Digest Of Supreme Court Cases

Builder Delay? Can Contract Limit Your Compensation? -“Can a one-sided builder clause override your legal rights?”

The Supreme Court just answered. Your agreement is not the Constitution. If a clause is one-sided and unfair, it cannot silence statutory protection And it’s big for homebuyers in Parsvnath Developers Ltd. v Mohit Khirbat 20 February 2026; Citations: 2026 INSC 170 | 2026 SCO.LR 2(4)[20] In this case, a Gurugram housing project was delayed. The […]

Builder Delay? Can Contract Limit Your Compensation? -“Can a one-sided builder clause override your legal rights?” Read More »

Termination on the Ground of Invalid Degree?- Can the government fire you because your university was later declared illegal?

The Supreme Court just answered this in Priyanka Kumari v. State of Bihar (2026) Bench: Justices Rajesh Bindal & Vijay Bishnoi In 2004, the appellants completed their Bachelor of Library Science from a private university in Chhattisgarh. In 2005, the Act under which that university was created was struck down as unconstitutional. In 2009 —

Termination on the Ground of Invalid Degree?- Can the government fire you because your university was later declared illegal? Read More »

Compensation in Lieu of Sentencing in Criminal Trials – “Can a criminal court replace jail time… with money?”

The Supreme Court just clarified this in Parameshwari v. State of Tamil Nadu (2026).Compensation is not a shortcut to avoid punishment. It cannot trivialize the offence. Sentencing must balance Gravity of offence, Impact on victim, Circumstances of accused, Societal interest. Compensation can supplement justice. but cannot substitute accountability in serious crimes. Parameshwari v State of

Compensation in Lieu of Sentencing in Criminal Trials – “Can a criminal court replace jail time… with money?” Read More »

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 378(3) read with Sections 378(1) and (2) — Leave to appeal against judgment of acquittal

The case arose from the murder of political leader Ramavatar Jaggi in 2003. The State police initially registered an FIR and filed a charge sheet; however, due to dissatisfaction expressed by the victim’s family, the investigation was later transferred to the CBI, which filed a fresh charge sheet implicating, among others, Amit Jogi. The trial

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — Section 378(3) read with Sections 378(1) and (2) — Leave to appeal against judgment of acquittal Read More »

₹2 Crores for faulty haircut? Compensation reduced to ₹25 Lakh

On 12-04-2018, the respondent visited the beauty salon situated in the ITC Maurya Hotel, New Delhi, for a haircut. Alleging that her hair was cut much shorter than instructed, resulting in emotional trauma and professional setbacks, she filed a consumer complaint before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission (NCDRC) in July 2018. By order dated

₹2 Crores for faulty haircut? Compensation reduced to ₹25 Lakh Read More »

Debit freezing/attaching bank accounts without Magistrate’s order under Section 107 BNSS illegal

In the instant matter, the petitioners are engaged in the business of buying and selling gold ornaments, gold bars, coins and precious stones and have been carrying on such business in compliance with applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. In July 2024, a company named Dallas E-com Infotech Private Limited (“the Customer”) approached the petitioners for

Debit freezing/attaching bank accounts without Magistrate’s order under Section 107 BNSS illegal Read More »

Distinction between “Deficiency in Service” and “Medical Negligence” 

The Supreme Court held that the benchmark for adjudging medical negligence is the lowest standard of professional skill and competence expected of a medical practitioner. It clarified that “deficiency in service” in patient care is distinct from “medical negligence” and that the two concepts must not be enmeshed. The case involved an appellant who alleged

Distinction between “Deficiency in Service” and “Medical Negligence”  Read More »

Terms & Conditions

The rules of the Bar Council of India prohibit law firms from soliciting work or advertising in any manner. By clicking on ‘I AGREE’, the user acknowledges that:

  1. The user wishes to gain more information about Re Legal, its practice areas for his/her own information and use.
  2. That the information provided in the website is only for personal use or reference of the visitor and is provided only on his/her specific request.
  3. That the material available for downloading on the website and other information provided on the website would not create any lawyer-client relationship.
  4. That we are not responsible for any consequence of any action taken by the user relying on material/information provided under this website.
  5. That in case the visitor has any legal issues; he or she should seek independent legal advice.

The information provided under this website is for informational purposes only and solely available at your request. It should not be interpreted as soliciting or advertising. I AGREE