Supreme Court Orders Demolition of Illegal Constructions in CRZ-III Zone: Kerala State Coastal Zone Management Authority vs. State of Kerala (2019)

/ Arun Mishra, Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ), Environment Protection Act, 1986, Environment Protection Act, 1986 with Section 3, Judges, Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999, Kerala Municipality Building Rules, 1999 with Rule 23(4), Navin Sinha

Supreme Court Orders Demolition of Illegal Constructions in CRZ-III Zone: Kerala State Coastal Zone Management Authority vs. State of Kerala (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether constructions made in violation of Coastal Regulation Zone (CRZ) notifications should be demolished. CASE TYPE: Environmental Law. Case Name: The Kerala State Coastal Zone Management Authority vs. The State of Kerala […]

Supreme Court Orders Demolition of Illegal Constructions in CRZ-III Zone: Kerala State Coastal Zone Management Authority vs. State of Kerala (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Additional Documents in Corruption Case: CBI vs. Subrahmanyam (2019)

/ Arun Mishra, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 242, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 362, Judges, Navin Sinha, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 13, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 with Section 17

Supreme Court Allows Additional Documents in Corruption Case: CBI vs. Subrahmanyam (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a court can allow additional documents to be submitted after the charge sheet has been filed, especially in cases of corruption. CASE TYPE: Criminal (Prevention of Corruption Act) Case Name: State Represented by Inspector of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation

Supreme Court Allows Additional Documents in Corruption Case: CBI vs. Subrahmanyam (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies sentencing powers under the NDPS Act: Rafiq Qureshi vs. Narcotic Control Bureau (2019)

/ Ashok Bhushan, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 with Section 21, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 with Section 32B

Supreme Court Clarifies Sentencing Under NDPS Act: Rafiq Qureshi vs. Narcotic Control Bureau (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of Section 32B of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 regarding factors for imposing higher than minimum punishment. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law (Narcotics) Case Name: Rafiq Qureshi vs. Narcotic Control Bureau Judgment Date: May 7, 2019

Supreme Court clarifies sentencing powers under the NDPS Act: Rafiq Qureshi vs. Narcotic Control Bureau (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court settles retirement age for aided college teachers: Dr. R.S. Sohane vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (2019) INSC 462 (07 May 2019)

/ Coordination Committee, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, M.R. Shah, Madhya Pradesh Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973, Madhya Pradesh Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1973 with Section 36, University Grants Commission Act, 1956, University Grants Commission Act, 1956 with Section 26(1)(d)(e)

Supreme Court Extends Retirement Age to 65 for Aided College Teachers in Madhya Pradesh Date of the Judgment: 07 May 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 462 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., M.R. Shah, J. Can teachers in private aided colleges claim the same retirement age as their counterparts in government colleges? The Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court settles retirement age for aided college teachers: Dr. R.S. Sohane vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh (2019) INSC 462 (07 May 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies reservation benefits for migrant Scheduled Tribes in Union Territories: Director Transport Department vs. Abhinav Dipakbhai Patel (2019)

/ Appointment, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 341, Constitutional Law with Article 342, Fundamental Rights, Judges, L. Nageswara Rao, M.R. Shah, Recruitment, Service Law

Supreme Court clarifies reservation benefits for migrant Scheduled Tribes in Union Territories: Director Transport Department vs. Abhinav Dipakbhai Patel (2019) Date of the Judgment: May 7, 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 463 Judges: L. Nageswara Rao, J., M.R. Shah, J. Can a person belonging to a Scheduled Tribe in one state claim reservation benefits in a

Supreme Court clarifies reservation benefits for migrant Scheduled Tribes in Union Territories: Director Transport Department vs. Abhinav Dipakbhai Patel (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Against Ex-Parte Decree After Dismissal of Order IX Rule 13 Application: Bhivchandra Shankar More vs. Balu Gangaram More (2019)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order IX Rule 13, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 96(2), Ex-parte Decree, Indian Limitation Act, 1908, Indian Limitation Act, 1908 with Section 5, Judges, R. Banumathi, R. Subhash Reddy

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Against Ex-Parte Decree After Dismissal of Order IX Rule 13 Application: Bhivchandra Shankar More vs. Balu Gangaram More (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether time spent pursuing an application to set aside an ex-parte decree constitutes sufficient cause for condoning delay in filing a first appeal against that decree. CASE TYPE: Civil. Case

Supreme Court Allows Appeal Against Ex-Parte Decree After Dismissal of Order IX Rule 13 Application: Bhivchandra Shankar More vs. Balu Gangaram More (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court rules on Abatement of Appeals in Joint Property Disputes: Hemareddi vs. Ramachandra (2019)

