Issues of Tribunals: Unresolved. 07.05.2018 “The functioning of Tribunals is required to be reviewed on the test of speedy and inexpensive quality justice. L. Chandra Kumar, (1997) 3 SCC 261 noted that various Tribunals have not evolved up to the expectations which is self-evident and widely acknowledged. Drastic measures were required to elevate the standards. […]Read more "Rojer Mathew, SLP (Civil) 15804/2017"
“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, ‘Venue’ v. ‘Seat’? The Arbitration Clause has to be appositely read to understand its intention so as to arrive at a conclusion on whether it determines the ‘seat’ or not. There is no shadow of doubt that the Arbitration Clause has to be read in a holistic manner so as to determine the […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XIII ANSWERED: Venue v. Seat, Arbitration"
Foreign Cases Cited: 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"
On March 05, 2014 Hon’ble Justice Thakur, not yet the CJI, spoke of the ‘chalta hai attitude’ that often costs the society dearly in man-made tragedies [See, (2014) 6 SCC 173]. The price of Sushil Ansal’s ‘chalta hai attitude’ was pegged at Rs. 30 Crores [See, (2015) 10 SCC 359]. That is merely 18 Crores […]Read more "The Advanced Age of Sushil Ansal"
My Lord, Can grant of monetary compensation be considered as the sole and adequate remedy for a student who has been deprived of admission, despite he or she being meritorious, vigilant and diligent, because of lapses committed either by the counselling authority or the administrating authority intrinsically connected with the process of admission? “It is […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XII: Doctrine of Relation Back in Admissions"
My Lord, Is it permissible and advisable to provide Statutory Appeals directly to the Supreme Court, from Orders of Tribunals, on issues not affecting National or Public Interest? “In an Article by Shri T.R. Andhyarujina [Former Solicitor General of India], ‘Restoring the Character and Stature of the Supreme Court of India’, the Learned Author states… […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench XI: Statutory Appeals to Supreme Court"
My Lord, Why is the Supreme Court not a Constitutional Court? “Relying upon Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy, Mr. Venugopal established that The Supreme Court had strayed from its original character as a Constitutional Court and gradually converted itself into a mere Court of Appeal to correct every error it found in the decisions of the 24 […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench X: Vidhi Centre for Legal Policy"
My Lord, What is the Doctrine of Mutuality? “The said Doctrine is predicated on the principle enunciated in Styles v. New York Life Insurance Company, (1889) 2 TC 460, 471 (HL) by Lord Watson in the following words: “When a number of individuals agree to contribute funds for a common purpose, such as the payment […]Read more "The Doctrine of Mutuality I"
In Keshav Mills Co. Ltd. v. CIT, (1965) 2 SCR 908 a Constitution Bench enacted circumstances in which a Reference to a Larger Bench would lie. It was held that in revisiting and revising its earlier decision, the SC should ask itself whether in the interest of the public good or for any other valid and […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench IX: Atiabari Tea, (1961) 1 SCR 809 and Automobile Transport, (1963) 1 SCR 491"
“Two Coordinate Benches (Three Judges)” have taken what would appear to be contrary views with regard to purport and effect and the interconnection between Section 3 and 4 of The Central Excise Act, 1944. The First Coordinate Bench in Union of India v. Bombay Tyre International Ltd., (1984) 1 SCC 467 comprised of Hon’ble Judges […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench VIII: Sections 3 & 4, The Central Excise Act, 1944"
In Ranjit Narayan Haksar v. Surendra Verma, 1995 MPLJ 21 a Division Bench of High Court of Madhya Pradesh held that an employee, retired from its service to Madhya Pradesh State Road Transport Corporation, was entitled to maintain an Eviction Petition under Chapter III-A of The Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961. In a Special […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench VII: Chapter III-A, The Madhya Pradesh Accommodation Control Act, 1961"
CCE v. SKF India, (2009) 13 SCC 461 & CCE v. International Auto, (2010) 2 SCC 672 – two cases with “almost identical” factual scenarios – fortuitously decided by the same Bench, do not [perhaps] correctly interpret the provisions of Section 11AB of The Central Excise Act, 1944 and “require a re-look”. What is the effect of […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench VI: Section 11AB, The Central Excise Act, 1944"
In appropriate cases, seemingly large amounts of compensation are justified. It is settled, inflation should be considered by while deciding the quantum of compensation. In (2014) 6 SCC 173, Hon’ble Justice T.S. Thakur spoke of the “cynical Chalta Hai Attitude that more often than not costs the society dearly in man-made tragedies”. The price of Mr. Sushil Ansal’s […]Read more "Uphaar: The Gift of Freedom"
The legal position regarding the existence of a ‘fundamental right to privacy’ is doubtful in view of the Judgments in M.P. Sharma and Kharak Singh. In Justice K.S. Puttasamy (Retd.) v. Union of India, [Writ Petition No. 494 of 2012] the warning is clear: “If the observations made in M.P. Sharma and Kharak Singh are to […]Read more "The Judicial Indiscipline of Justice Chelameswar"
Doctrine of Merger ≠ Universal/Unlimited Application. Aggrieved by an Order of a High Court, one files a Special Leave Petition, against the Impugned Order, before the Supreme Court. Outset Dismissal of the Special Leave Petition, leads to a Review Petition, against the same Impugned Order, before the High Court. Exercise of Article 136, Two Steps: […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench V: Maintainability of Review Petitions"
In Common Cause v. UOI, (2014) 5 SCC 338 it was held, “A vivid reading of Para 104 of Aruna Shanbaug, (2011) 4 SCC 454 demonstrates that the reasoning in Para 104 is directly inconsistent with its own observation in Para 101. In Paras 21 & 101, the Bench was of the view that in Gian Kaur, […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench IV: Katju’s Eccentricity"
In (2014) 6 SCC 173 (‘Judgment’) Hon’ble Justice Thakur spoke of the “cynical chalta hai attitude that more often than not costs the society dearly in man-made tragedies.” The man in question is Mr. Sushil Ansal. On 07.08.2011, Mr. Ansal had his book “Brick by Brick” unveiled by no less than the Maharaja Gaj Singh of […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench III: The Chalta Hai Attitude"
The Yajnavalkya Smriti classifies concubines into two types: (1) Avaruddha and (2) Bhujasya. An Avaruddha Stree operates under an injunction to stay at the master’s home whereas a Bhujasya is not kept in the house but elsewhere. There is some protection for an Avaruddha Stree in modern India. There is a presumption in favor of […]Read more "Masterly Concubinage I"
It is always interesting to note References to a Larger Bench, ones especially made on account of ‘difference’ of opinions amongst Equal Bench Strengths. Eventually, it is the flocculation of the Law of the Land; per incuriam decisions stand filtered, retaining still its historical significance. Who is the SC judge known to have rendered the most […]Read more "Referred to Larger Bench II: Suits of Borrower Against Banks"