Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies Cess Applicability on Supply Contracts under the Building and Other Construction Workers Act: Uttar Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. vs. CG Power and Industrial Solutions Limited (2021) INSC 303 (12 May 2021)

/ Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Condition of Service) Act, 1996, Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Condition of Service) Act, 1996 with Section 2(1)(d), Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Condition of Service) Act, 1996 with Section 2(1)(g), Building and Other Construction Workers (Regulation of Employment and Condition of Service) Act, 1996 with Section 2(1)(i), Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1996, Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1996 with Section 3(1), Indira Banerjee, Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies Cess Applicability on Supply Contracts under the Building and Other Construction Workers Act Date of the Judgment: 12 May 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 303 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J., Indira Banerjee, J. Can a government entity demand labor cess on a contract that solely involves the supply of equipment, without any construction […]

Supreme Court Clarifies Cess Applicability on Supply Contracts under the Building and Other Construction Workers Act: Uttar Pradesh Power Transmission Corporation Ltd. vs. CG Power and Industrial Solutions Limited (2021) INSC 303 (12 May 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Default Bail: House Arrest Not Custody Under Section 167 CrPC (12 May 2021)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 167, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 428, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 57, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 21, Constitutional Law with Article 22, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Uday Umesh Lalit, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 with Section 43(D)(2)

Supreme Court Denies Default Bail: House Arrest Not Custody Under Section 167 CrPC Date of the Judgment: 12 May 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 290 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J., K.M. Joseph, J. Can house arrest be considered as custody under Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC)? The Supreme Court of India recently

Supreme Court Denies Default Bail: House Arrest Not Custody Under Section 167 CrPC (12 May 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Teacher Appointed Due to Error: State of Odisha vs. Kamalini Khilar (28 April 2021)

/ Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 115, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Recruitment, Service Law, Termination of Service, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Teacher Appointed Due to Error: State of Odisha vs. Kamalini Khilar (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a teacher appointed due to an administrative error, where another candidate was rightfully selected, can be terminated to rectify the error. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: State of Odisha & Ors. vs. Kamalini Khilar

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of Teacher Appointed Due to Error: State of Odisha vs. Kamalini Khilar (28 April 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Restricts Operation of Bank Accounts During Moratorium Under IBC: Sandeep Khaitan vs. JSVM Plywood (2021)

/ Corporate Insolvency Resolution Process (CIRP), Criminal Procedure Code, Criminal Procedure Code with Section 482, Insolvency Law, Insolvency Law with Section 14, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Moratorium, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Restricts Operation of Bank Accounts During Moratorium Under IBC: Sandeep Khaitan vs. JSVM Plywood (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a High Court can allow the operation of bank accounts, which are frozen due to an FIR, during the moratorium period under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 (IBC). CASE TYPE: Insolvency Law Case Name:

Supreme Court Restricts Operation of Bank Accounts During Moratorium Under IBC: Sandeep Khaitan vs. JSVM Plywood (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies “Under the Influence” in Insurance Claims: IFFCO Tokio vs. Pearl Beverages (2021)

/ Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 17, Exclusion Clause, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 279, Indira Banerjee, Insurance Law, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Motor Insurance, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988, Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Section 185, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Clarifies “Under the Influence” in Insurance Claims: IFFCO Tokio vs. Pearl Beverages (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of “under the influence of intoxicating liquor” in insurance contracts. CASE TYPE: Insurance Law, Consumer Protection. Case Name: IFFCO Tokio General Insurance Company Ltd. vs. Pearl Beverages Ltd. [Judgment Date]: 12 April 2021 Introduction Date of the

Supreme Court Clarifies “Under the Influence” in Insurance Claims: IFFCO Tokio vs. Pearl Beverages (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition Compensation in Haryana: Ved & Anr. vs. State of Haryana (2021)

/ Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 17(2)(c), Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6, Uday Umesh Lalit, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition Compensation in Haryana: Ved & Anr. vs. State of Haryana (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of fair market value for land acquired for industrial development. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition. Case Name: Ved & Anr. vs. State of Haryana & Anr. [Judgment Date]: April 08, 2021 Date of the Judgment: April 08,

