Supreme Court clarifies “paid” and “physical possession” under Section 24 of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act: Indore Development Authority vs. Manohar Lal (2020) INSC 242 (06 March 2020)

/ Arun Mishra, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 11, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 31, M. R. Shah, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 with Section 24, S. Ravindra Bhat, Vineet Saran

LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of Section 24 of the Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013, specifically concerning the meaning of “paid” and “physical possession.” CASE TYPE: Land Acquisition Case Name: Indore Development Authority vs. Manohar Lal & Ors. ETC. Judgment Date: 06 March 2020 Date of the Judgment: […]

Supreme Court clarifies “paid” and “physical possession” under Section 24 of the 2013 Land Acquisition Act: Indore Development Authority vs. Manohar Lal (2020) INSC 242 (06 March 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Adoption Claim: M. Vanaja vs. M. Sarla Devi (2020)

/ Adoption, Deepak Gupta, Family Law, Family Law with Property, Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956, Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956 with Section 11, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Adoption Claim: M. Vanaja vs. M. Sarla Devi (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Validity of adoption under the Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act, 1956. CASE TYPE: Civil Law Case Name: M. Vanaja vs. M. Sarla Devi (Dead) [Judgment Date]: March 6, 2020 Date of the Judgment: March 6, 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC

Supreme Court Upholds Dismissal of Adoption Claim: M. Vanaja vs. M. Sarla Devi (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court quashes dismissal of judicial officer: Sadhna Chaudhary vs. State of UP (2020)

/ B.R. Gavai, Judges, Judicial Misconduct, Land Acquisition Act, 1894, Land Acquisition Act, 1894 with Section 11(3), Reinstatement, S.A. Bobde, Service Law, Surya Kant, Uttar Pradesh Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1956, Uttar Pradesh Government Servants Conduct Rules, 1956 with Rule 3

Supreme Court quashes dismissal of judicial officer: Sadhna Chaudhary vs. State of UP (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a judicial officer can be dismissed based on the outcome of their judicial decisions, rather than the decision-making process itself. CASE TYPE: Service Law/Judicial Misconduct Case Name: Sadhna Chaudhary vs. State of U.P. & Anr. Judgment Date: 06

Supreme Court quashes dismissal of judicial officer: Sadhna Chaudhary vs. State of UP (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Prioritizes Secured Creditor Rights Over Tax Dues in Property Dispute: Connectwell Industries vs. Union of India (2020)

/ Debt Recovery, Debt Recovery Tribunal, Deepak Gupta, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Rule 16, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Rule 2, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao

Supreme Court Prioritizes Secured Creditor Rights Over Tax Dues in Property Dispute LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a prior secured debt takes precedence over government tax dues when a property is sold by a Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT). CASE TYPE: Debt Recovery/Tax Law Case Name: M/s. Connectwell Industries Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India Judgment Date: March

Supreme Court Prioritizes Secured Creditor Rights Over Tax Dues in Property Dispute: Connectwell Industries vs. Union of India (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the forum for recovery of dues in nationalized textile undertakings: UCO Bank vs. National Textile Corporation Ltd. (2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Arbitration Law, Debt Recovery, Debts Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, Permanent Machinery of Arbitrators (PMA), R. Banumathi, Textile Law, Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995, Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995 with Section 4(2), Textile Undertakings (Nationalisation) Act, 1995 with Section 4(5)

Supreme Court clarifies the forum for recovery of dues in nationalized textile undertakings: UCO Bank vs. National Textile Corporation Ltd. (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the appropriate forum for resolving disputes regarding liabilities of a nationalized textile undertaking. CASE TYPE: Civil Appellate Jurisdiction Case Name: UCO Bank vs. National Textile Corporation Ltd. & Anr. Judgment Date:

Supreme Court clarifies the forum for recovery of dues in nationalized textile undertakings: UCO Bank vs. National Textile Corporation Ltd. (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Financial Upgradation Under MACP Scheme: Union of India vs. M.V. Mohanan Nair (2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme, Central Civil Services (Revised Pay) Rules, 2008, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 141, Hrishikesh Roy, Judges, Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme, R. Banumathi, Service Law

Supreme Court Clarifies Financial Upgradation Under MACP Scheme: Union of India vs. M.V. Mohanan Nair (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme entitles financial upgradation to the next grade pay or to the grade pay of the next promotional hierarchy. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Union of India and Others

Supreme Court Clarifies Financial Upgradation Under MACP Scheme: Union of India vs. M.V. Mohanan Nair (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles jurisdiction in pharmacy education: Pharmacy Council of India vs. Dr. S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trusts (2020)

