Surya Kant

Supreme Court Upholds One Rank One Pension Policy with Periodic Revision: Indian Ex Servicemen Movement vs. Union of India (2022) INSC 244

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP), Pension, Service Law, Surya Kant, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds One Rank One Pension Policy with Periodic Revision: Indian Ex Servicemen Movement vs. Union of India (2022) INSC 244 LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the implementation of the One Rank One Pension (OROP) policy for ex-servicemen, with revisions at periodic intervals, is constitutionally valid and non-discriminatory. CASE TYPE: Service Law, Pension Case Name: Indian […]

Supreme Court Upholds One Rank One Pension Policy with Periodic Revision: Indian Ex Servicemen Movement vs. Union of India (2022) INSC 244 Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction of NGT on land use change: Raza Ahmad vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2022)

/ Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Environment (Protection) Act 1986, Judges, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 with Section 14, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 with Section 16, National Green Tribunal Act, 2010 with Section 33, Surya Kant

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction of NGT on land use change: Raza Ahmad vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the National Green Tribunal (NGT) has the jurisdiction to hear a challenge to a change in land use notification when it allegedly violates the conditions of an Environmental Clearance (EC). CASE TYPE: Environmental Law Case

Supreme Court clarifies jurisdiction of NGT on land use change: Raza Ahmad vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Refund for Quashed 2G Licenses: Loop Telecom vs. Union of India (2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 56, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 65, Judges, Surya Kant, Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997, Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997 with Section 14, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Refund for Quashed 2G Licenses: Loop Telecom vs. Union of India (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a telecom company is entitled to a refund of entry fees after its 2G licenses were quashed due to an illegal government policy. CASE TYPE: Telecom Law, Contract Law, Constitutional Law. Case Name: Loop Telecom

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Refund for Quashed 2G Licenses: Loop Telecom vs. Union of India (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Claim: Non-Communication of Policy Terms Leads to Victory for Cardholder’s Family

/ Cardsure Package Policy, Consumer Disputes, Consumer Law, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insurance Law, Judges, Non-ATM transaction, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Claim: Non-Communication of Policy Terms Leads to Victory for Cardholder’s Family LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an insurance company can deny a claim based on a condition not explicitly communicated to the policyholder. CASE TYPE: Consumer Case Name: Anju Kalsi vs. HDFC Ergo General Insurance Company Limited and Another Judgment Date: 21 February

Supreme Court Upholds Insurance Claim: Non-Communication of Policy Terms Leads to Victory for Cardholder’s Family Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Job Work vs. Manpower Supply for Service Tax: Adiraj Manpower Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Pune II (2022)

/ Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act 1970, Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act 1970 with Section 2(c), Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Finance Act 1994, Finance Act 1994 with Section 66(B), Judges, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Clarifies Job Work vs. Manpower Supply for Service Tax: Adiraj Manpower Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Pune II (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the services provided by a contractor constitute job work or manpower supply for the purpose of service tax exemption. CASE TYPE: Service Tax Law Case Name: Adiraj Manpower

Supreme Court Clarifies Job Work vs. Manpower Supply for Service Tax: Adiraj Manpower Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise Pune II (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Magistrate’s Duty on Multiple Police Reports: Luckose Zachariah vs. Joseph Joseph (2022)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 173(2), Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 173(8), Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Clarifies Magistrate’s Duty on Multiple Police Reports: Luckose Zachariah vs. Joseph Joseph (2022) Date of the Judgment: 18 February 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 167 Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J and Surya Kant, J. When a police investigation results in multiple reports, how should a Magistrate proceed? The Supreme Court of India recently

Supreme Court Clarifies Magistrate’s Duty on Multiple Police Reports: Luckose Zachariah vs. Joseph Joseph (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles jurisdiction of Consumer Forums in Telecom Disputes: Vodafone Idea Cellular Ltd. vs. Ajay Kumar Agarwal (2022) INSC 123 (16 February 2022)

