Supreme Court quashes criminal proceedings in N.S. Gnaneshwaran case after One Time Settlement between parties, emphasizing no continuing public interest warrants prosecution continuation.
This article discusses the Supreme Court’s clarification on Section 29A(5) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, addressing whether an application for extending the time limit to pass an arbitral award can be filed after the expiry of the prescribed period. Learn how the court’s ruling affects arbitration timelines and tribunal mandates
The Supreme Court of India issued mandates to lower courts on staying bail orders in the Parvinder Singh Khurana case. Learn about the judgment balancing personal liberty and judicial procedure in bail cancellation cases.
Explore the power of arbitrator’s power to grant interest on interest in awards. This article delves into the legal interpretations under the Arbitration Act 1940, Civil Procedure Code, and the Arbitration Act 1996, providing insights on when and how arbitrators can award compound interest and interest on interest.
Supreme Court of India clarifies the limited scope of revisional powers under Section 397 CrPC in K. Ravi vs. State of Tamil Nadu & Anr., emphasizing judicial restraint in criminal proceedings.
The Supreme Court in SBI General Insurance Co. Ltd. vs. Krish Spinning (2024) held that arbitration can be invoked even after a full and final settlement if allegations like coercion or economic duress are present. The Court reaffirmed minimal judicial intervention in Section 11 petitions under the Arbitration Act, limiting courts to verifying the existence of an arbitration agreement without delving into merits, in line with the Competence-Competence principle.
Supreme Court clarifies the scope of inquiry under Section 202 CrPC and the distinction between criminal breach of trust and cheating, emphasizing the need for careful scrutiny in issuing summons in criminal cases involving commercial transactions.
The above legal maxim was referred to in a recent Apex Court judgment propounded by Hon’ble Justice C.T. Ravikumar, J. in the case of Sudeep Chatterjee v. State of Bihar (SLP (Crl.) No.2011 of 2024). The said case revolves around challenging the bail conditions imposed by the High Court while granting pre-arrest/anticipatory bail to an… Read More »Legal Maxim of the week: “Lex non cogit ad impossibilia”.
The Supreme Court’s judgment in Alifiya Husenbhai Keshariya v. Siddiq Ismail Sindhi upholds the fundamental right of indigent litigants to file an appeal without payment of court fees under Section 173 of the Motor Vehicle Act. Analyzing Orders XXXIII and XLIV of the CPC, the Court reiterates that lack of funds should not impede legal remedies. It discusses the concept of an ‘indigent person’ and the duty of courts to conduct proper inquiries before denying the ability to file appeals/suits without initial court fees, ensuring the poor are not priced out of the justice system.
Explore the Supreme Court’s detailed analysis in Rajesh Kumar vs. Anand Kumar & Ors., focusing on contract validity, personal testimony, and specific performance in land sale disputes. Learn about key precedents cited and their implications in specific performance suits and the importance of adhering to limitation periods.
