Supreme Court clarifies the entitlement to salary after disengagement in labor disputes: U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. vs. Satya Ram (2025)

/ Augustine George Masih, Judges, Sanjay Kumar, Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, Uttar Pradesh Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 with Section 6H(1)

Date of the Judgment: March 05, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 339 Judges: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Kumar, Hon’ble Mr. Justice Augustine George Masih Can a labor court order salary payments to workers after their disengagement, especially when factual aspects like their age of superannuation are overlooked? The Supreme Court addressed this critical question in the […]

Supreme Court clarifies the entitlement to salary after disengagement in labor disputes: U.P. Power Corporation Ltd. vs. Satya Ram (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Contempt Ruling for Property Alienation Despite Undertaking: Lavanya C. vs. Vittal Gurudas Pai (2025)

/ Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Contempt of Court, Judges, Order XXXIX Rule 1, Order XXXIX Rule 2, Order XXXIX Rule 2A, Pankaj Mithal, Sanjay Karol

Introduction Date of the Judgment: March 5, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 325 Judges: Pankaj Mithal J., Sanjay Karol J. What happens when a party assures the court they won’t sell a property during a legal battle, but then does so anyway? The Supreme Court of India recently examined this issue in a case involving a

Supreme Court Upholds Contempt Ruling for Property Alienation Despite Undertaking: Lavanya C. vs. Vittal Gurudas Pai (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Tanaji Shamrao Kale vs. State of Maharashtra (2025)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 161, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 162, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 149, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Ujjal Bhuyan

Date of the Judgment: March 05, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 323 Judges: Abhay S. Oka, J., Ujjal Bhuyan, J. Did the High Court correctly uphold the conviction of the accused in a murder case where the prosecution presented eyewitness testimony? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in the case of Tanaji Shamrao Kale

Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Murder Case: Tanaji Shamrao Kale vs. State of Maharashtra (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns conviction for abetment of suicide due to lack of proximate cause: Patel Babubhai vs. State of Gujarat (2025)

/ Abhay S. Oka, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 313, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 107, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 114, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 306, Judges, Ujjal Bhuyan

Introduction Date of the Judgment: March 05, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 322 Judges: Abhay S. Oka, J., Ujjal Bhuyan, J. When can words or actions be considered as instigating someone to commit suicide? The Supreme Court of India addressed this critical question in the case of Patel Babubhai Manohardas & Ors. vs. State of Gujarat.

Supreme Court overturns conviction for abetment of suicide due to lack of proximate cause: Patel Babubhai vs. State of Gujarat (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the status of ad-hoc employees in Sports Authority of India: Sports Authority of India & Anr. vs. Dr. Kulbir Singh Rana (2025) INSC 319 (04 March 2025)

/ Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Judges, Recruitment Rules, Service Law, Service Rules and Regulations, Societies Registration Act, 1860, Sudhanshu Dhulia

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 04 March 2025 Citation: (2025) INSC 319 Judges: Sudhanshu Dhulia, J., Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J. What happens to employees who are hired on an ad-hoc basis when new rules come into effect? The Supreme Court of India addressed this important question in a recent case involving the Sports Authority of India

Supreme Court settles the status of ad-hoc employees in Sports Authority of India: Sports Authority of India & Anr. vs. Dr. Kulbir Singh Rana (2025) INSC 319 (04 March 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Interim Moratorium under IBC on Consumer Protection Act Penalties: Saranga Anil Kumar Aggarwal vs. Bhavesh Dhirajlal Sheth (2025)

/ Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, Consumer Protection Act, 1986, Consumer Protection Act, 1986 with Section 27, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 95, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 with Section 96, Insolvency Resolution Process, Judges, Prasanna B. Varale, Vikram Nath

Date of the Judgment: March 04, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 314 Judges: Vikram Nath, J., Prasanna B. Varale, J. Does the interim moratorium under Section 96 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (IBC) apply to penalties imposed under the Consumer Protection Act (CP Act)? This question was recently addressed by the Supreme Court in a

Supreme Court Clarifies Scope of Interim Moratorium under IBC on Consumer Protection Act Penalties: Saranga Anil Kumar Aggarwal vs. Bhavesh Dhirajlal Sheth (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies liability of non-executive directors under Section 138 NI Act in cheque dishonor cases: K.S. Mehta vs. M/S Morgan Securities (2025) INSC 315 (March 4, 2025)

