Repugnancy I

Repugnancy can be looked at from three distinct perspectives. The first is where provision of a State enactment is directly in conflict with a law enacted by Parliament. Compliance with one is impossible along with obedience to the other. The second is where regulation of subject matter by Parliament is so complete as a code, […]

Read more "Repugnancy I"

Permissible School Fees

Constitution Bench in T.M.A. Pai Foundation, (2002) 8 SCC 481 has expounded, private unaided school management must have absolute autonomy to determine school fees. The consistent view has been restated and enunciated by Constitution Bench in Modern Dental College and Research Centre, (2016) 7 SCC 353 in Paragraph 75. Though fee can be fixed by […]

Read more "Permissible School Fees"

Intersectionality

K. Crenshaw has been credited for coining the term ‘intersectionality’. “Discrimination, like traffic through an intersection, may flow in one direction, and it may flow in another. If an accident happens in an intersection, it can be caused by cars traveling from any number of directions and, sometimes, from all of them. Similarly, if a […]

Read more "Intersectionality"

Rule of Alternate Remedy

It becomes necessary for this Court, to dwell on the ‘rule of alternate remedy’ and its judicial exposition [Whirlpool Corporation v. Registrar of Trademarks, Mumbai, (1998) 8 SCC 1; Harbanslal Sahnia v Indian Oil Corpn. Ltd., (2003) 2 SCC 107]. When a right is created by a statute, which itself prescribes remedy or procedure for […]

Read more "Rule of Alternate Remedy"

Seat of Arbitration II

My Lord, Indian-Companies 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. Union of India, (2017) […]

Read more "Seat of Arbitration II"

Same Transaction

Offences that are committed as part of the ‘same transaction’ can be tried jointly as per Section 220 of The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. What is meant by ‘same transaction’ is not defined and it seems to us to be a difficult task to undertake a definition. We have not come across a single […]

Read more "Same Transaction"

Tender Law V

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"

Rooh Afza Returns

It was claimed in Hamdard National Foundation v. Hussain Dalal, 202 (2013) DLT 291 Yeh Jawaani Hai Deewani (2013, Dir. Ayan Mukherjee) contains some dialogues which injures goodwill and reputation of ‘Rooh Afza’, a popular concentrated squash. It was admitted, ‘Rooh Afza’ is a well-known trademark. Attention was drawn to Section 29(9) of The Trade […]

Read more "Rooh Afza Returns"

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"

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"

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"

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"

The Question of Apparent Conflict

One of the meanings of the expression ‘inconsistent’, as approved by this Court, is: mutually repugnant or contradictory. Constitution itself has used the words ‘inconsistency’ and ‘repugnancy’ interchangeably. Things are inconsistent when they cannot stand together at the same time and one law is inconsistent with another law when the command or power or provision […]

Read more "The Question of Apparent Conflict"