Category: Corporate

Railways Act, 1989 – Section 106 – Notice of claim for compensation and refund of overcharge.- The court examines the distinction between ‘overcharge’ and ‘illegal charge,’ the requirement of notice under Section 106, and the applicability of past cases like Birla Cement Works and West Coast Paper Mills – The court analyzes the scope of Section 106, the reasons for revising freight charges, and whether the revision was due to a new methodology or an error in the existing notified freight charges – Held,, that the chargeable distance of 444 km was illegal

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH UNION OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. M/S INDIAN OIL CORPORATION LTD. — Respondent ( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Civil…

Words and Phrases – “Rurban” – The term “Rurban” is a blend of the words “rural” and “urban.” – It refers to areas that exhibit characteristics of both rural and urban environments – These regions often combine elements of agriculture, small-scale industry, and limited urban infrastructure – The concept of “Rurban” aims to bridge the gap between rural and urban development, fostering sustainable growth and improving the quality of life for residents.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH TAPAS KUMAR DAS — Appellant Vs. HINDUSTAN PETROLEUM CORPORATION LIMITED AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dipankar Datta and Sanjay Kumar, JJ. )…

Special Court (Trial of Offences relating to transactions in Securities) Act, 1992 – Sections 3(2) and 3(3) – Attachment of Property – Properties of the person notified under Section 3(2) would stand attached automatically with effect from the date of notification by virtue of Section 3(3).

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH SUMAN L. SHAH — Appellant Vs. THE CUSTODIAN AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and Sandeep Mehta, JJ. ) Civil…

Refer a complaint for misconduct to the Disciplinary Committee – Rule 9(3)(b) of the Chartered Accountants (Procedure of Investigation of Professional and Other Misconduct and Conduct of Cases) Rules, 2007 falls within the scope of the general delegation of power under Section 29A(1).

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH NARESH CHANDRA AGRAWAL — Appellant Vs. THE INSTITUTE OF CHARTERED ACCOUNTANTS OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha and…

“The SEBI, and the investigative agencies of the Union government, shall probe into whether the loss suffered by Indian investors due to the conduct of the Hindenburg research and any other entities in taking short position involved any infraction of law, and if so, suitable action shall be taken.”

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH VISHAL TIWARI — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Dr. Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud, CJI., J.B. Pardiwala and Manoj…

Carriage by Air Act, 1972 – Sections 19 and 13(3) – Carrier is liable for damage occasioned by delay in the carriage by air of passengers, luggage or goods – If the carrier admits the loss of the goods, or if the goods have not arrived at the expiration of seven days after the date on which they ought to have arrived, the consignee is entitled to put into force against the carrier the rights which flow from the contract of carriage.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH M/S. RAJASTHAN ART EMPORIUM — Appellant Vs. KUWAIT AIRWAYS AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : A.S. Bopanna and Prashant Kumar Mishra, JJ. )…

We are not inclined to proceed further with the present writ petition, as it is clear from the counter affidavit filed by respondent no. 2 – Telecom Regulatory Authority of India (TRAI) that the cellular mobile telephone number once deactivated for non-usage or disconnected on the request of subscriber, is not allocated to the new subscriber for at least a period of 90 days. It is for the earlier subscriber to take adequate steps to ensure that privacy is maintained.

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH RAJESWARI — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjiv Khanna and S.V.N. Bhatti, JJ. ) Writ Petition (Civil)…

Advocates Act, 1961 – Sections 16 and 23(5) – – Classification of advocates and the mechanism to grant seniority to advocates is not based on any arbitrary, artificial or evasive grounds – Such a classification is a creation of the legislature, and there is a general presumption of constitutionality, and the burden is on the petitioners to show that there is a clear transgression of the constitutional principles – something which they have miserably failed to discharge

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH MATHEWS J. NEDUMPARA AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Sanjay Kishan Kaul, C.T. Ravikumar and…

You missed