Legal RoundUpSupreme Court Roundups

This roundup revisits the analyses of Supreme Court’s judgments/orders on constitutionality of Demonetisation; Freedom of Speech of Ministers; Guidelines to withhold life support of a terminally ill patients; Tussle between Delhi Government and Centre, and more. It also covers reports on Justice SA Nazeer’s retirement; the career trajectory & important decision of Justice CT Ravikumar; Explainers on important law points; five ‘Did You Know’ facts; Cases Reported in SCC Weekly in the month of January; and a throwback from SCC Archives.

Continue reading
Landmark Judgments on Constitutional Law
Experts CornerSiddharth R Gupta

by Siddharth R. Gupta† and Sangam Ghorpade††
Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 7

Continue reading
Case BriefsSupreme Court

Observing that performance of functions identical to those performed by medical practitioners by persons who do not possess the qualifications prescribed under the Central Act, could have dangerous consequences, the Supreme Court held that Rural Health Practitioners enlisted under the Assam Act, are underqualified to perform functions similar to those performed by medical practitioners registered in accordance with the Indian Medical Council Act, 1956. The Court, however, upheld the constitutionality of the Assam Community Professional (Registration and Competency) Act, 2015 that was enacted to give continuity in service to the practitioners in question.

Continue reading
Case BriefsSupreme Court

While Justice Shah stated that the Kerala High Court has erred in interfering with the judgment of Trial Court of passing a decree for specific performance; Justice Nagarathna affirmed the Judgment of the High Court.

Continue reading
Case BriefsSupreme Court

The bench of KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna, JJ has held that the definition of ‘family' under the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 is a restrictive and specific one and cannot be expanded to take within its sweep, all heirs, as provided under Hindu law, or other personal laws.

Continue reading
Case BriefsSupreme Court

While Justice Shah stated that the plaintiff had not produced the Power of Attorney, Justice Nagarathna opined that non-production of Power of Attorney was not fatal to the case of the original plaintiff.

Continue reading
Case BriefsSupreme Court

Noting that there is no disqualification for a Sikkim man, who marries a non-Sikkimese after 01.04.2008, the Supreme Court observed that the discrimination is based on gender.

Continue reading
Case BriefsSupreme Court

While MR Shah, J, has struck down the definition of “Sikkimese” in Section 10(26AAA) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Nagarathna, J, has called for saving the Explanation to Section 10(26AAA) and has created a stopgap ‘sub-clause (iv)’ till the Union of India makes the requisite amendment to the provision.

Continue reading
Case BriefsSupreme Court

Taking note of the sorry state of affairs as to how the city of Bengaluru, once considered to be one of India’s best cities, a ‘Garden city’ has been ruined on account of haphazard urban development, the Supreme Court observed that the warning flagged by the city of Bengaluru needs to be given due attention by the legislature, executive and the policy makers and proper balance needs to be struck between sustainable development and environmental protection.

Continue reading
Case BriefsSupreme Court

The Supreme Court stated that it was neither a case where the appellant did not make any application within the stipulated time under the 2019 Scheme nor where the appellant deliberately did not deposit the settlement amount.

Continue reading
Case BriefsSupreme Court

The Court was called upon to decide as to while calculating the amount to be deposited as predeposit under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act, 50% of which amount the borrower is required to deposit as pre-deposit and whether while calculating the amount of “debt due”, the amount deposited by the auction purchaser on purchase of the secured assets is required to be adjusted and/or appropriated towards the amount of pre-deposit to be deposited by the borrower under Section 18 of the SARFAESI Act.

Continue reading
Legal RoundUpSupreme Court Roundups

“When the daughter belonging to the non-tribal is entitled to the equal share in the property of the father, there is no

Continue reading
Op EdsOP. ED.

by Jeet J. Bhatt†

Continue reading
Know thy Judge

After an extensive tenure of 6 years, Justice S. Abdul Nazeer retires today. During this time, Justice Nazeer had been a part of some path-breaking decisions such as- Right to Privacy, Triple Talaq, Ayodhya verdict etc. Justice Nazeer has also been the part of the Constitution Bench which decided upon the validity of Central Govt’s 2016 Demonetisation Scheme.

Continue reading
speech of Ministers
Hot Off The PressNews

    Supreme Court: A Constitution Bench of S Abdul Nazeer, AS Bopanna, BR Gavai, V Ramasubramanian & BV Nagarathna, JJ, delivered

Continue reading
demonetisation
Case BriefsSupreme CourtSupreme Court (Constitution/Larger Benches)

While BR Gavai, J has written the majority opinion for himself and SA Nazeer, A.S. Bopanna, V. Ramasubramanian, JJ, to uphold the legality of the 2016 demonetization, BV Nagarathna, J is the lone dissenter who has held that though demonetisation was well-intentioned and well thought of, the manner in which it was carried out was improper and unlawful.

Continue reading
decision of demonetising
Hot Off The PressNews

Supreme Court: In a petition against the demonitisation of Rs. 500 and Rs. 1000 currency notes in 2016, the Constitution Bench of

Continue reading
Constitution Bench 2022 Roundup
Legal RoundUpSupreme Court Roundups

The year 2022 has seen formation of multiple Constitution Benches and its hearings, wherein out of pending 498 Constitution Bench matters, 25

Continue reading
Case BriefsSupreme CourtSupreme Court (Constitution/Larger Benches)

The Constitution Bench of SA Nazeer, BR Gavai, AS Bopanna, V Ramasubramanian and BV Nagarathna, JJ has observed that the trial does not abate nor does it result in an order of acquittal of the accused public servant if the complainant turns ‘hostile’, or has died or is unavailable to let in his evidence.

Continue reading
State Tax Officers
Case BriefsSupreme Court

    Supreme Court: In a significant case, the Division Bench of M.R. Shah* and B.V. Nagarathna, JJ., allowed the PIL filed

Continue reading