/ B. V. Nagarathna, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 482, Judges, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 with Section 141, Satish Chandra Sharma

Date of the Judgment: March 4, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 315 Judges: B. V. Nagarathna, J., Satish Chandra Sharma, J. Can a non-executive director of a company be held liable for cheque dishonor under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881? The Supreme Court addressed this critical question in the case of K.S. Mehta

Supreme Court clarifies liability of non-executive directors under Section 138 NI Act in cheque dishonor cases: K.S. Mehta vs. M/S Morgan Securities (2025) INSC 315 (March 4, 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court acquits husband in wife’s death due to inconsistencies in dying declaration: Suresh vs. State (2025) INSC 318 (04 March 2025)

/ Ahsanuddin Amanullah, Dying Declaration, Evidence Law, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 307, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Sudhanshu Dhulia

Introduction Date of the Judgment: 04 March 2025 Citation: (2025) INSC 318 Judges: Sudhanshu Dhulia, J., Ahsanuddin Amanullah, J. Is a dying declaration enough to convict someone of murder? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this critical question in the case of Suresh vs. State. The court overturned the conviction of a husband who

Supreme Court acquits husband in wife’s death due to inconsistencies in dying declaration: Suresh vs. State (2025) INSC 318 (04 March 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles the question of guardianship of a disabled adult: Sharmila Velamur vs. V. Sanjay (2025)

/ Best Interests of the Child, Constitutional Law, Dipankar Datta, Family Law, Guardianship, Judges, Surya Kant, Ujjal Bhuyan

Introduction Date of the Judgment: March 3, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 299 Judges: Surya Kant, J., Dipankar Datta, J., Ujjal Bhuyan, J. When parents disagree about the care and residence of an adult child with disabilities, who decides what’s best? The Supreme Court of India recently addressed this delicate question in Sharmila Velamur vs. V.

Supreme Court settles the question of guardianship of a disabled adult: Sharmila Velamur vs. V. Sanjay (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Cancels Bail of In-Laws in Dowry Death Case: Shabeen Ahmad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025 INSC 307)

/ Criminal Procedure Code, Criminal Procedure Code with Section 439, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961 with Sections 3 and 4, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 304B, Judges, Offences Affecting the Human Body, Offences Against Marriage, Sandeep Mehta, Vikram Nath

Date of the Judgment: March 03, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 307 Judges: Vikram Nath, J., Sandeep Mehta, J. Can the High Court grant bail in a dowry death case based on superficial parameters? The Supreme Court, in Shabeen Ahmad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh, addressed this critical question. The court overturned the Allahabad High Court’s

Supreme Court Cancels Bail of In-Laws in Dowry Death Case: Shabeen Ahmad vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2025 INSC 307) Read Post »

Supreme Court acquits accused in forgery case due to lack of primary evidence: C. Kamalakkannan vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2025)

/ Evidence Act, Evidence Act with Section 65, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 468, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 471, Judges, Sandeep Mehta, Vikram Nath

Introduction Date of the Judgment: March 03, 2025 Judges: Vikram Nath, J. and Sandeep Mehta, J. In a case highlighting the critical importance of evidence in criminal trials, the Supreme Court of India addressed the question of whether a conviction can be sustained when primary evidence is lacking. The case revolved around allegations of forgery

Supreme Court acquits accused in forgery case due to lack of primary evidence: C. Kamalakkannan vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation Period in Property Disputes Arising from Power of Attorney: V. Ravikumar vs. S. Kumar (2025)

/ Civil Procedure Code, Civil Procedure Code with Order VII Rule 11, Judges, K. Vinod Chandran, Limitation Act, Property Law, Sudhanshu Dhulia

Date of the Judgment: March 03, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 343 Judges: Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice K. Vinod Chandran When does the clock start ticking for challenging property transactions made using a power of attorney? The Supreme Court recently addressed this crucial question in a property dispute case. The court clarified that the limitation

Supreme Court Clarifies Limitation Period in Property Disputes Arising from Power of Attorney: V. Ravikumar vs. S. Kumar (2025) Read Post »

Scroll to Top