Supreme Court Upholds Surcharge on Arc Furnace Industries for Not Shifting to 66 KV Supply: Waryam Steel Castings vs. Punjab State Power Corporation (2017)

/ Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 61, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 62, Judges, Navin Sinha, Ranjan Gogoi, Regulatory Law, Regulatory Power, Statutory Authority, Tariff Determination

Can a regulatory body impose a surcharge on industries for not complying with voltage supply norms? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a case involving arc furnace industries in Punjab. This case clarifies the extent of regulatory power in enforcing electricity supply standards and the validity of surcharges imposed for non-compliance. The […]

Supreme Court Upholds Surcharge on Arc Furnace Industries for Not Shifting to 66 KV Supply: Waryam Steel Castings vs. Punjab State Power Corporation (2017) Read Post »

Majithia Wage Board Award: Supreme Court clarifies implementation in Contempt Case (2017)

/ Contempt of Court, Contempt of Court with Wilful Disobedience, Judges, Navin Sinha, Ranjan Gogoi, Working Journalists Act, 1955, Working Journalists Act, 1955 with Section 16, Working Journalists Act, 1955 with Section 17

LEGAL ISSUE: Implementation of the Majithia Wage Board Award for working journalists and non-journalist employees. CASE TYPE: Contempt of Court / Labour Law Case Name: Avishek Raja & Ors. vs. Sanjay Gupta Judgment Date: 19 June 2017 Can newspaper establishments be held in contempt for not fully implementing the Majithia Wage Board Award? The Supreme

Majithia Wage Board Award: Supreme Court clarifies implementation in Contempt Case (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Denies Damages for Wrongful Termination: Kanchan Udyog Ltd. vs. United Spirits Ltd. (2017)

/ Indian Contract Act, 1872, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 62, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 73, Indian Contract Act, 1872 with Section 8, Judges, Navin Sinha, Ranjan Gogoi

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a party can claim damages for loss of anticipated profits and costs for plant installation after a contract termination. CASE TYPE: Contract Law, Commercial Dispute Case Name: Kanchan Udyog Limited vs. United Spirits Limited [Judgment Date]: June 19, 2017 Introduction Date of the Judgment: June 19, 2017 Citation: [Not Available in Source]

Supreme Court Denies Damages for Wrongful Termination: Kanchan Udyog Ltd. vs. United Spirits Ltd. (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Extinguishment of Redemption Right After Auction Sale: Allokam Peddabbayya vs. Allahabad Bank (2017)

/ Code of Civil Procedure, Code of Civil Procedure with Order XXXIV, Judges, Navin Sinha, Ranjan Gogoi, Rights of Mortgagor, Transfer of Property Act, 1882, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 60, Transfer of Property Act, 1882 with Section 91

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the right to redeem a mortgaged property is extinguished after an auction sale and issuance of a sale certificate, even if the purchaser of the equity of redemption was not a party to the foreclosure suit. CASE TYPE: Civil (Mortgage Redemption) Case Name: Allokam Peddabbayya and another vs. Allahabad Bank and others

Supreme Court Upholds Extinguishment of Redemption Right After Auction Sale: Allokam Peddabbayya vs. Allahabad Bank (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies implementation of Majithia Wage Board Award: Avishek Raja & Ors. vs. Sanjay Gupta (2017) INSC 530 (19 June 2017)

/ Contempt of Court, Judges, Labor Law, Minimum Wages, Navin Sinha, Ranjan Gogoi, Wage Boards, Working Journalists Act, 1955, Working Journalists Act, 1955 with Section 12, Working Journalists Act, 1955 with Section 16, Working Journalists Act, 1955 with Section 17

Date of the Judgment: 19 June 2017 Citation: (2017) INSC 530 Judges: Ranjan Gogoi, J., Navin Sinha, J. Can newspaper employees be denied the wages as per the Majithia Wage Board Award? The Supreme Court addressed this crucial question in a batch of contempt petitions, clarifying the scope and implementation of the Majithia Wage Board

Supreme Court clarifies implementation of Majithia Wage Board Award: Avishek Raja & Ors. vs. Sanjay Gupta (2017) INSC 530 (19 June 2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Surcharge on Arc Furnace Industries for Not Shifting to 66 KV Power Supply: Waryam Steel Castings vs. Punjab State Power Corporation (2017)

/ Electricity Act, 2003, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 61, Electricity Act, 2003 with Section 62, Judges, Navin Sinha, Ranjan Gogoi, Tariff Determination

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a surcharge can be levied on arc furnace industries for not shifting to a 66 KV power supply line, despite earlier exemptions. CASE TYPE: Electricity Regulatory Law Case Name: Waryam Steel Castings Pvt. Ltd. vs. Punjab State Power Corporation Ltd. Judgment Date: 19 June 2017 Introduction Date of the Judgment: 19 June

Supreme Court Upholds Surcharge on Arc Furnace Industries for Not Shifting to 66 KV Power Supply: Waryam Steel Castings vs. Punjab State Power Corporation (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds NEET Admission Schedule: Maharishi Markandeshwar University Case (2017)

