Supreme Court Upholds Resumption of Allotted Booth Due to Payment Default: Rajiv Vohra vs. State of Haryana (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a government authority can resume an allotted property due to non-payment of dues by the allottee. CASE TYPE: Civil Case Name: Rajiv Vohra vs. The State of Haryana and Ors. Judgment Date: 21 February […]
Supreme Court Clarifies Disposal of Goods on Public Premises: Board of Trustees vs. APL India (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of Section 6 of the Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1971, regarding the disposal of goods found on public premises. CASE TYPE: Public Premises Law, Eviction Law Case Name: Board of Trustees for the
Supreme Court Allows 100% Tax Exemption Post Substantial Expansion Under Section 80-IC: Aarham Softronics Case (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether an assessee who initially availed 100% tax exemption under Section 80-IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for setting up a new industry can claim the same 100% exemption again after carrying out a substantial expansion
Supreme Court Upholds Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards in LMJ International Ltd. vs. Sleepwell Industries Co. Ltd. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Enforceability of foreign arbitral awards. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Case Name: LMJ International Ltd. vs. Sleepwell Industries Co. Ltd. Judgment Date: 20 February 2019 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 20 February 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 147
Supreme Court Holds Reliance Companies in Contempt for Breaching Undertakings: Ericsson vs. State Bank of India (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether Reliance Companies were in contempt of court for breaching undertakings given to the Supreme Court regarding payment to Ericsson. CASE TYPE: Contempt of Court Case Name: Reliance Communication Limited & Ors. vs. State Bank of
Supreme Court Clarifies Employer-Employee Relationship in Contract Labour Disputes: Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. vs. Mahendra Prasad Jakhmola & Ors. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Determining the nature of the employer-employee relationship in cases involving contract labour, specifically whether workers of a contractor can be considered direct employees of the principal employer. CASE TYPE: Industrial Dispute/Labour Law Case
Supreme Court Upholds Trial Court’s Sentence in Culpable Homicide Case: State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Suresh (2019) Date of the Judgment: 20 February 2019 Citation: (2019) INSC 132 Judges: Abhay Manohar Sapre, J., Dinesh Maheshwari, J. Can a High Court reduce a sentence awarded by a Trial Court without sufficient justification? The Supreme Court of
Supreme Court Commutes Death Sentence to Life Imprisonment in Child Kidnapping and Murder Case Date of the Judgment: 20 February 2019 Citation: Not Available in the source. Judges: A.K. Sikri, J., S. Abdul Nazeer, J., and M. R. Shah, J. Can a death sentence be commuted to life imprisonment based on the convict’s reformation in
Supreme Court Upholds Conviction in Fatal Bus Accident Case: Thangasamy vs. State of Tamil Nadu (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the accused was rightly convicted for causing death and injuries due to rash and negligent driving. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law – Motor Vehicle Accident Case Name: Thangasamy vs. The State of Tamil Nadu Judgment Date: 20
Supreme Court clarifies refund claims under Section 11B of the Central Excise Act: Western Coalfields Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the limitation period of six months applies to refund claims filed by a buyer when the central excise duty was paid under protest by the manufacturer. CASE TYPE: Central Excise
Supreme Court Upholds Enforceability of Foreign Arbitral Awards in LMJ International Ltd. vs. Sleepwell Industries Co. Ltd. (2019) LEGAL ISSUE: Enforceability of foreign arbitral awards and the scope of objections under Section 48 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996. CASE TYPE: Arbitration Law Case Name: LMJ International Ltd. vs. Sleepwell Industries Co. Ltd. [Judgment
Supreme Court clarifies refund claims under Central Excise Act: Western Coalfields Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Central Excise (2019) Date of the Judgment: 20 February 2019 Citation: 2019 INSC 141 Judges: A.M. Khanwilkar, J., Ajay Rastogi, J. Can a buyer claim a refund of excise duty paid by the manufacturer under protest, even if the buyer’s
