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’"
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"
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"
See, Bennion on Statutory Interpretation, 5th Edition. The concept of ‘absurdity’ in the context of interpretation of statutes is construed to include any result which is unworkable, impracticable, illogical, futile or pointless, artificial, or productive of a disproportionate counter mischief. Logic referred to herein is not formal or syllogistic logic, but acceptance that enacted law […]Read more "Cadaveric Consequences in Interpretation"
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"
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"
The disqualification under Section 8 of The Representation of People Act, 1951 is relatable to Article 191(1)(e). Therefore, any interpretation to Section 8 should be in sync with the constitutional scheme. Once the period of disqualification starts running, the seat, hitherto held by the person disqualified, becomes vacant by virtue of Article 190(3). His name […]Read more "Timing of Votes"
Mr. Peter Leaver [Queen’s Counsel], Justice V.K. Gupta [Retd.] and Mr. Anthony Houghton [Senior Counsel] delivered their International Arbitral Award in New Delhi, on 12.05.2014. Majority Award [Mr. Peter Leaver and Mr. Anthony Houghton] was in favor of Anglo American Metallurgical Coal Pty Ltd. and Dissenting Award [Justice V.K. Gupta] dismissed the claim of Anglo […]Read more "Section 34 of The Arbitration Act IV / Arbitral Award Dissent"
Samir Agarwal sought, by an information filed, CCI to initiate an inquiry, under Section 26(2) of The Competition Act, 2002, into the alleged anti-competitive conduct of Ola and Uber. Shri Rajshekhar Rao, appearing on behalf of Ola, submitted, Samir cannot be said to be a ‘person aggrieved’ for the purpose of sections 53B and 53T. […]Read more "Section 53 of The Competition Act / Aggrieved Person II / The Revival of Ray LVII"
See, Frame v. Smith,  2 SCR 99. Hospital Products Ltd. v. United States Surgical Corporation Ltd., (1984) 156 CLR 41 rightly observed, the scope of fiduciary duties is moulded according to the nature of the relationship and facts of the case. Principles of Fiduciary Relationships are equitable. Equity never operates in an absolute manner […]Read more "Principles of Fiduciary Relationships"
There can be no doubt, the principle which appears to have evolved over a period of time is, the law frowns upon determining a day with reference to its fractions. The principle, ‘fractions of the day’ are eschewed from consideration, is not a universal principle which knows no exceptions. Clearly the context and the purpose […]Read more "Day-Fraction"
Most jurists draw distinction between ‘direct application’ of treaties in domestic law, and national legal systems that mandate and require ‘act of transformation’ for an international treaty to apply and be a part of domestic law; ‘direct application’ means and mandates that the treaty norms, either wholly or to some extent, are directly treated as […]Read more "Act of Transformation"
My Lord, Satoshi Nakamoto? “He still remains anonymous.” Reserve Bank of India, on 06.04.2018, in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 35A read with Section 36(1)(a) and Section 56 of The Banking Regulation Act, 1949 and Section 45JA and 45L of The Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934 and Section 10(2) read with […]Read more "My Precious Bitcoin"
Doctrine of Piercing the Corporate Veil is as well settled as the Salomon,  AC 22 principle itself. In Life Insurance Corporation of India v. Escorts Ltd., (1986) 1 SCC 264, this Court held: “Generally and broadly speaking, we may say that the Corporate Veil may be lifted where a statute itself contemplates lifting the […]Read more "Piercing / Disregarding the Corporate Veil II"
3 Judges in Balwant Rai Saluja implicitly questioned the grounds on which the SC had previously lifted the corporate veil and correctly held that the law on the point has in recent times crystallized around the six requirements set out by Munby J in Ben Hashem, approved by Lord Sumption in Prest v. Petrodel Resources. 2 […]Read more "Piercing the Corporate Veil I"
“The expression ‘legal proceeding’ has been the subject matter of consideration in the Federal Court decision in Governor-General in Council v. Shiromani Sugar Mills Ltd., AIR 1946 FC 16. In that decision Section 171 of The Indian Companies Act, 1913 came up for consideration. “When a winding-up order has been made or a Provisional Liquidator […]Read more "Legal Proceeding"
“Different situations can arise in the interplay between The Companies Act, 1956 and The Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985 [for instance, in the matter of winding up of a company: i) where winding up proceedings are pending, but no order of winding up has been passed against the company, and a reference is […]Read more "SC Resolves Conflict Between SICA & Companies Act"
SC in Lakshmi Rattan Engineering Works Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner Sales Tax, Kanpur, AIR 1968 SC 488 had the occasion to consider the meaning of the expression ‘entertain’ in the context of The Uttar Pradesh Sales Tax Act, 1948. It was held that the expression has the meaning of ‘admitting to consideration’. An appeal under […]Read more "Deposit under Section 18 of SARFAESI Act"