Entitlement to back wages: Denial of back wages to appellant CA, whose termination was found unjustified, not proper. [Pradeep v. Manganese Ore (India) Ltd., (2022) 3 SCC 683]
It could thus be seen that this Court in its celebrated judgment in the case of Vadivelu Thevarhas found that witnesses are of three types, viz., (a) wholly reliable; (b) wholly unreliable; and (c) neither wholly reliable nor wholly unreliable. When the witness is “wholly reliable”, the Court should not have any difficulty inasmuch as
Criminal Law — Criminal Trial — Witnesses Read More »
illegality, irrationality and procedural impropriety, held, not attracted in this case. Courts in exercise of power under judicial review, held, cannot interfere with selections made by expert bodies, as in this case, by reassessing comparative merits of candidates, unless vitiated by bias, mala fides or contrary to statutory provisions. None of these vitiating factors were
Held, having reappreciated the evidence of the witnesses, we find that the high Court was justified in reversing the judgement of conviction and sentencing the two of the accused with death penalty and imposing Upendra Ram to undergo life imprisonment and instead of acquitting all the accused. However directions to initiate proceedings of perjury against
Constitution of India — Art. 136 — Appeal against acquittal Read More »
Election petition based on allegations of corrupt practices not supported by an affidavit in Form 25, as prescribed under R. 94-A of the 1961 Rules cannot be thrown out at threshold. Non-filing of affidavit or non-filing of proper verification is technical defect which is curable by allowing candidate to file proper affidavit. [A. Manju v.
Long practice which was being followed, if not contrary to law, must be given its true importance and ordinarily is not to be interfered with in exercise of power of judicial review under Art. 226. Held, appellant can certainly be relieved for that rotation year. Appellant directed to be considered for nomination as HoD/ Director when
Arbitration clause contained in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) was invoked by the petitioner but was opposed on the premise that the MOU ceased to exist on and from the date of the shareholder’s agreement(SHA) which superseded the MOU and novated the same. Held, is thus non-determinable by court at the stage of reference when
Provision of law applicable after coming into force of the 2019 Act: S. 23 of the 1986 Act provide that no appeal shall be entertained by Supreme Court unless the person who is required to pay the amount deposits 50% of the amount or Rs 50,000, whichever is less is not applicable to the complaints
Consumer Protection Act, 1986 — S. 23 — Appeal to Supreme Court Read More »
Award on issues/matters beyond the scope of the arbitration clause which was invoked, as the issues/matters in question pertained to another distinct agreement, arbitration clause in which latter agreement was not invoked, is not valid. Award on lease rental and lease duration i.e pertaining to lease agreement is not permissible, when arbitration has been invoked
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 34 and 5: Read More »
Respondent contended that disputes sought to be raised were under the non-disclosure agreement and, therefore not arbitrable, inasmuch as, there was no arbitration agreement in that agreement. Held, ordinarily falls within the domain of the arbitration. Zostel Hospitality Private Limited v. Oravel Stays Private Limited, (2021) 9 SCC 765
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:
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