A ‘letter of intent’ merely indicates a party’s intention to enter into a contract with the other party in future. No binding relationship between the parties at this stage emerges and the totality of the circumstances have to be considered in each case. It is no doubt possible to construe a ‘letter of intent’ as […]Read more "Letter of Intent"
“The Strict Liability Rule under Common Law is a relic of the past and should not be given effect in the Indian context.” – Justice Mohan M. Shantanagoudar, Taj Mahal Hotel v. United India Insurance Co. Ltd., (2020) 2 SCC 224. _____ There is certainly a phantom thread concerning the Rule of Strict Liability and […]Read more "Be Kind Rewind, Strict Liability"
Senior Advocate, Sanjoy Ghose argued for Captain Arvind Kumar Sharma, Captain K Sai Sashanka, Captain Jeetender Yadav, Captain Jitender Singh Randhawa, Captain Adish M. Chavan, Captain Reuben James, Captain B Sujimon, Captain Vishal V Chandorkar and Captain Vijay Kumar Dahiya before Hon’ble Justice Jyoti Singh of Hon’ble High Court of Delhi. The common thread was […]Read more "Façade of ‘Commercial Decision’"
Danish Khan & Ruhi Khan, Escaped, (Penguin, 2021) is beautifully detailed. The number of facts cited must be appreciated. It doesn’t matter whether the story is on Vijay Mallya or successful extradition of Hansie Cronje times Sanjeev Chawla or forgotten excuses of Raymond Varley who brought Goa to disrepute. Each one will educate. Excerpt follows. […]Read more "Extraditable Fugitives II"
Lord Hoffmann in Investors Compensation Scheme Limited v. West Bromwich Building Society, 1998 (1) AIR 98 summarized broad principles of interpretation of contract. “Interpretation is the ascertainment of the meaning which the document would convey to a reasonable person having all the background knowledge which would reasonably have been available to the parties in the […]Read more "Well-Known Principles of Interpretation II"
My Lord, Two Companies, incorporated in India, can Arbitrate outside India? Yes. It is clear, there can be more than one ratio decidendi to a Judgment. Jacobs v. London County Council, (1950) 1 All ER 737 has been followed in State of Gujarat v. M.P. Jadeja, (2013) 2 SCC 300 and in Shayara Bano v. […]Read more "Seat of Arbitration II"
As has been held in Ambika Prasad Mishra v. State of U.P., (1980) 3 SCC 719 every argumentative novelty does not undo a settled position of law. Section 19 of The Limitation Act, 1908 corresponds to Section 18 of The Limitation Act, 1963. Khan Bahadur Shapoor Freedom Mazda v. Durga Prasad, (1962) 1 SCR 140 […]Read more "The Plea of Limitation XVI: Section 18 of The Limitation Act, 1963"
Though retrospectivity is not to be presumed and rather there is presumption against retrospectivity, it is open for the Legislature to enact laws having retrospective operation. “Where a statute is passed for the purpose of supplying an obvious omission in a former statute or to ‘explain’ a former statute, the subsequent statute has relation back […]Read more "Explanatory Legislations"
Aman Bangia completely damaged one Porsche, DL-1CJ-3577, at 02:25 AM on 22.12.2007. It is indisputable, he smelt of alcohol. There is no evidence of recording the exact nature of alcoholic drink which was consumed and there is also no material as to the quantity consumed. We cannot resist recording our disquiet at the conduct of […]Read more "Contracts of Insurance II"
Tata Cellular v. Union of India, (1994) 6 SCC 651, Paragraph 94 states: “Normally speaking, the decision to accept the tender or award the contract is reached by process of negotiations through several tiers. More often than not, such decisions are made qualitatively by experts.” Afcons Infrastructure Ltd. v. Nagpur Metro Rail Corpn. Ltd., (2016) […]Read more "Tender Law V"
This Court in Madhusudan Gordhandas v. Madhu Woollen Industries Pvt. Ltd., (1971) 3 SCC 632 observed: If the debt is bona fide disputed and the defence is a substantial one, Court will not wind-up the Company [London and Paris Banking Corporation, (1874) LR 19 Eq 444; Brighton Club and Horfold Hotel Co. Ltd., (1865) 35 […]Read more "Disputed Company Debt / The Revival of Ray LXIV"
In Lau v. Chu,  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"
High Courts in India as well as Supreme Court recognize Doctrine of Indirect Discrimination. Only by exercising close scrutiny and exhibiting attentiveness to the possibility of alternatives can a Court ensure, full potential of Doctrine of Indirect Discrimination is realized and not lost in its application. _____ In a case of direct discrimination, judicial enquiry […]Read more "The Doctrine of Indirect Discrimination"
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"
“In every case where a statute inflicts a penalty for doing an act, though the act be not prohibited, yet the thing is unlawful, because it is not intended that a statute would inflict a penalty for a lawful act. It is a question of construction in each case whether the Legislature intended to prohibit […]Read more "The Revival of Ray LXI"
Unfortunately, there is no substantive domestic legislation or sector-specific regulations which may throw light upon the issue of whether banks are responsible for loss of articles placed inside the locker. This requires factual findings on knowledge of the contents of the locker; or whether the locker holder had prepared any receipt or inventory of the […]Read more "The Hurt Locker"
Two-Judge Bench in ABL International Ltd. v. Export Credit Guarantee Corporation of India, (2004) 3 SCC 553 analyzed a long line of precedent [K.N. Guruswamy, AIR 1954 SC 592; Gujarat State Financial Corporation, (1983) 3 SCC 379; Gunwant Kaur, (1969) 3 SCC 769] to conclude, Writs under Article 226 are maintainable for asserting contractual rights […]Read more "Writ Jurisdiction in Contractual Arena"
A transaction which is sham or collusive would only create an illusion that money has been disbursed to a borrower with the object of receiving consideration… when in fact the parties have entered into the transaction with a different or an ulterior motive. In other words, the real agreement between the parties is something other […]Read more "Sham Transactions"
The Constitution Bench in Jammu & Kashmir v. Triloki Nath Khosa, (1974) 1 SCC 19 considered the question, whether persons drawn from different sources and integrated into one class can be classified on the basis of their Educational Qualifications for promotion. The Constitution Bench answered the question in the affirmative holding, providing for Graduates to […]Read more "Educational Qualifications in Promotion / The Revival of Ray LIX"
It is well settled, an Arbitration Agreement is distinct and separate; independent from the substantive commercial contract in which it is embedded. The autonomy of the Arbitration Agreement is based on the twin concepts of separability and kompetenz – kompetenz; which, though inter-related, are distinct. The Doctrine of Separability of Arbitration Agreement connotes, the invalidity, […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XXV: Doctrine of Separability of Arbitration Agreement"