Case Analysis

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 […]
28th Jun, 2021

The prior consent of Central Government is not necessary under Section 86(3) of the Code of Civil Procedure to enforce an arbitral award against a Foreign State.

In the matters of KLA Const Technologies Pvt. Ltd. Vs. The Embassy of Islamic Republic of Afghanistan, OMP (ENF) (COMM) 82/2019 and Matrix Global Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Ministry of Education, Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia, […]
28th Jun, 2021

Non-fulfilment of a stipulated condition of grant of the contract is different from a mere contractual dispute and is ground enough for sustaining a blacklisting order

In the matter of Nisa Industrial Services Private Limited & Anr. vs. State Bank of India in Writ Petition (L) no. 12341 of 2021 decided on 22.06.2021 decided by the Bombay High Court. Facts: The […]
22nd Jun, 2021

The obligation of the father to provide maintenance to his son does not end when the son attains majority if he is not able to sustain himself.

Urvashi Aggarwal & Ors. Vs. Inderpaul Aggarwal Crl. Rev. P. 549/2018 decided by Hon’ble Delhi High Court on 14.06.2021. Facts of the case- The petitioner No. 1 (wife) and the Respondent are both government employees […]
22nd Jun, 2021

However strong a person’s right to recovery maybe, he cannot file an intervention application in an already disposed of matter and stay the execution of the decree or nullify the decree without proper judicial recourse

In the matter of Rajesh Saichand Sharma vs. Subhash Chandra Saichand Sharma (IA No. 11624/2021 in Suit No. 2700/2011) decided on 11.06.2021 by the Bombay High Court. FACTS: Petitioner and Subhash Chandra Saichand Sharma were […]
18th Jun, 2021

Right of an accused to carry on his occupation or profession cannot be curtailed while ensuring the culmination of the legal process

In the matter of Arun Baby vs. State of Kerala and ors. [ CRL.MC NO. 2695 of 2021] decided by Kerala High Court on 11th June 2021. Facts The Petitioner (Arun Baby) is an accused […]
18th Jun, 2021

Delhi High Court’s take on celebrity rights/publicity rights and their relationship with right to privacy

In the matter of Krishna Kishore Singh Vs. Sarla A. Saraogi & Ors., CS(COMM) 187/2021 decided by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court on 10.06.2021. Facts of the case- The Plaintiff (father of late actor Sushant […]
15th Jun, 2021

Not mentioning date of service of demand notice in the complaint is not fatal to case under Section 138, Negotiable Instruments Act 1881

In the matter of Anil Kumar Goel v. State of UP & Anr. (No. 14190/2014) decided by the Allahabad High Court on 07.06.2021 FACTS: The Respondent No. 2 in the present case presented the cheque […]
14th Jun, 2021

The bank has the duty to scrutinize the documents to ensure that they are in conformity with the terms and condition of the Letter of Credit.

In the matter of UPL Limited vs. Standard Chartered Bank & Ors. (COMM SUIT NO. 12 OF 1999) decided by the Bombay High Court on 8th June 2021. FACTS- In the present suit, the Plaintiff […]
14th Jun, 2021

The legal guardianship of the property of the minor is vested only in the father or grandfather and not mother

In the matter of G. Premjee Trading Pvt. Ltd Vs. Abdul Kader Haji Noormohammad & Ors. Bearing Suit No. 1754/1994, decided by the Bombay High Court on 08.06.2021. Facts of the case- The Defendant No. […]