Therefore, res judicata impacts not only actual matter determined, but every other matter which parties might or ought to have litigated and have decided as incidental to or essentially connected with subject matter of litigation. It includes every matter coming into legitimate purview of original action, both in respect of matters of claim and defence ..read more

During course of hearing a practical test was conducted and it was found, said underwear was not of Andrew Salvatore’s size. _____ 04.04.1990 Andrew Salvatore, an Australian, travelling from Thiruvananthapuram to Mumbai, while undergoing frisking, was found to be in possession of 55 grams and 6.6 grams of charas. _____ M.R. Ajayan has submitted, he ..read more

Central Board of Dawoodi Bohra Community v. State of Maharashtra, (2005) 2 SCC 673 reiterated, if a Bench of Lower Strength is ‘doubtful’ about correctness of a Judgment delivered by a Bench of Larger Strength, it cannot ‘disagree’ or ‘dissent’. It can invite Chief Justice of India’s attention and request, the matter be listed before ..read more

Union of India v. Tantia Constructions Limited, 2021 SCC OnLine SC 271 prima facie disagreed with Central Organisation for Railway Electrification v. ECI-SPIC-SMO-MCML (JV), [2019] 16 SCR 1234. In present reference, we have upheld decisions of this Court in TRF Ltd. v. Energo Engineering Projects Ltd., [2017] 7 SCR 409  and Perkins Eastman Architects DPC ..read more

It cannot be declared as a general rule, merely because a legal proceeding is not a ‘suit’, it would be completely exempted from application of principles underlying Order 23, Rule 1. These principles, being in nature of public policy, bring efficiency and certainty to administration of justice by any Court and should be invoked and ..read more

It has been an adventure. If a Judgment is pronounced by a Bench of Seven Judges, with Four Judges constituting Majority, Majority Judgement will constitute a binding Judgment by a Bench of Seven Judges and not a Bench of Four Judges. This position of law has been clarified and settled by a Constitution Bench of ..read more

Chief Justice A.N. Ray in Indira Nehru Gandhi v. Raj Narain, 1975 Supp SCC 1 held, since the legislation is not subject to any other constitutional limitation, applying Doctrine of Basic Structure to test validity of a statute will amount to ‘rewriting the Constitution’. Learned Judge further observed, application of an undefinable Theory of Basic ..read more

The issue before a Seven-Judge Bench of this Court in Bar Council of Maharashtra v. MV Dabholkar, (1975) 2 SCC 702 was whether State Bar Council was an ‘aggrieved party’ to maintain an appeal under Section 38 of The Advocates Act, 1961. Chief Justice A.N. Ray, writing for Majority, held, State Bar Council was an ..read more

In Re: Section 6A of The Citizenship Act, 1955, WP (Civil) No. 274 of 2009 Five-Judge Bench of this Court in Modern Dental College and Research Centre v. State of Madhya Pradesh, (2016) 7 SCC 353 observed, “Traditions that might have been acceptable at some historical point of time are not cast in stone. If ..read more

Eknath Kisan’s Daughter, Pramila was in inter-caste marriage. Learned Counsel for State of Maharashtra, Mr. Siddharth Dharmadhikari would contend, Courts have rightly awarded Death Sentence. Learned Senior Counsel, Dr. Aditya Sondhi, appearing on behalf of Eknath Kisan, has vehemently prayed, Eknath Kisan be acquitted. In alternative, it is prayed, Courts have failed to consider mitigating ..read more