Uncontrolled and indiscriminate entry of persons, Hindu or Muslim, from Pakistan into India or from India to Pakistan, is fraught with the possibility of espionage and sabotage. When employed for espionage, care is taken to see, he does not know who his real employers are but knows only the name of his contact man, whose […]
Read more "The Golden Lasso of Truth"“Doctrine of Merger would come into play as exposited in Kunhayammed, (2013) 10 SCC 655 wherein a Three-Judge Bench of this Court opined that once a Special Leave Petition has been granted, the doors of the Appellate Jurisdiction of this Court have been let open and any Order passed thereafter would be an Appellate Order […]
Read more "The Doctrine of Merger I"The legal position as to when a Non-Signatory to an Arbitration Agreement can be impleaded and subjected to Arbitration Proceedings is no more res integra. Three-Judge Bench in Chloro Controls India Private Limited, (2013) 1 SCC 641 opined, invoking ‘Doctrine of Group of Companies’, Arbitration Agreement entered by a Company, being one within a Group […]
Read more "Non-Signatories to Arbitration I"Indians have been taught the lesson, and rightly so, consensual intercourse, even if not procreative, is inherent for the enjoyment of life and liberty of every individual and is protected under constitutional morality. Mr. XYZ has come up with a film script. Cut short, the script is about an 18-year old Indian, who gets disinherited […]
Read more "#THE377DEBATE III : My Lord, Africa"“The principle of ‘incorporation by reference’ of an Arbitration Clause, from another document or contract, is a well-established principle in Arbitration Jurisprudence [Clements v. Devon Country Insurance Committee, [1918] 1 KB 94; Macleod Ross and Co. Ltd. v. Compagnie d’ Assurances Generales L’Helvetia of St Gall, [1952] 1 Lloyd’s Rep 12 (CA)]. This principle has […]
Read more "Section 7(5) of The Arbitration Act IV"“Two Judge Bench in State Bank’s Staff Union (Madras Circle) v. Union of India, (2005) 7 SCC 584 had occasion to examine the concept. Further in Jay Mahakali Rolling Mills v. Union of India, (2007) 12 SCC 198 following has been laid down: “Retrospective means looking backward, contemplating what is past, having reference to a […]
Read more "Retrospective v. Retroactive I"Daya Kishan Joshi, (2018) 11 SCC 642; Surendra Pandey, (2015) 13 SCC 625; Lord Denning. “He fell off the roof of the bus accidentally and died. Merely because the deceased was coming down the roof of the bus after having his meal, cannot be considered in isolation and interpreted so myopically to hold that he […]
Read more "The Doctrine of Notional Extension"Security Clearance is Mandatory – The Cable Television Network (Amendment) Rules, 2012. My Lord, Principle of Natural Justice, Fair Play Overlooked? “In similar circumstances, in Ex-Armymen’s Protection Services Private Limited, (2014) 5 SCC 409 following was laid down: “What is in ‘interest of national security’ is not a ‘question of law’. It is a ‘matter […]
Read more "Principles of Natural Justice IV"45 Years of E.P. Royappa Determination of Equation of Pay Scales: Government, Experts; Not Courts [SAIL, (2011) 11 SCC 122; S.C. Chandra, (2007) 8 SCC 27]. Determinative Factors in Equation of Posts: a) Prescribed Minimum Qualification; b) Nature and Duty [E.P. Royappa, (1974) 4 SCC 3]; c) Responsibility and Power; Salary [P.K. Roy, AIR 1968 SC […]
Read more "Principle of Parity II / The Revival of Ray XI"07.01.2019 My Lord, Teachers are Employees under Section 2(e) of The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972? “No. Clearly Not. See, Ahmedabad Pvt. Primary Teachers’ Association, (2004) 1 SCC 755.” – Hon’ble Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre, Birla Institute of Technology v. State of Jharkhand, [Civil Appeal No. 2530 of 2012]. _____ 09.01.2019 My Lord, Teachers are […]
Read more "Section 2(e) of The Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972"“Equality means parity of treatment under parity of conditions. The rule of parity is the equal treatment of equals in equal circumstances.” – Chief Justice of India, Hon’ble Justice A.N. Ray, State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas, AIR 1976 SC 490. “The imposition of a penalty in disciplinary proceeding lies in the sole domain of […]
Read more "Principle of Parity I"“Willie (William) Slaney v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1956 SC 116 explained the concept of ‘prejudice caused to the accused’ and held: “Trial is not vitiated unless the accused can show substantial prejudice. Some violations of the Code will be so obvious that they will speak for themselves as, for example, a refusal to give the […]
Read more "Principles of Natural Justice III"Doctrine of Piercing the Corporate Veil is as well settled as the Salomon, [1897] 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"While stating, ‘genesis’ of creamy layer principle is to be found in State of Kerala v. N.M. Thomas, (1976) 2 SCC 310 Hon’ble Justice R.F. Nariman quoted a few words of Hon’ble Justice Krishna Iyer in Jarnail Singh v. Lachhmi Narain Gupta, [Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 30621 of 2011]. Of course, Ray CJ had […]
Read more "The Revival of Ray VI"In Allied Motors, (2012) 2 SCC 1 reference was made to the celebrated Judgment of Privy Council in Nazir Ahmad, AIR 1936 PC 253: “Where a power is given to do a certain thing in a certain way, the thing must be done in that way, or not at all. Other methods of performance are […]
Read more "Lord Roche II / The Revival of Ray IV"“In legal parlance, ‘consortium’ is a compendious term which encompasses ‘spousal consortium’, ‘parental consortium’ and ‘filial consortium’. The right to consortium would include company, care, help, comfort, guidance, solace and affection of deceased. With respect to a spouse, it would include sexual relations with deceased spouse; parental consortium is granted upon premature death of a […]
Read more "Consortium I"Navtej Singh Johar v. UOI, [Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 76 of 2016] was filed for declaring Section 377 to be unconstitutional. It was held by: Dipak Misra CJI and A.M. Khanwilkar J. The phrase ‘against the order of nature’ has neither been defined in any provision of the IPC. What is ‘against the order of nature’? Procreation […]
Read more "#The377Debate II : 06.09.2018"Parliament often begins to legislate with remarkable vigor but about the same time it gives up the attempt to govern. It begins to lay down general rules, entrusting its working to Officials/Secretaries of State/Boards of Commissioners/Law Courts, who are endowed with new statutory powers. Once or twice upon a time, Ecclesiastical Courts could pronounce a divorce, ‘a mensa et […]
Read more "A Mensa Et Thoro"“It is a well settled position of law, testimony of a witness cannot be discarded in toto merely due to presence of embellishments or exaggerations. Doctrine of ‘falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus’, which means ‘false in one thing, false in everything’ has been held to be inapplicable in Indian scenario, where tendency to exaggerate […]
Read more "Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus"“A single revolutionary spark may kindle a fire that, smouldering for a time, may burst into a sweeping and destructive conflagration.” It was the Judgment of Holmes J in Schenck v. United States, 249 US 47 at 52 (1910) that gave rise to the test of ‘clear and present danger’ for determining whether restrictions on […]
Read more "Clear and Present Danger"
The Last Word 
You must be logged in to post a comment.