Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Stays Project-Wise Insolvency, Allows CIRP to Continue with Modifications: Indiabulls vs. Ram Kishore Arora (2023)

/ Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process, Dinesh Maheshwari, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 29A, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 7, Judges, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Stays Project-Wise Insolvency, Allows CIRP to Continue with Modifications: Indiabulls vs. Ram Kishore Arora (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) can order a project-wise Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP) instead of a company-wide CIRP under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: Indiabulls […]

Supreme Court Stays Project-Wise Insolvency, Allows CIRP to Continue with Modifications: Indiabulls vs. Ram Kishore Arora (2023) Read Post »

State’s Right to Challenge Central Laws: Supreme Court Addresses Maintainability of Meghalaya’s Suit on Lottery Regulations (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 131, Dinesh Maheshwari, Federalism, Judges, Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998, Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 with Section 5, Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 with Section 6, Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 with Section 7, Original Jurisdiction, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Addresses State’s Right to Challenge Central Lottery Laws: Meghalaya vs. Union of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a State can challenge the constitutional validity of a Central law under Article 131 of the Constitution of India. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law, Original Suit Case Name: State of Meghalaya vs. Union of India & Others

State’s Right to Challenge Central Laws: Supreme Court Addresses Maintainability of Meghalaya’s Suit on Lottery Regulations (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds State’s Right to Challenge Lottery Laws: Meghalaya vs. Union of India (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 131, Constitutional Law with Article 298, Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges, Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998, Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 with Section 5, Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 with Section 6, Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998 with Section 7, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Upholds State’s Right to Challenge Lottery Laws: Meghalaya vs. Union of India (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a State can challenge the validity of a Central law under Article 131 of the Constitution. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law, Original Suit Case Name: State of Meghalaya vs. Union of India & Others Judgment Date: 11 May

Supreme Court Upholds State’s Right to Challenge Lottery Laws: Meghalaya vs. Union of India (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Stays Project-Wise Insolvency Resolution: Indiabulls vs. Ram Kishore (2023)

/ Committee of Creditors (CoC), Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), Dinesh Maheshwari, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 7, Judges, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Stays Project-Wise Insolvency Resolution: Indiabulls vs. Ram Kishore (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (NCLAT) can order a project-wise insolvency resolution process under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: Indiabulls Asset Reconstruction Company Limited vs. Ram Kishore Arora & Ors. [Judgment Date]:

Supreme Court Stays Project-Wise Insolvency Resolution: Indiabulls vs. Ram Kishore (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award on Power Purchase Agreement: Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. vs. State of Goa (2023)

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 28, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Contract Law, Contract Law with Fuel Supply Contract, Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges, Power Purchase Agreement, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award on Power Purchase Agreement: Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. vs. State of Goa (2023) Date of the Judgment: May 10, 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 448 Judges: Dinesh Maheshwari, J., Sanjay Kumar, J. Can a court interfere with an arbitrator’s decision on a complex commercial contract? The Supreme Court recently addressed this question

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award on Power Purchase Agreement: Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. vs. State of Goa (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award on Power Purchase Agreement Dispute: Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. vs. State of Goa (2023) INSC 514

/ Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 28, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 34, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 37, Dinesh Maheshwari, Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 86(1)(f), Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 114, Judges, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award on Power Purchase Agreement Dispute Date of the Judgment: 10 May 2023 Citation: (2023) INSC 514 Judges: Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Sanjay Kumar. This was a unanimous decision by a two-judge bench, with the opinion authored by Justice Dinesh Maheshwari. Can an arbitral award be overturned by a court simply

Supreme Court Upholds Arbitral Award on Power Purchase Agreement Dispute: Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. vs. State of Goa (2023) INSC 514 Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Repatriation of Funds, Sets Aside Bank Guarantee in Jermyn Capital LLC Dubai vs. CBI (9 May 2023)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 102, Judges, Krishna Murari, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Allows Repatriation of Funds, Sets Aside Bank Guarantee in Jermyn Capital LLC Dubai vs. CBI Date of the Judgment: 9 May 2023 Citation: (2023) INSC 438 Judges: Krishna Murari, J. and Sanjay Kumar, J. Can a company’s assets be frozen indefinitely due to an investigation against an unrelated individual? The Supreme Court of

Supreme Court Allows Repatriation of Funds, Sets Aside Bank Guarantee in Jermyn Capital LLC Dubai vs. CBI (9 May 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court allows Repatriation of Funds, Overturns Bank Guarantee Requirement in Jermyn Capital LLC Dubai vs. CBI (09 May 2023)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 102, Judges, Krishna Murari, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Allows Repatriation of Funds, Overturns Bank Guarantee Requirement in Jermyn Capital LLC Dubai vs. CBI LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a freeze order on a company’s assets can be sustained when the company is not implicated in the alleged crime and the accused individual is discharged. CASE TYPE: Criminal. Case Name: M/s. Jermyn Capital LLC

Supreme Court allows Repatriation of Funds, Overturns Bank Guarantee Requirement in Jermyn Capital LLC Dubai vs. CBI (09 May 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Acts: C.S. Gopalakrishnan vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 254(2), Dinesh Maheshwari, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Law, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Sanjay Kumar, Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Acts

Supreme Court Upholds Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Acts: C.S. Gopalakrishnan vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Tamil Nadu land acquisition laws are discriminatory and arbitrary compared to the Central Land Acquisition Act. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Law Case Name: C.S. Gopalakrishnan ETC. vs. The State of Tamil Nadu & Others [Judgment

Supreme Court Upholds Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Acts: C.S. Gopalakrishnan vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Laws: C.S. Gopalakrishnan vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2023)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 254, Dinesh Maheshwari, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Land Acquisition Law, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Sanjay Kumar, Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Laws

Supreme Court Upholds Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Laws: C.S. Gopalakrishnan vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2023) Date of the Judgment: May 9, 2023 Citation: 2023 INSC 510 Judges: Dinesh Maheshwari, J., Sanjay Kumar, J. Can State laws for land acquisition, which are different from the central law, be valid? The Supreme Court of India addressed

Supreme Court Upholds Tamil Nadu Land Acquisition Laws: C.S. Gopalakrishnan vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court on Delay in Enforcing Rights under the Karnataka SC/ST Act: Shakuntala vs. State of Karnataka (28 April 2023)

/ Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges, Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978, Land Law, Land Law with Section 4, Land Law with Section 5, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court on Delay in Enforcing Rights under the Karnataka SC/ST Act: Shakuntala vs. State of Karnataka (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether significant delay in initiating proceedings impacts the enforcement of statutory rights under the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978. CASE TYPE: Land Law, Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe

Supreme Court on Delay in Enforcing Rights under the Karnataka SC/ST Act: Shakuntala vs. State of Karnataka (28 April 2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court Rules Delay Fatal in Land Restitution Cases: Shakuntala vs. State of Karnataka (28 April 2023)

/ Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges, Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978, Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 with Section 4, Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978 with Section 5, Land Restitution, Sanjay Kumar

Supreme Court Rules Delay Fatal in Land Restitution Cases: Shakuntala vs. State of Karnataka (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether delay impacts the enforcement of statutory rights, specifically in the context of land restitution under the Karnataka Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prohibition of Transfer of Certain Lands) Act, 1978. CASE TYPE: Land Law, Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe

Supreme Court Rules Delay Fatal in Land Restitution Cases: Shakuntala vs. State of Karnataka (28 April 2023) Read Post »

Scroll to Top