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"
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"