Arbitration — Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 34 and 37 — Arbitral award — Validity of: Law explained on validity of arbitral award and entertainability of curative petition before Supreme Court when there is gross miscarriage of justice, [DMRC Ltd. v. Delhi Airport Metro Express (P) Ltd., (2024) 6 SCC 357]
Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 — Ss. 12, 13 and 14 r/w Fifth and Seventh Schedules — Increase of arbitrators’ fee in an ongoing arbitration: Unilateral increase of arbitrators’ fee in an ongoing arbitration is not sufficient ground for termination of mandate of Arbitral Tribunal, [Chennai Metro Rail Ltd. v. Transtonnelstroy Afcons (JV), (2024) 6 SCC 211]
Constitution of India — Art. 141 — Principles for determining if/which precedent is binding: Asian Resurfacing, (2018) 16 SCC 299 directing that stay order shall come to an end on expiry of six months unless in exceptional cases stay extended by speaking order is not applicable to instant proceedings, [Asian Resurfacing of Road Agency (P) Ltd. v. CBI, (2024) 6 SCC 307]
Constitution of India — Arts. 141 and 233 — Whether matter should be tagged with Constitution Bench in Tej Prakash Pathak, (2013) 4 SCC 540: In this case, held, reference to the Constitution Bench along the lines in Tej Prakash Pathak case is unnecessary since the issue which is referred to the Constitution Bench is not raised herein. Registry therefore, directed to add the present matter to the three-Judge Bench and seek direction on the administrative side for listing the petition before an appropriate Bench, [Salam Samarjeet Singh v. High Court of Manipur, (2024) 6 SCC 263]
Constitution of India — Arts. 142 and 141 — Exercise of power under Art. 142: Blanket directions to decide cases in time-bound manner, and specifying automatic consequences of failure to do so, including automatic vacation of stay, etc., not permissible. Asian Resurfacing, (2018) 16 SCC 299, directing the above, overruled, [Allahabad High Court Bar Assn. v. State of U.P., (2024) 6 SCC 267]
Constitution of India — Arts. 142 and 141 — Reference to larger Bench — When warranted: Asian Resurfacing, (2018) 16 SCC 299 vide a three-Judge Bench holding that stay shall stand vacated automatically, unless specifically extended, on expiry of period of six months i.e. automatic vacation of stay without application of judicial mind, held, is liable to result in serious miscarriage of justice since delay is not always on account of conduct of parties involved but may also occasion by inability of court to take up proceedings expeditiously. Matter referred to larger Bench of five Judges, [Allahabad High Court Bar Assn. v. State of U.P., (2024) 6 SCC 303]
Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 — Ss. 60 and 61 — Interim relief by NCLT/NCLAT: Reasons for grant of interim relief by NCLT/NCLAT, is necessary, [Orbit Electricals (P) Ltd. v. Deepak Kishan Chhabria, (2024) 6 SCC 234]
Insurance — Payment of Claim or Repudiation of Claim/Termination/Remedies/Relief — Repudiation of claim on the basis of exclusionary clause: Validity of Burden of proving the applicability of an exclusionary clause, held, lies on the insurer. Further, it is the duty of the insurer to plead and lead cogent evidence to establish the application of such a clause and the evidence must unequivocally establish that the event sought to be excluded is specifically covered by the exclusionary clause, [United India Insurance Co. Ltd. v. Hyundai Engineering & Construction Co. Ltd., (2024) 6 SCC 310]
Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act, 1971 — S. 3 — Role of RMP/Medical Board — Opinion of RMP/Medical Board: Reasons for divergent subsequent opinion are necessary, [A v. State of Maharashtra, (2024) 6 SCC 327]
Mines and Minerals — Mining — Mining Lease — Renewal of — Whether warranted: Legality of directions of High Court for formation of a High-Powered Committee to take decision with regard to the renewal of mining leases, determined, [State of Odisha v. Bharat Process & Mechanical Engineers Ltd., (2024) 6 SCC 347]
Transfer of Property Act, 1882 — Ss. 105 and 5 — Lessor’s right to claim premium as per terms of the lease deed: Right to claim unearned increase in market value of the leased premises and scope of “transfer” of leased premises/leasehold rights, as contemplated in the lease deed, determined, [Jaiprakash Industries Ltd. v. DDA, (2024) 6 SCC 252]