It was observed in S. Azeez Basha v. Union of India, (1968) 1 SCR 833 that the words “establish and administer” in Article 30(1) must be read conjunctively and so read it gives the right to a religious minority to administer an educational institution provided it has been established by it; Article 30(1) cannot be […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XVI: Decades of Decay"
Original Scheme – Appointment on Compassionate Grounds Substituted Scheme – Ex Gratia Payment ________ State Bank of India, (2010) 11 SCC 661 + MGB Gramin Bank, (2014) 13 SCC 583 Governing Scheme: Original Scheme or Substituted Scheme? Answer/Principle: ‘Inconsistent’, ‘Irreconcilable’. Canara Bank, (2007) 9 SCC 571 ________ “Hon’ble Chief Justice of India CONSTITUTE Bench of […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XV: Gracious Compassion"
My Lord, Informant-Investigating Officer? “The principle of fair trial now informs and energizes many areas of the law. Societal interest mandates that Mohan Lal cannot be allowed to become a spring board for being catapulted to acquittal, irrespective of all other considerations. If the facts in Mohan Lal were telling with regard to the prosecution, the facts […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XIV Answered: 2 Gunny Bags of Charas"
“We find it difficult to accept the view taken in Mohan Lal. It was held that a fair investigation, which is but the very foundation of fair trial, necessarily postulates that the informant and the investigator must not be the same person. Some have maintained a distinction in that where the investigation was conducted by […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XIV: 4 Kilograms of Opium"
“Unlike matrimonial proceedings where strict proof of marriage is essential, in the proceedings under Section 125 CrPC, such strict standard of proof is not necessary as it is summary in nature meant to prevent vagrancy. When the parties live together as husband and wife, there is a presumption that they are legally married couple for […]Read more "Masterly Concubinage II"
My Lord, When the Arbitration Agreement specifies the ‘venue’ for holding the Arbitration Sittings by the Arbitrators but does not specify the ‘seat’, then on what basis and by which principle, the parties have to decide the place of ‘seat’ which has a material bearing for determining the applicability of laws of a particular country for […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XIII ANSWERED: Venue v. Seat, Arbitration"
Cited: Foreign Cases: Naviera Amazonica Peruana S.A., (1988) (1) Lloyd’s Law Reports 116. Hiscox, (1992) 1 AC 562. McDonnell Douglas Corpn., (1993) 2 Lloyd’s Law Rep. 48. C vs. D, (2007) EWCA Civ 1282 (CA). C vs. D, (2008) 1 Lloyd’s Law Rep 239. Braes of Doune Wind Farm (Scotland) Limited, (2008) EWHC 426 (TCC). […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XIII: Venue v. Seat, Arbitration"