/ Abatement of Appeals, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Adoption, Property Law, Ashok Bhushan, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XXII Rule 3, Joint Property, Property Law, Judges, K.M. Joseph, Order XXII, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Property Law

Supreme Court on Abatement of Appeals in Joint Property Disputes: Hemareddi vs. Ramachandra (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an appeal filed jointly by two brothers abates entirely if one brother dies and his legal representatives are not brought on record, particularly in a dispute regarding joint family property and adoption. CASE TYPE: Civil (Property Law) Case

Supreme Court rules on Abatement of Appeals in Joint Property Disputes: Hemareddi vs. Ramachandra (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Concurrent Findings on Collusive Decree in Property Dispute: Jaswant Singh & Ors. vs. Jaspal Singh & Ors. (2019) INSC 459 (07 May 2019)

/ Civil Law, Civil Procedure Code, 1908, Collusive Decree, Decree, Judges, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, N.V. Ramana, Property Law, Sale Deed

Supreme Court Upholds Concurrent Findings on Collusive Decree in Property Dispute Date of the Judgment: 07 May 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 459 Judges: N.V. Ramana, J. and Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, J. Can a court decree be challenged if it is found to be collusive and aimed at circumventing the law? The Supreme Court of India

Supreme Court Upholds Concurrent Findings on Collusive Decree in Property Dispute: Jaswant Singh & Ors. vs. Jaspal Singh & Ors. (2019) INSC 459 (07 May 2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes Forgery Charges in Vakalatnama Case: Sasikala Pushpa vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2019)

/ Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 with Section 340, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 466, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 468, Judges, Offences Relating to Documents, R. Banumathi, S. Abdul Nazeer

Supreme Court Quashes Forgery Charges in Vakalatnama Case: Sasikala Pushpa vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a mistake in the date of a vakalatnama (a document authorizing a lawyer to represent a party) constitutes forgery and warrants criminal prosecution. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: Sasikala Pushpa and Others vs. State of

Supreme Court Quashes Forgery Charges in Vakalatnama Case: Sasikala Pushpa vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns conviction in murder case due to lack of evidence: Ashoksinh Jayendrasinh vs. State of Gujarat (2019)

/ Arms Act, Arms Act with Section 25(c), Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 307, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, R. Banumathi, S. Abdul Nazeer

Supreme Court overturns conviction in murder case due to lack of evidence: Ashoksinh Jayendrasinh vs. State of Gujarat (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the conviction of the accused for murder and attempted murder was justified based on the evidence presented. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Ashoksinh Jayendrasinh vs. State of Gujarat Judgment Date: 07 May 2019

Supreme Court overturns conviction in murder case due to lack of evidence: Ashoksinh Jayendrasinh vs. State of Gujarat (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Remands Eviction Case Due to Procedural Error: Arulmighu Nellukadai Mariamman Tirukkoil vs. Tamilarasi (Dead) (2019)

/ Abhay Manohar Sapre, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Section 100, Dinesh Maheshwari, Judges

Supreme Court Remands Eviction Case Due to Procedural Error: Arulmighu Nellukadai Mariamman Tirukkoil vs. Tamilarasi (Dead) (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Procedural compliance in second appeals before the High Court. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: Arulmighu Nellukadai Mariamman Tirukkoil vs. Tamilarasi (Dead) By LRs. [Judgment Date]: May 7, 2019 Date of the Judgment: May 7, 2019 Citation:

Supreme Court Remands Eviction Case Due to Procedural Error: Arulmighu Nellukadai Mariamman Tirukkoil vs. Tamilarasi (Dead) (2019) Read Post »

Supreme Court Allows Additional Evidence in Consumer Dispute: Jiten K. Ajmera vs. Tejas Co-operative Housing Society (2019)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, 1908, Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 with Order XLI Rule 27, Consumer Disputes Redressal, Consumer Law, Indu Malhotra, Judges, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court Allows Additional Evidence in Consumer Dispute: Jiten K. Ajmera vs. Tejas Co-operative Housing Society (2019) Date of the Judgment: May 6, 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 448 Judges: Uday Umesh Lalit, J., Indu Malhotra, J. Can new evidence be introduced at the appellate stage in a consumer dispute? The Supreme Court of India addressed

Supreme Court Allows Additional Evidence in Consumer Dispute: Jiten K. Ajmera vs. Tejas Co-operative Housing Society (2019) Read Post »

Scroll to Top