Gambling in Cricket II : Name of the Game

“Cricket Corruption”, Patriot Act with Hasan Minhaj had an insight to share on Hon’ble Justice R.M. Lodha: “Court ordered changes still haven’t been made”. Indian Courts have executed limited interference with (issues of) Cricket. Supreme Court [BCCI, (2018) 9 SCC 624], once pointed out: “Famous Cricketers produced by Mumbai Cricket Association or MCA, amongst others, […]

Read more "Gambling in Cricket II : Name of the Game"

Gun Island

Amitav Ghosh, Gun Island, (Penguin, 2019) is a remarkable read. It travels through time, space and thoughts. If you do not let yourself completely in, the best bits shall go unnoticed. Like there are dreams within dreams, at Gun Island, there are stories within stories. Written simply, detailed subtly, this one is a must read. […]

Read more "Gun Island"

Section 148, The NI Act

Considering, Statement of Objects and Reasons of Amendment, Amended Section 148 of The N.I. Act is applicable w.r.t. Appeals against Orders of Conviction and Sentence for the Offence under Section 138, even where Criminal Complaints for the Offence are filed prior to Amendment Act No. 20/2018 [01.09.2018]. “If such a purposive interpretation is not adopted, […]

Read more "Section 148, The NI Act"


“The expression ‘Quasi-Judicial Order’ means a verdict in writing which determines and decides contesting issues and question by a Forum other than a Court. The determination has civil consequences. Explaining the meaning of ‘Quasi-Judicial Body’ in Indian National Congress (I) v. Institute of Social Welfare, (2002) 5 SCC 685
 it was held that when any body of […]

Read more "Quasi-Judicial"

The Revival of Ray XXII

Hon’ble Justice Arun Misra, while explaining Section 108 of The Companies Act [Ram Parshottam Mittal v. Hotel Queen Road Pvt. Ltd., Civil Appeal No. 3934 of 2017], quoted Hon’ble Chief Justice of India, Hon’ble Justice A.N. Ray [Mannalal Khetan v. Kedar Nath Khetan, (1977) 2 SCC 424]; My Lord, Mannalal Khetan v. Kedar Nath Khetan, […]

Read more "The Revival of Ray XXII"

Class Action, Consumer Disputes

Appellant Nos. 1-44 entered Builder-Buyer Agreement with Respondent; Respondent-Builder, failed; Appellant Nos. 1-44 filed NCDRC, Consumer Complaint. “The National Commission concluded that the case could not be accepted as class action and dismissed the same. The dismissal of the case as class action is questioned. In T.N. Ganapathy, (1990) 1 SCC 608 it was held […]

Read more "Class Action, Consumer Disputes"