Articles

11th Aug, 2021

There exists no distinction on the basis of nature of employment whether it is temporary/ad-hoc/ permanent employee and as such all employees are entitled to payment of gratuity

In the matter of Janardan Sharma vs. GNCTD in W.P. (C)11154/2019 decided on 03.08.2021 by the Delhi High Court. Facts: Petitioner herein was a vocational part-time teacher in a Govt. School, under the GNCT of […]
11th Aug, 2021

An application filed under O6R17 can be considered on merits before disposal of application under O12R6, as the case is still at an intermediate stage, even when it is “reserved for orders” for application under O12R6.

In the matter of M/s BDR Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Narsingh Shah, CM(M) 412/2020 alongwith four other similar matter, decided by Delhi High Court on 03.08.2021. Background of the case- The Petitioner/Plaintiff claimed to be […]
28th Jul, 2021

Letter of intent is not a binding contract unless such an intention is evident from its terms

In the matter of South Eastern Coalfields Limited vs M/s S. Kumar Asoociates AKM (JV) (LL 2021 SC 325) decided by the Supreme Court of India on 23.06.2021   FACTS: The appellants, a government company […]
28th Jul, 2021

Personal information having no relation to any public activity, public interest cannot be disclosed under RTI Act

In the matter of Har Kishan vs President Secretariat & Anr. (LPA 90/2021) decided on 26.07.2021 in the Delhi High Court.   FACTS: The plea was filed by one Har Kishan, who was seeking information […]
21st Jul, 2021

Clarifications, enquiries and preliminary due diligence exercise have to be sought from the available official sources before posting tweets against public figures

In the matter of Lakshmi Murdeshwar Puri Vs Saket Gokhale in I.A. 7944/2021 in CS OS No. 300/2021 decided on 13.07.2021 FACTS: The plaintiff in this matter is a decorated retired member of the Indian […]
21st Jul, 2021

It is beyond the scope of Section 11 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 to decide contentious issues regarding the disputes between the parties

In the matter of Jyoti Sarup Mittal. vs. The Executive Engineer -XXIII, South Delhi Municipal Corporation in ARB. P. No. 275/2021 decided on 12.07.2021 by the Delhi High Court. Facts: The Petitioner, a government contractor […]
10th Jul, 2021

An arbitration clause in unsigned invoice would still be a valid arbitration agreement if both parties are shown to have acted and accepted the conditions stipulated in the invoice

In the matter of Swastik Pipe Ltd. vs. Shri Ram Autotech Pvt. Ltd. in ARB. P. No. 241/2021 decided on 05.07.2021 by the Delhi High Court. Facts: Disputes arose between the parties due to non-payment […]
10th Jul, 2021

Filing of caveat by itself does not entitle caveators to be treated as a party to the proceedings

In the matter of Sanjay Prakash vs. Union of India (LL 2021 SC 283) decided on 28.06.2021 FACTS: Under consideration was inter-alia a plea of Central Indian Police Service Association to intervene in a Special […]
1st Jul, 2021

When there is a disability that makes it impossible to obey the law, the alleged disobedience of law is excused.

In the matter of Smt. Kalmati Ramkrupal Yadav v. Chandrapur City Municipal Corp. [ W.P. 1904 of 2020] decided by Bombay Nagpur Bench at Nagpur on 24th June 2021. ¬FACTS- The Petitioner (Smt. Kalmati Ramkrupal […]
1st Jul, 2021

Calcutta High Court distinguishes between the scope of Order XXXVIII Rule 5 CPC and Order XXXIX Rule 1 CPC

In the matter of Prabha Surana vs. Jaideep Halwasiya in GA 2 of 2021 in CS 52 of 2021 decided on 22.06.2021 by the Calcutta High Court. Facts: The Petitioner moved an application for temporary […]
30th Jun, 2021

A secured creditor’s interest in the mortgaged property prioritises over any other creditors be it recovery warrant issued by the revenue authorities.

In the matter of IDBI Trusteeship Services Limited vs. District Collector Pune & Ors. in Writ Petition no. 3417 of 2019 decided on 25.06.2021 decided by the Bombay High Court. Facts: Respondent nos. 4-8, a […]
30th Jun, 2021

Non-compliance of mandatory provisions of Sec 33(2)(b) of the ID Act, would render the dismissal order of a workman as void ab initio and the workman would be entitled for reinstatement with all consequential benefits.

In the matter of Duncan Engineering Ltd. Vs. Ajay C. Shelke W.P (ST.) No. 93088/2020 along with similar other writ petitions, decided by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court on 21.06.2021. Facts of the case- The […]