Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court clarifies Pro-Rata Wage Deductions for “Go Slow” Tactics in Industrial Dispute: Bata India Limited vs. Workmen of Bata India Limited (29 March 2022)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Go Slow Tactics, Industrial Disputes, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 10-B, Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 10(3), Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 33-C(1), Judges, Pro-Rata Wage Deduction, Sanjiv Khanna

Bata India Limited vs. Workmen of Bata India Limited: Supreme Court on Pro-Rata Wages for “Go Slow” Tactics Date of the Judgment: 29 March 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 188 Judges: Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice Sanjiv Khanna Can an employer deduct wages for employees who deliberately slow down production, a tactic known as “go slow”? […]

Supreme Court clarifies Pro-Rata Wage Deductions for “Go Slow” Tactics in Industrial Dispute: Bata India Limited vs. Workmen of Bata India Limited (29 March 2022) Read Post »

Limitation in Property Disputes: Supreme Court Divided on Plaint Rejection in Saranpal Kaur Anand vs. Praduman Singh Chandhok (28 March 2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order VII Rule 11(d), Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XII Rule 6, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XIV Rule 2, Judges, Limitation Act, 1963, Limitation Act, 1963 with Article 58, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 17, Limitation Act, 1963 with Section 3, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Addresses Limitation in Property Dispute: Saranpal Kaur Anand vs. Praduman Singh Chandhok (2022) Date of the Judgment: 28 March 2022 The Supreme Court of India heard a case regarding a property dispute where the main issue was whether the suit was filed within the time limit set by law. The case, *Saranpal Kaur

Limitation in Property Disputes: Supreme Court Divided on Plaint Rejection in Saranpal Kaur Anand vs. Praduman Singh Chandhok (28 March 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Bangalore Development Authority’s Right to Alter Site Prices: Bangalore Development Authority vs. R. Jayakumar & Ors. (9 March 2022)

/ Allotment of Sites, Bangalore Development Authority Rules, 1984, Bangalore Development Authority Rules, 1984 with Rule 12, Bela M. Trivedi, Breach of contract, Contract Law, Judges, Sanjiv Khanna, Specific Performance

Supreme Court Upholds Bangalore Development Authority’s Right to Alter Site Prices: Bangalore Development Authority vs. R. Jayakumar & Ors. (2022) Date of the Judgment: 9 March 2022 Citation: Not Available Judges: Sanjiv Khanna, J. and Bela M. Trivedi, J. Can a development authority alter the price of a site after the initial application? The Supreme

Supreme Court Upholds Bangalore Development Authority’s Right to Alter Site Prices: Bangalore Development Authority vs. R. Jayakumar & Ors. (9 March 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of CISF Constable for Assaulting Senior Officer: Union of India vs. Managobinda Samantaray (24 February 2022)

/ Appellate Powers, Bela M. Trivedi, Disciplinary Proceedings, Judges, Sanjiv Khanna, Service Law, Service Law with Rule 52 of the CISF Rules, 2001

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of CISF Constable for Assaulting Senior Officer LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the appellate authority’s decision to enhance the penalty of a CISF constable from reduction of pay to dismissal was justified, and whether the High Court’s intervention in reducing the punishment was appropriate. CASE TYPE: Service Law. Case Name: Union of India

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of CISF Constable for Assaulting Senior Officer: Union of India vs. Managobinda Samantaray (24 February 2022) Read Post »

Duty to Disclose Investigation Report: Supreme Court rules in favor of transparency in T. Takano vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India (2022)

/ Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, PFUTP Regulations, Right to Information Act, Right to Information Act with Section 8(1), Sanjiv Khanna, SEBI Act, Securities Law

Supreme Court mandates disclosure of investigation report in SEBI case: T. Takano vs. SEBI (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an investigation report under Regulation 9 of the SEBI (Prohibition of Fraudulent and Unfair Trade Practices) Regulations, 2003 (PFUTP Regulations) must be disclosed to the person to whom a show cause notice is issued. CASE TYPE: Securities

Duty to Disclose Investigation Report: Supreme Court rules in favor of transparency in T. Takano vs. Securities and Exchange Board of India (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Limits Vicarious Liability in Murder Case: Krishnamurthy vs. State of Karnataka (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 428, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Limits Vicarious Liability in Murder Case: Krishnamurthy vs. State of Karnataka (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether individuals can be held vicariously liable for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, when their actions, though contributing to the circumstances, did not directly cause the death and lacked a

