Case Analysis

20th Jan, 2020

Contractual employees engaged by a company entitled to Provident Fund benefit as per the Employees’ Provident Funds and Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952

The Supreme Court in the matter of M/s Pawan Hans Limited & Ors. vs. Aviation Karamchari Sangathan & Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 353 of 2020) has observed that contractual employees engaged by a Company who […]
Do you like it?
Read more
20th Jan, 2020

Inconvenience of the wife should be treated as the prime consideration in a proceeding under Section 24 of CPC arising out of a matrimonial suit.

The Calcutta High Court reiterated the above-mentioned proposition in the matter of Sanchayita Deb vs Sustana Deb (CO No. 3963 and 3964 of 2018) published on 15.01.2020. Also, in terms of language of section 9 […]
Do you like it?
Read more
13th Jan, 2020

Basement parking is not a garage but forms a part of common area. NCDRC confirms that the club Area and the Basement Parking being common to all the allottees, developers are not entitled to collect charges for the same.

The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi in the case of Capital Greens Flat Buyer Association & Ors. vs DLF Universal Ltd. & Ors in consumer case no. 351 of 2015 on 03.01.2020 held […]
Do you like it?
Read more
13th Jan, 2020

In a suit for possession on the ground of subletting, once the landlord establishes that a third party is in exclusive possession of the premises, the onus shifts on to the tenant to prove that he continues to hold legal possession in tenancy

The Supreme Court in the matter of A. Mahalakshmi vs. Ala Venkatram (D) (Civil Appeal No. 9443/2019) on 07.01.2020 held that in a suit for possession on the ground of subletting, the onus is on […]
Do you like it?
Read more
13th Jan, 2020

Upon death of a coparcener his property devolves upon his legal heirs under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act as his self acquired property after notional partition

The Supreme Court in the matter of M. Arumugam vs. M. Ammaniammal (Civil Appeal No. 8642 of 2009) decided on 08.01.2020 held that a HUF property devolving under Section 8 of the Hindu Succession Act, […]
Do you like it?
Read more
13th Jan, 2020

Presumption as under Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 also applies to guarantor cheques

The High Court of Kerala in the matter of A. K Bhaskaran vs K.G Sheeba & Ors. (Crl. A 782 of 2006), decided on 08.01.2020 has held that the presumption under Section 139 of Negotiable […]
Do you like it?
Read more
13th Jan, 2020

State cannot invoke the doctrine of adverse possession to perfect title over acquired land from private citizens without following due process of law

The Supreme Court in the case of Vidya Devi vs State of Himachal Pradesh& Ors. (Civil Appeal no. 60-61 of 2020) decided on 08.01.2020 held that forcible dispossession of a person from his private property […]
Do you like it?
Read more
6th Jan, 2020

THE INSOLVENCY AND BANKRUPTCY CODE (AMENDMENT) ORDINANCE, 2019- A SET BACK TO HOME BUYERS

The Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code (Amendment) Ordinance, 2019 was promulgated on December 28, 2019. The Ordinance amends the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016. Insolvency is a situation where individuals or companies are unable to repay […]
Do you like it?
Read more
6th Jan, 2020

In a landlord-tenant suit, when the landlord’s derivative title is challenged, the same has to be established in some form

The Supreme Court in the matter of Vijay Eknath Lad vs. Chiu Mao Chen in Civil Appeal No. 4726 of 2010 decided on 18.12.2019 held that though a tenant cannot challenge the title of his […]
Do you like it?
Read more
6th Jan, 2020

In a suit for recovery, Bank would be entitled to sell the hypothecated vehicle even if the Defendant is ex-parte

The Delhi High Court in the case of M/s ICICI Bank Limited vs Nidhi Sharma (CM (M) 1814/2019) decided on 23.12.2019 held that the Bank would be entitled to sell the hypothecated vehicle where the […]
Do you like it?
Read more
6th Jan, 2020

Widow remarrying would not dis-entitle her for from claiming compensation under the MV Act

The above-mentioned reasoning was pronounced by the Bombay High Court in the matter of The New India Assurance Co. Ltd. vs. Smt. Sushama Mahendra Sonwane (FA. No. 28929 of 2014) on 20.12.2019. Facts: The Appeal […]
Do you like it?
Read more
23rd Dec, 2019

The conduct of the majority shareholders to be oppressive requires the events to be considered not in isolation, but as a part of a consecutive story. The acts must be continuous on the part of the majority shareholders, continuing up to the date of filing of the petition.

The National Company Law Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal) in the matter of Cyrus Investments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Tata Sons Ltd. & Anr. (Appeal No. 254/2018), decided on 18.12.2019, has reiterated the […]
Do you like it?
Read more
Prev page
12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758596061626364656667686970717273747576777879808182838485868788
Next page