Bopanna, J., V. Ramasubramanian, J. Can a candidate, convicted of a crime and sentenced to imprisonment for more than two years, contest

Supreme Court clarifies the effect of suspended sentences on disqualification under Section 8(3) of the Representation of the People Act, 1951: Saritha S. Nair vs. Hibi Eden (9 December 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Investigation into Vehicle Emission Deception: Skoda Auto Volkswagen vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (26 November 2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 420, Judges, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Section 110, Offences of Cheating, S.A. Bobde, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Allows Investigation into Vehicle Emission Deception: Skoda Auto Volkswagen vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a criminal investigation can proceed on a complaint regarding vehicle emission violations when related environmental issues are already under adjudication in civil appeals before the Supreme Court. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Skoda Auto Volkswagen

Supreme Court Allows Investigation into Vehicle Emission Deception: Skoda Auto Volkswagen vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (26 November 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Election Petition: Tej Bahadur vs. Narendra Modi (24 November 2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order VI Rule 16, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order VII Rule 11, Judges, Representation of the People Act, 1951, Representation of the People Act, 1951 with Section 33(3), Representation of the People Act, 1951 with Section 36(5), Representation of the People Act, 1951 with Section 79(b), S.A. Bobde, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Election Petition: Tej Bahadur vs. Narendra Modi (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an individual whose nomination was rejected due to lack of a mandatory certificate can challenge an election as a ‘candidate’. CASE TYPE: Election Law Case Name: Tej Bahadur vs. Shri Narendra Modi Judgment Date: 24 November 2020 Introduction Date

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Election Petition: Tej Bahadur vs. Narendra Modi (24 November 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Orders Disclosure of Segmented Offers in Telecom Tariff Dispute: TRAI vs. Bharti Airtel Ltd. (2020) INSC 721 (06 November 2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Judges, Regulatory Authority, S.A. Bobde, Telecom Law, Telecom Law with Section 11(1)(b)(i), Telecom Law with Section 11(2), Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI), Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Orders Disclosure of Segmented Offers in Telecom Tariff Dispute Date of the Judgment: 06 November 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 721 Judges: S.A. Bobde, CJI, A.S. Bopanna, J., V. Ramasubramanian, J. Can a telecom regulator demand details of segmented offers from service providers to ensure fair pricing? The Supreme Court addressed this question in

Supreme Court Orders Disclosure of Segmented Offers in Telecom Tariff Dispute: TRAI vs. Bharti Airtel Ltd. (2020) INSC 721 (06 November 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court directs speedy trial in matrimonial dispute case: T.S.K. Ashwin Kumar vs. Tubati Srivalli & Ors. (2020) INSC 497 (06 November 2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 482, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 420, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 498A, Judges, S.A. Bobde, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court directs speedy trial in matrimonial dispute case: T.S.K. Ashwin Kumar vs. Tubati Srivalli & Ors. (2020) INSC 497 (06 November 2020) Date of the Judgment: 06 November 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 497 Judges: S.A. Bobde, CJI, A.S. Bopanna, J., V. Ramasubramanian, J. Can a High Court stay a trial when the Supreme Court

Supreme Court directs speedy trial in matrimonial dispute case: T.S.K. Ashwin Kumar vs. Tubati Srivalli & Ors. (2020) INSC 497 (06 November 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Striking of Prayer for Declaring Election Petitioner as Duly Elected: Muniraju Gowda vs. Munirathna (2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Judges, Representation of the People Act, 1951, Representation of the People Act, 1951 with Section 100, Representation of the People Act, 1951 with Section 101, Representation of the People Act, 1951 with Section 83, S.A. Bobde, V. Ramasubramanian

Supreme Court Upholds Striking of Prayer for Declaring Election Petitioner as Duly Elected: Muniraju Gowda vs. Munirathna (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an election petitioner can be declared elected in place of a disqualified returned candidate when there were multiple candidates in the fray and the election petition lacks material facts to support such a declaration.

Supreme Court Upholds Striking of Prayer for Declaring Election Petitioner as Duly Elected: Muniraju Gowda vs. Munirathna (2020) Read Post »

Scroll to Top