Supreme Court Limits Vicarious Liability in Murder Case: Krishnamurthy vs. State of Karnataka (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court acquits accused in dowry death case due to lack of evidence: Satye Singh vs. State of Uttarakhand (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 106, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court acquits accused in dowry death case due to lack of evidence: Satye Singh vs. State of Uttarakhand (2022) Date of the Judgment: 15th February 2022 Citation: [Not Available in Source] Judges: Sanjiv Khanna, J., Bela M. Trivedi, J. Can a conviction for murder be upheld based solely on suspicion and circumstantial evidence, even

Supreme Court acquits accused in dowry death case due to lack of evidence: Satye Singh vs. State of Uttarakhand (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies insurance claim rules for vehicle theft: Delay in intimation not always fatal: Jaina Construction Company vs. Oriental Insurance Company (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Consumer Law, Consumer Rights, Gurshinder Singh vs. Shriram General Insurance Company Ltd., Insurance Claims, Insurance Law, Insurance Law with Condition No. 1 of the Insurance Policy, Judges, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court on Delay in Insurance Claim for Vehicle Theft: Jaina Construction Company vs. Oriental Insurance Company (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an insurance company can reject a claim for vehicle theft solely due to a delay in informing the company, despite a timely police report. CASE TYPE: Consumer Law Case Name: Jaina Construction Company vs.

Supreme Court clarifies insurance claim rules for vehicle theft: Delay in intimation not always fatal: Jaina Construction Company vs. Oriental Insurance Company (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Bar on Suits Challenging Compromise Decrees in Property Dispute: Sree Surya Developers vs. N. Sailesh Prasad (2022)

/ Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Civil Procedure Code, 1908 with Order XXIII Rule 3A, Judges, M.R. Shah, Order XXIII, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Order XXXII, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Upholds Bar on Suits Challenging Compromise Decrees in Property Dispute: Sree Surya Developers vs. N. Sailesh Prasad (2022) Date of the Judgment: 09 February 2022 Citation: 2022 INSC 140 Judges: M.R. Shah, J., Sanjiv Khanna, J. Can a party bypass the legal bar on challenging a compromise decree by cleverly drafting a suit?

Supreme Court Upholds Bar on Suits Challenging Compromise Decrees in Property Dispute: Sree Surya Developers vs. N. Sailesh Prasad (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Holds Post Office Liable for Fraudulent Encashment of Kisan Vikas Patras: Pradeep Kumar vs. Post Master General (2022)

/ B.R. Gavai, Government Savings Certificates Act, 1959, Government Savings Certificates Act, 1959 with Section 12, Government Savings Certificates Act, 1959 with Section 8, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 10, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 31, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 78, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Holds Post Office Liable for Fraudulent Encashment of Kisan Vikas Patras: Pradeep Kumar vs. Post Master General (2022) Date of the Judgment: 7th February 2022 Citation: Civil Appeal Nos. 8775-8776 of 2016 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, Sanjiv Khanna, B.R. Gavai Can a post office be held liable for the fraudulent encashment of Kisan

Supreme Court Holds Post Office Liable for Fraudulent Encashment of Kisan Vikas Patras: Pradeep Kumar vs. Post Master General (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Partially Allows Appeal on Deficiency of Service: IndusInd Bank vs. Simarjit Singh (2022)

/ Civil Law, Consumer Law, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 2019, D.Y. Chandrachud, Damages, Deficiency of Service, Deficiency of Service, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Judges, Sanjiv Khanna

Supreme Court Partially Allows Appeal on Deficiency of Service: IndusInd Bank vs. Simarjit Singh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) was correct in upholding the State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission’s (SCDRC) order regarding the valuation of timber in a deficiency of service case. CASE TYPE: Consumer Case Name: IndusInd Bank

Supreme Court Partially Allows Appeal on Deficiency of Service: IndusInd Bank vs. Simarjit Singh (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Directs Arrears Payment for TV News Correspondents and Editors: Union of India vs. E Krishna Rao (28 January 2022)

/ Arrears of Pay, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Implementation of Court Orders, Judges, Sanjiv Khanna, Service Law, Supreme Court Orders

Supreme Court Directs Arrears Payment for TV News Correspondents and Editors Can the government delay payments to employees who won a legal battle? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this question, ensuring that arrears are paid to TV News Correspondents, Assistant News Correspondents, and Assistant News Editors. This case involves the Union of India

Supreme Court Directs Arrears Payment for TV News Correspondents and Editors: Union of India vs. E Krishna Rao (28 January 2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top