Corporate Archives - Page 3 of 27 - Supreme Court of India Judgements

Levy of a service charge or fee – Section 38 of the Insurance Act, which governs assignment or transfer of policies, does not authorize the levy of any such fee – even in the contract of policy, such a provision has not been made – Fees charged unauthorized

Sep 23, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. DRAVYA FINANCE PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Abhay S. Oka and Sanjay…

Corporate

Contract Act, 1872 – Section 73 – Compensation for loss or damage caused by breach of contract – It is undeniable that the measure of damages, per Section 73 of the Contract Act, is the difference between the price at which goods sell at the marketplace on the date of breach, and the contract price

Aug 27, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH H. J. BAKER AND BROS. INC. — Appellant Vs. THE MINERALS AND METALS TRADE CORPORATION LTD. (MMTC) — Respondent ( Before : S. Ravindra…

Corporate Mining

Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, 1957 – Section 15 – Rajasthan Minor Mineral Concession Rules, 1986 – Rules 4(10) and 7(3) – When a decision is taken by a competent authority in public interest by evolving a better process such as auction, a right, if any, to an applicant seeking lease over a Government land evaporates on its own – An applicant cannot have an exclusive right in seeking a grant of license of a mineral unless facilitated accordingly by a statute

Aug 6, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH THE STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND OTHERS — Appellant Vs. SHARWAN KUMAR KUMAWAT ETC. ETC — Respondent ( Before : A.S Bopanna and M.M Sundresh,…

Constitution Corporate

Competition Act, 2002 – Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 39(b) – Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 – Section 28 – Competition Act, 2022 apply to Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 –

Jul 18, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH COAL INDIA LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : K.M. Joseph, B. V. Nagarathna…

Companies Act Corporate

Paid-up capital – Appellants cannot be described as having acted in a defective or in an unfair manner, in the matter of allotment of further shares particularly when the contention of the respondents about the bona fides of the decision to increase the authorised capital has been found in favour of the appellants

Jul 18, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH HASMUKHLAL MADHAVLAL PATEL AND ANR. — Appellant Vs. AMBIKA FOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : K.M. Joseph and B.V.…

Constitution Corporate

Bike taxi operations in Delhi – Stayed – Without proper licence or permit and plying of such nontransport vehicles for hire or reward is in violation of registration condition

Jul 11, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS. — Appellant Vs. ROPPEN TRANSPORTATION SERVICES PVT. LTD. AND OTHERS — Respondent ( Before : Aniruddha Bose…

Constitution Corporate

Competition Act, 2002 – Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 39(b) – Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 – Section 28 – Competition Act, 2022 apply to Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973

Jun 20, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA FULL BENCH COAL INDIA LIMITED AND ANOTHER — Appellant Vs. COMPETITION COMMISSION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : K.M. Joseph, B. V. Nagarathna…

Companies Act Corporate

HELD purported to project a case of mismanagement and oppression by the appellants in the Petitions styled under Sections 397 and 398 of the Companies Act, By Order dated the NCLT, Ahmedabad Bench disposed of the petitions with the following directions –In this set of facts, it is not just and equitable to order winding up of the company

Jun 18, 2023 sclaw

HASMUKHLAL MADHAVLAL PATEL AND ANR. vs. AMBIKA FOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. AND ORS. WITH CIVIL APPEAL NO. 8195 OF 2018 J. [K.M. JOSEPH] …………………………………………J. [B.V. NAGARATHNA] Case No.: CIVIL APPEAL…

Constitution Corporate

State Monopolies, Govt Companies & PSUs Can’t Violate Competition Act

Jun 17, 2023 sclaw

CIL, being a government company, will answer the definition of “person” and hence would come within the ambit of the definition of “enterprise” under Section 2(h) of the Competition Act, being…

Corporate Education

Advocates Act, 1961 – Section 24(1) – Decision of the High Court was not justified in directing the enrolment of respondent No. 1 as an Advocate, despite the fact that he secured his law degree from a college which was not recognized or approved by BCI.

Jun 14, 2023 sclaw

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA DIVISION BENCH BAR COUNCIL OF INDIA — Appellant Vs. RABI SAHU AND ANOTHER — Respondent ( Before : Vikram Nath and Sanjay Kumar, JJ. ) Civil…

Levy of a service charge or fee – Section 38 of the Insurance Act, which governs assignment or transfer of policies, does not authorize the levy of any such fee – even in the contract of policy, such a provision has not been made – Fees charged unauthorized

Competition Act, 2002 – Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 39(b) – Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 – Section 28 – Competition Act, 2022 apply to Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 –

Bike taxi operations in Delhi – Stayed – Without proper licence or permit and plying of such nontransport vehicles for hire or reward is in violation of registration condition

Competition Act, 2002 – Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 39(b) – Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973 – Section 28 – Competition Act, 2022 apply to Coal Mines (Nationalisation) Act, 1973

State Monopolies, Govt Companies & PSUs Can’t Violate Competition Act

Advocates Act, 1961 – Section 24(1) – Decision of the High Court was not justified in directing the enrolment of respondent No. 1 as an Advocate, despite the fact that he secured his law degree from a college which was not recognized or approved by BCI.

You missed

A suit in representative capacity (Order 1, Rule 8 CPC) is not maintainable if lacking locus standi, and a prior decree (res judicata) bars subsequent suits on the same subject matter, notwithstanding varying reliefs.

Agreement to sell immovable property incurs stamp duty as deemed conveyance via implied/symbolic possession transfer, with duty applying to the agreement (instrument), not the sale (transaction).

In child custody cases, the lawpoint is that the welfare of the minor child is the paramount consideration, and a Habeas Corpus writ petition is maintainable only when the child’s detention is proven illegal or without legal authority

Supreme Court of India Judgements

Category: Corporate

You missed