Essar Shipping Ltd. v. The Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta: Supreme Court Judgment Analysis LEGAL ISSUE: Determining liability for damages to port infrastructure during berthing operations. CASE TYPE: Civil (Shipping and Port Operations) Case Name: Essar Shipping Ltd. v. The Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta [Judgment Date]: February 15, […]
Supreme Court Clarifies Use of Mediator and Counselor Reports in Child Custody Cases: Perry Kansagra vs. Smriti Madan Kansagra (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Admissibility of mediator and counselor reports in child custody cases. CASE TYPE: Family Law, Child Custody Case Name: Perry Kansagra vs. Smriti Madan Kansagra Judgment Date: 15 February 2019 Date of the Judgment:
Supreme Court Upholds Incorporation of Arbitration Clause by Reference in Coal India Dispute Date of the Judgment: 15 February 2019 Citation: Giriraj Garg v. Coal India Ltd. & Ors. (2019) INSC 123 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J. and Indu Malhotra, J. Can an arbitration clause in a parent scheme be automatically applied to individual sale
Supreme Court Upholds Salary Revision for Bank Officer Posted Abroad: State Bank of India vs. Ravindra Nath (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a bank can revise the salary of an employee posted abroad based on the recommendations of a Standing Committee, even if the initial salary was fixed without considering the relevant Cost of Living Index.
Compassionate Appointment vs. Ex-Gratia Payment: Supreme Court Refers Conflict to Larger Bench Date of the Judgment: February 8, 2019 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J. and Indu Malhotra, J. Can a bank deny compassionate appointment to a dependent of a deceased employee if a new scheme providing ex-gratia payment comes into effect after the employee’s death
Supreme Court Corrects Arithmetical Errors in Land Acquisition Compensation Case: Hukam Singh vs. State of Haryana (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Correction of arithmetical errors in a judgment concerning land acquisition compensation. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: Hukam Singh etc. etc. vs. State of Haryana and Anr. etc. etc. [Judgment Date]: February 8, 2019 Date of
Supreme Court Upholds Insured Value in Total Loss Claim: Sumit Kumar Saha vs. Reliance General Insurance Co. Ltd. (2019) Date of the Judgment: January 30, 2019 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 1299 of 2019 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 27695 of 2018) Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J., R. Subhash Reddy, J. Can an
Supreme Court Clarifies Jurisdiction in Land Disputes: Pyarelal vs. Shubhendra Pilania (2019) Date of the Judgment: 29 January 2019 Citation: Pyarelal vs. Shubhendra Pilania (2019) INSC 49 Judges: Justice Uday Umesh Lalit and Justice Dr. Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud Can a civil court decide on the validity of a gift deed for agricultural land if the
Supreme Court clarifies compensation calculation in railway accident cases: Union of India vs. Radha Yadav (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the correct method for calculating compensation in railway accident cases, specifically when amendments to compensation amounts occur between the date of the accident and the date of the award. CASE TYPE: Railway Accident Compensation Case Name:
Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Complaint in Family Share Dispute: Suresh Kumar Goyal vs. State of UP (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Quashing of criminal proceedings in a family dispute over share ownership. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Sri Suresh Kumar Goyal & Ors. Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. Judgment Date: 11 January 2019 Date of
Supreme Court Revises Land Compensation in Haryana Acquisition Case LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of fair market value for land acquired under the Land Acquisition Act, 1894. CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition/Civil. Case Name: Wazir & Anr. vs. State of Haryana. Judgment Date: 11 January 2019. Can the government acquire land for development and pay compensation based on
Supreme Court Stays Imprisonment of Society Secretary in Consumer Case Date of the Judgment: 14 December 2018 Citation: (2018) INSC 997 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J., R. Subhash Reddy, J. Can a person be imprisoned for the default of a society they represent, without a specific order imposing personal liability? The Supreme Court addressed this
