Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
This report covers the Supreme Court’s Never Reported Judgment on consideration, dating back to the year 1954.
The Court also reiterated that FIR is not an encyclopedia of all imputations. Therefore, to test whether an FIR discloses commission of a cognizable offence, what is to be looked at is not any omission in the accusations, but the gravamen of the accusations contained therein to find out whether, prima facie, some cognizable offence has been committed or not.
Supreme Court said that the finding of the Trial Court on the ground to proceed against the accused is based on suppositions and suspicions, having no foundational support from the materials produced by the prosecution.
“The notice invoking arbitration sent to the same address was reported to have been delivered, but in the Speed Post report, by which the petition was sent to the address, it is stated that no such person is available at the address.”
Supreme Court said that once the parties committed themselves to a written contract, whereby they reduced the terms and conditions agreed upon by them to writing, the same would be binding upon them.
“Bohemia and his agents are restrained from posting, uploading, sharing, e-sharing and/or publishing or causing any defamatory, disparaging, misleading posts against Saga Music (P) Ltd. on any social media or digital platform.”
In 2001, the appellant, Director of Education under the aegis of the Directorate of Education created by the Government of NCT of Delhi, floated a tender for the implementation of the Computer Education Project (“CEP-II”) for various government/ government aided Senior Secondary Schools, and Educomp Solutions a provider of technology-based educational products and services was awarded the contract.
“The parties to an arbitration have an autonomy to decide not only on the procedural law to be followed, but also on the substantive law”
The instant matter was remitted to the respondents for a fresh decision on the petitioner’s maternity leave, with a directive to comply within a specified timeframe.
On 3-10-2023, the Ministry of Corporate Affairs notified that the provisions of Section 14 (1), relating to “Moratorium”, of the Insolvency and
The Court is not meant to act as a Court of first appeal and cannot supplant its view over that of the Arbitral Tribunal.
The MSMED Act, 2006 is a beneficial legislation for Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises and ought to be construed in a manner that is beneficial to such enterprises.
Where parties decide to put an end to the original contract as if it never existed and substituted a new contract with it, then in such a situation the original contract is extinguished by the substituted one and the arbitration clause of the original one perishes with it.
Delhi High Court observed that an inadequately drafted agreement will be one that fails to include essential elements such as the name of all the relevant parties, the terms outlining the conditions of settlement, and the consequences in the event of non-compliance or breach.
The Delhi High Court opined that that technicalities and procedural defects, which do not go to the root of the matter, should not be permitted to defeat a just cause, more so in cases where suits are initiated or defended on behalf of public corporations.
The Delhi High Court upheld Single judge’s decision to set aside ICC Award of $562.5 million in favour of Devas Multimedia (P) Ltd. for a failed satellite agreement with Antrix Corporation Ltd., on the grounds of fraud and being in conflict with the public policy of India.
Grant of injunction in favour of the plaintiff company would cause irreparable injury to the Artist which cannot be compensated in monetary terms as he would be forced to continue with the contract of personal service even though mutual trust has been lost between parties.
The Delhi High Court ruled that the moratorium granted by the NCLAT, staying the institution of suits and proceedings against the Corporate Debtor, after the resolution process was initiated against it under Sections 241 and 242 of the Companies Act, 2013, was akin to an order of moratorium passed under Section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016.
It is travesty of justice that an institution contributing for noble cause being that of running a charitable hospital on a public land and providing for sound research and treatment facilities has been made to suffer the rigors of cancellation of the Lease Deed and vacation of the property. Being a constitutional court and the conscience-keeper of the democracy, this Court cannot lend a blind eye when the ends of justice are being bulldozed in broad daylight.
A curious case presented itself before the Karnataka HC wherein they deliberated over an agreement for adoption entered between the biological parents and adoptive parents, when the child was still unborn.