Functional Dead Lock

In Lau v. Chu, [2020] 1 WLR 4656 House of Lords indicated, “just and equitable winding up may be ordered where the Company’s members have fallen out in two related but distinct situations, which may or may not overlap.” The first of these is labelled as “functional dead lock” of a paralyzing kind, clearly recognized […]

Read more "Functional Dead Lock"

Same Words, Different Meanings

There is no doubt on the principles that, depending upon context, the same word may be used in different parts of the statute with different meanings and the same word in the context of one provision of the enactment may convey one meaning and another meaning in different context. However, it is also fundamental that, […]

Read more "Same Words, Different Meanings"

Act of 1986 v. Act of 2019

NCDRC dismissed a Consumer Case, instituted under Act of 1986 on 18.06.2020, on the ground, after enforcement of Act of 2019, pecuniary jurisdiction of NCDRC has been enhanced from Rupees One Crore to Rupees Ten Crores. The decision has been set aside. _____ A change in forum lies in the realm of procedure. Accordingly, in […]

Read more "Act of 1986 v. Act of 2019"

Legal Malice II

It is well settled, actions of State with an oblique or indirect object will be attributed to ‘malice in law’. Kalabharati Advertising v. Hemant Vimalnath Narichania, (2010) 9 SCC 437 has summarized as follows: “Where malice is attributed to State, it can never be a case of personal ill will or spite on part of […]

Read more "Legal Malice II"

Quasi-Judicial II / The Plea of Limitation XV: Causes of Justice II

The conditions that are required to be fulfilled for invoking the provisions of Section 14 of The Limitation Act, 1963 have been succinctly spelt out in Consolidated Engineering Enterprises v. Principal Secretary, Irrigation Department, (2008) 7 SCC 169 . The question as to whether Section 14 would also be applicable to Quasi-Judicial Forums as against […]

Read more "Quasi-Judicial II / The Plea of Limitation XV: Causes of Justice II"

Section 11(6) of The Arbitration Act IV

The 1996 Act has been framed for expeditious resolution of disputes. Various time lines have been provided [Section 8; Section 9(2); Section 13; Section 16(2); Section 34(3)]. The 1996 Act was amended by The Arbitration and Conciliation (Amendment) Act, 2015 to incorporate further provisions for expeditious disposal of Arbitral Proceedings [Section 11(13); Section 29A; Section […]

Read more "Section 11(6) of The Arbitration Act IV"

Arising Out Of / Relating To

Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. v. General Electric Company, (1984) 4 SCC 679 held, “expressions such as “arising out of” or “in respect of” or “in connection with” or “in relation to” or “in consequence of” or “concerning” or “relating to” the contract are of the widest amplitude and content.” Mansukhlal Dhanraj Jain v. Eknath Vithal […]

Read more "Arising Out Of / Relating To"

The Revival of Ray LXIII

Over the last five decades, several decisions have dealt with the fundamental issue of when the process of an examination can stand vitiated. Essentially, the answer to the issue turns upon whether the irregularities in the process have taken place at a systemic level so as to vitiate the sanctity of the process. There are […]

Read more "The Revival of Ray LXIII"

The Copyright Act, 1957

The expression ‘copyright’ has to be understood only as is stated in Section 14 and not otherwise. It is an exclusive right, which is negative in nature, being a right to restrict others from doing certain acts. The ownership of copyright in a work is different from the ownership of the physical material in which […]

Read more "The Copyright Act, 1957"

Civil Sheep & Criminal Wolf

A reading [State of Assam v. Ranga Mahammad, (1967) 1 SCR 454; Jagdish Chander Gupta v. Kajaria Traders (India) Ltd., (1964) 8 SCR 50; Rajasthan State Electricity Board v. Mohan Lal, (1967) 3 SCR 377; CBI v. Braj Bhushan Prasad, (2001) 9 SCC 432; Godfrey Phillips India Ltd. v. State of U.P., (2005) 2 SCC […]

Read more "Civil Sheep & Criminal Wolf"