/ All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) Act, 1987, All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE) Act, 1987 with Section 2(g), Arun Mishra, Judges, M. R. Shah, Pharmacy Act, 1948, Pharmacy Act, 1948 with Section 10, Pharmacy Act, 1948 with Section 12, Pharmacy Act, 1948 with Section 42, Vineet Saran

Pharmacy Council of India vs. Dr. S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trusts: Supreme Court Settles Jurisdiction in Pharmacy Education (2020) Date of the Judgment: March 5, 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 229 Judges: Arun Mishra, J., Vineet Saran, J., M. R. Shah, J. Can two regulatory bodies oversee the same educational field? The Supreme Court addressed this critical

Supreme Court settles jurisdiction in pharmacy education: Pharmacy Council of India vs. Dr. S.K. Toshniwal Educational Trusts (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence in Triple Murder Case: Manoj Suryavanshi vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2020)

/ Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 with Section 235(2), Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 364, Indira Banerjee, Judges, M. R. Shah, Offences Against Human Body, Sentencing, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence in Triple Murder Case: Manoj Suryavanshi vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the death penalty was warranted in a case of triple murder based on circumstantial evidence. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Manoj Suryavanshi vs. State of Chhattisgarh [Judgment Date]: 5 March 2020 Introduction Date of the Judgment:

Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence in Triple Murder Case: Manoj Suryavanshi vs. State of Chhattisgarh (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies seat of arbitration in international commercial disputes: Mankastu Impex Private Limited vs. Airvisual Limited (2020) INSC 196 (05 March 2020)

/ A.S. Bopanna, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 11(6), Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 with Section 2(2), Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 141, Hrishikesh Roy, International Commercial Arbitration, Judges, R. Banumathi

Supreme Court clarifies seat of arbitration in international commercial disputes Date of the Judgment: 05 March 2020 Citation: (2020) INSC 196 Judges: R. Banumathi, J., A.S. Bopanna, J., Hrishikesh Roy, J. Can a clause specifying the “place of arbitration” in a contract also determine the “seat” of arbitration, especially in international commercial disputes? The Supreme

Supreme Court clarifies seat of arbitration in international commercial disputes: Mankastu Impex Private Limited vs. Airvisual Limited (2020) INSC 196 (05 March 2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Absolute Ownership of Property Bequeathed in Will: M.S. Bhavani & Anr. vs. M.S. Raghu Nandan (2020)

/ Absolute Ownership, Indian Succession Act, 1925, Indian Succession Act, 1925 with Section 88, Indian Succession Act, 1925 with Section 95, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Property Law, R. Subhash Reddy, Testamentary Law, Will Interpretation

Supreme Court Upholds Absolute Ownership of Property Bequeathed in Will: M.S. Bhavani & Anr. vs. M.S. Raghu Nandan (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of a will to determine the nature of property rights bequeathed. CASE TYPE: Civil Law – Property Dispute Case Name: M.S. Bhavani & Anr. vs. M.S. Raghu Nandan Judgment Date: March 5, 2020

Supreme Court Upholds Absolute Ownership of Property Bequeathed in Will: M.S. Bhavani & Anr. vs. M.S. Raghu Nandan (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Section 153C Compliance in Income Tax Search Cases: Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT (2020)

/ Ashok Bhushan, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 132, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 153C, Judges, M.R. Shah, Search and Seizure

Supreme Court Upholds Section 153C Compliance in Income Tax Search Cases: Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the Assessing Officer complied with the mandatory requirements of Section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 before initiating proceedings against a third party based on seized documents. CASE TYPE: Income Tax Law, Search

Supreme Court Upholds Section 153C Compliance in Income Tax Search Cases: Super Malls Pvt. Ltd. vs. PCIT (2020) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies refund process in Super Bazar Winding Up: Writers and Publishers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Dr. AK Mishra (2020)

/ Ajay Rastogi, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952, Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 with Section 11, Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act 1952 with Section 7A, Judges, Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act 2002, Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act 2002 with Section 86, Multi-State Co-operative Societies Act 2002 with Section 90, Winding Up of Cooperative Societies

Supreme Court clarifies refund process in Super Bazar Winding Up: Writers and Publishers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Dr. AK Mishra (2020) LEGAL ISSUE: The core legal issue revolves around the extent of refund and accounting obligations of a bidder, Writers and Publishers Pvt. Ltd. (WPL), after a failed attempt to revive a cooperative society, Super Bazar,

Supreme Court clarifies refund process in Super Bazar Winding Up: Writers and Publishers Pvt. Ltd. vs. Dr. AK Mishra (2020) Read Post »

Scroll to Top