/ Arbitration, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 11, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 2(o), Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 3, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indian Telegraph Act, 1885, Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 with Section 3(6), Indian Telegraph Act, 1885 with Section 7B, Judges, Surya Kant, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Settles Jurisdiction of Consumer Forums in Telecom Disputes Date of the Judgment: 16 February 2022 Citation: (2022) INSC 123 Judges: Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J, Surya Kant, J, Vikram Nath, J Can a consumer forum hear a complaint against a telecom company, or is arbitration the only option? The Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court settles jurisdiction of Consumer Forums in Telecom Disputes: Vodafone Idea Cellular Ltd. vs. Ajay Kumar Agarwal (2022) INSC 123 (16 February 2022) Read Post »

Premature Release Policy: Supreme Court Orders Reconsideration in Sharafat Ali Case (10 February 2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 32, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 34, Judges, Surya Kant, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Orders Reconsideration of Premature Release: Sharafat Ali vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2022) Date of the Judgment: 10 February 2022 Citation: Not Available Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J., Surya Kant, J., and Vikram Nath, J. Can a state government reject a premature release application based on a general apprehension of resentment from

Premature Release Policy: Supreme Court Orders Reconsideration in Sharafat Ali Case (10 February 2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Selection Grade Benefit: Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation vs. Sadhu Singh (2022)

/ Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, Limitation Act 1963, Limitation Act 1963 with Article 137, Selection Grade Benefits, Service Law, Service Law with Satisfactory Service Record, Surya Kant

Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation vs. Sadhu Singh: Supreme Court Denies Selection Grade Benefit Due to Untainted Service Record (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an employee with a blemished service record is entitled to Selection Grade benefits and whether a suit filed seven years after retirement is barred by limitation. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name:

Supreme Court Denies Selection Grade Benefit: Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation vs. Sadhu Singh (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Operational Creditor Definition under IBC: Consolidated Construction Consortium Ltd. vs. Hitro Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (2022)

/ Companies Act, 2013, Companies Act, 2013 with Section 4, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 5(21), Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 9, Judges, Memorandum of Association, Operational Creditor, Surya Kant, Vikram Nath

Supreme Court Clarifies Operational Creditor Definition under IBC: Consolidated Construction Consortium Ltd. vs. Hitro Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a party that receives goods or services can be considered an operational creditor under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name: M/s Consolidated Construction Consortium Limited vs.

Supreme Court Clarifies Operational Creditor Definition under IBC: Consolidated Construction Consortium Ltd. vs. Hitro Energy Solutions Pvt. Ltd. (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court permits Parsi funeral rites during COVID-19: Surat Parsi Panchayat Board vs. Union of India (2022)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 25, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Public Health, Surya Kant

Supreme Court permits Parsi funeral rites during COVID-19: Surat Parsi Panchayat Board vs. Union of India (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Balancing religious freedom with public health concerns during a pandemic. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law/Religious Rights Case Name: The Surat Parsi Panchayat Board and Another vs. Union of India and Others Judgment Date: 4 February 2022 Date

Supreme Court permits Parsi funeral rites during COVID-19: Surat Parsi Panchayat Board vs. Union of India (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction in Army Act Cases: State of Sikkim vs. Jasbir Singh (01 February 2022)

/ Army Act 1950, Army Act 1950 with Section 125, Army Act 1950 with Section 69, Army Act 1950 with Section 70, Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 with Section 475, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Indian Penal Code 1860, Indian Penal Code 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code 1860 with Section 308, Judges, Surya Kant

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction in Army Act Cases: State of Sikkim vs. Jasbir Singh (2022) Date of the Judgment: 01 February 2022 Citation: Criminal Appeal No. 85 of 2022 Judges: Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, J, Surya Kant, J Can a member of the armed forces, accused of a crime, be tried in a regular criminal

Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction in Army Act Cases: State of Sikkim vs. Jasbir Singh (01 February 2022) Read Post »

Scroll to Top