Supreme Court Upholds Land Acquisition Compensation in Haryana: Ved & Anr. vs. State of Haryana (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Land Acquisition in Haryana: Acquainted Realtors LLP vs. State of Haryana (2021)

/ Compensation, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 6, Uday Umesh Lalit, Vineet Saran

Supreme Court enhances land compensation in Haryana acquisition case Date of the Judgment: April 8, 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 179 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J. and Vineet Saran, J. When the government acquires land for development, how is fair compensation determined? The Supreme Court of India recently tackled this question in a case concerning land

Supreme Court Enhances Compensation for Land Acquisition in Haryana: Acquainted Realtors LLP vs. State of Haryana (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Relieves Landowners from Returning Excess Compensation in Haryana Land Acquisition Case (2021)

/ Compensation, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 142, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 18, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 4, Land Acquisition Law, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Relieves Landowners from Returning Excess Compensation in Haryana Land Acquisition Case (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether landowners should be required to return excess compensation received due to prior court orders, when the final compensation is reduced. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition, Civil Case Name: Haryana State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited & Ors. vs.

Supreme Court Relieves Landowners from Returning Excess Compensation in Haryana Land Acquisition Case (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Degree Holders to Compete for Junior Engineer Posts: Puneet Sharma vs. HPSEB (2021)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Judges, Recruitment Rules, Right to Equality, S. Ravindra Bhat, Service Law, Service Law with Promotion, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Allows Degree Holders to Compete for Junior Engineer Posts: Puneet Sharma vs. HPSEB (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a degree in Electrical Engineering is a higher qualification than a diploma for the post of Junior Engineer. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Puneet Sharma & Ors. vs. Himachal Pradesh State Electricity Board Ltd. &

Supreme Court Allows Degree Holders to Compete for Junior Engineer Posts: Puneet Sharma vs. HPSEB (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Kidnapping and Murder Case: Yogesh vs. State of Haryana (2021)

/ Circumstantial Evidence, Criminal Law, Eyewitness Testimony, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120-B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Kidnapping and Murder Case: Yogesh vs. State of Haryana (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether circumstantial evidence was sufficient to prove the guilt of the accused in a case of kidnapping and murder. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law. Case Name: Yogesh vs. State of Haryana. [Judgment Date]: April 6, 2021 Introduction Date of

Supreme Court Acquits Accused in Kidnapping and Murder Case: Yogesh vs. State of Haryana (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies regularization of contract employees: University of Delhi vs. Delhi University Contract Employees Union (2021)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Contract Employees, Fundamental Rights, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Recruitment Process, Regularization, Service Law, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court clarifies regularization of contract employees: University of Delhi vs. Delhi University Contract Employees Union (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether contract employees are entitled to regularization and what criteria should be used for their selection process. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: University of Delhi vs. Delhi University Contract Employees Union & Ors. Judgment Date:

Supreme Court clarifies regularization of contract employees: University of Delhi vs. Delhi University Contract Employees Union (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Disciplinary Action Against Employee in U.P. Milk Union Case (23 March 2021)

/ Disciplinary Proceedings, Hemant Gupta, Judges, S. Ravindra Bhat, Service Law, Service Regulations, Uday Umesh Lalit, Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1965, Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 with Section 121, Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 with Section 122, Uttar Pradesh Co-operative Societies Act, 1965 with Section 122-A

Supreme Court Upholds Disciplinary Action: Jagpal Singh Case (2021) Date of the Judgment: 23 March 2021 Citation: (2021) INSC 152 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J., Hemant Gupta, J., S. Ravindra Bhat, J. (authored by Hemant Gupta, J.) Can a disciplinary action against an employee be overturned due to procedural errors, even if the charges are

Supreme Court Upholds Disciplinary Action Against Employee in U.P. Milk Union Case (23 March 2021) Read Post »

Scroll to Top