/ Admission Schedule, Ashish Ranjan Case, D.Y. Chandrachud, Education Law, Judges, Medical Admissions, National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET), Sanjay Kishan Kaul, Supreme Court Judgments

LEGAL ISSUE: Adherence to the NEET admission schedule for medical and dental postgraduate courses. CASE TYPE: Education Law, specifically relating to medical admissions. Case Name: Ashish Ranjan and Ors. vs. Union of India and Ors. Judgment Date: 19th June 2017 Date of the Judgment: 19th June 2017 Citation: Not available in the provided document. Judges:

Supreme Court Upholds NEET Admission Schedule: Maharishi Markandeshwar University Case (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns acquittal in Haryana hooch tragedy case: State of Haryana vs. Krishan & Anr. (2017) INSC 488

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 218, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 226, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Judges, Offences Against Human Body, Punjab Excise Act, 1914, Punjab Excise Act, 1914 with Section 61(1)(a)

LEGAL ISSUE: Criminal liability for sale of spurious liquor leading to death and grievous injury. CASE TYPE: Criminal Law Case Name: State of Haryana vs. Krishan & Anr. Judgment Date: June 09, 2017 Introduction Date of the Judgment: June 09, 2017 Citation: (2017) INSC 488 Judges: A.K. Sikri, J., Ashok Bhushan, J. (authored by A.K.

Supreme Court overturns acquittal in Haryana hooch tragedy case: State of Haryana vs. Krishan & Anr. (2017) INSC 488 Read Post »

Supreme Court acquits accused in murder case based on circumstantial evidence: Satish Nirankari vs. State of Rajasthan (2017)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Code of Criminal Procedure, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 313, Code of Criminal Procedure with Section 374, Indian Evidence Act, 1872, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 101, Indian Evidence Act, 1872 with Section 106, Indian Penal Code, 1860, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 302, Indian Penal Code, 1860 with Section 309, Judges, Offences Against Human Body

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed murder, or if the death was a suicide. CASE TYPE: Criminal Case Name: Satish Nirankari vs. State of Rajasthan Judgment Date: 09 June 2017 Date of the Judgment: 09 June 2017 Citation: 2017 INSC 545 Judges: A.K. Sikri, J., Ashok Bhushan, J.

Supreme Court acquits accused in murder case based on circumstantial evidence: Satish Nirankari vs. State of Rajasthan (2017) Read Post »

Aadhaar-PAN Link: Supreme Court Upholds Section 139AA of Income Tax Act, 1961 (9 June 2017)

/ A.K. Sikri, Aadhaar Act, 2016, Aadhaar Act, 2016 with Section 3, Aadhaar Act, 2016 with Section 7, Ashok Bhushan, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 19(1)(g), Fundamental Rights, Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Act, 1961 with Section 139AA, Judges

LEGAL ISSUE: The constitutional validity of making Aadhaar mandatory for PAN and income tax returns. CASE TYPE: Tax Law, Constitutional Law Case Name: Binoy Viswam vs. Union of India & Ors. Judgment Date: 9 June 2017 Introduction Citation: This judgment is not yet reported in the official INSC format. Judges: The judgment was delivered by

Aadhaar-PAN Link: Supreme Court Upholds Section 139AA of Income Tax Act, 1961 (9 June 2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Market Fee Liability on Agricultural Produce: Arihant Udhyog vs. State of Rajasthan (2017)

/ A.K. Sikri, Ashok Bhushan, Judges, Market Fees, Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Market Rules, 1963, Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961, Rajasthan Agricultural Produce Markets Act, 1961 with Section 17, Sale and agreement to sell, Sale of Goods Act, 1930, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 19, Sale of Goods Act, 1930 with Section 4

LEGAL ISSUE: Determination of when a sale of goods is considered to have taken place within a market area for the purpose of levying market fees. CASE TYPE: Civil Law, Agricultural Market Regulation Case Name: M/s. Arihant Udhyog vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. Judgment Date: June 9, 2017 Date of the Judgment: June 9,

Supreme Court Clarifies Market Fee Liability on Agricultural Produce: Arihant Udhyog vs. State of Rajasthan (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court overturns High Court order on institutional preference and in-service doctor benefits: Dr. Saurabh Dwivedi & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (2017) INSC 489

/ Ashok Bhushan, Constitutional Law, Deepak Gupta, Judges, Medical Council of India Act, 1956, Medical Council of India Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000, Medical Council of India Post Graduate Medical Education Regulations, 2000 with Regulation 9(iv)

LEGAL ISSUE: Whether institutional preference in Aligarh Muslim University and Banaras Hindu University and service benefits for doctors should be restricted to those who graduated from within the State of Uttar Pradesh. CASE TYPE: Education and Service Law Case Name: Dr. Saurabh Dwivedi & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. [Judgment Date]: June 7,

Supreme Court overturns High Court order on institutional preference and in-service doctor benefits: Dr. Saurabh Dwivedi & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (2017) INSC 489 Read Post »

Scroll to Top