Jain & Co. Advocates

11/05/2018

The Supreme Court Collegium today unanimously agreed, on principle, that the recommendation for appointment of Chief Justice of Uttarakhand High Court, Justice KM Joseph, as a Judge of the Supreme Court should be reiterated.

03/05/2018

The Supreme Court today allowed an appeal filed against the proprietorship concern of Senior Advocate Abhishek Manu Singhvi.

A Bench of Justices Ranjan Gogoi and R Banumathi delivered the judgment today, sending the dispute for arbitration, thereby setting aside the decision of the Delhi High Court.

25/04/2018

A Jodhpur Court has reportedly convicted self-styled godman Asaram Bapu and two other accused in a 2013 r**e case involving a minor victim. The verdict was delivered this morning by Judge Madhusudhan Sharma amidst tight security from inside Jodhpur Central jail.

21/04/2018

The five charges levelled against Chief Justice :
1. The facts and circumstances relating to the Prasad Educational Trust case, show prima facie evidence suggesting that Chief Justice Dipak Misra may have been involved in the conspiracy of paying illegal gratification in the case, which at least warrants a thorough investigation.
2. That the Chief Justice Dipak Misra dealt on the administrative as well as judicial side, with a writ petition which sought investigation into a matter in which he too was likely to fall within the scope of investigation since he had presided over every bench which had dealt with the case and passed orders in the case of Prasad Educational Trust, and thus violated the first principle of the Code of Conduct for Judges.
3. That the Chief Justice Dipak Misra appears to have antedated an administrative order dated 6thNovember 2017 which amounts to a serious act of forgery/fabrication.
4. That Chief Justice Dipak Misra acquired land when he was an advocate, by giving an affidavit that was found to be false and despite the orders of the ADM cancelling the allotment in 1985, surrendered the said land only in 2012 after he was elevated to the Supreme Court.
5. That Chief Justice Dipak Misra has abused his administrative authority as master of roster to arbitrarily assign individual cases of particular advocates in politically sensitive cases, to select judges in order to achieve a predetermined outcome.

20/04/2018

20/04/2018

The Youth Bar Association of India has filed a petition before the Supreme Court praying for directions to be issued to the Supreme Court Collegium and Calcutta High Court Collegium to fill up vacancies in the Calcutta High Court.

19/04/2018

Supreme Court website hacked? Site non-functional

17/11/2016

Unregistered Partnership Deed can be Referred to Arbitration; SC*_ Ananthesh Bhakta Vs. Nayana S. Bhakta
[Supreme Court of India, 15-11-2016]

07/11/2016

The Union Law Ministry has approved the proposal to re-appoint retired High Court judges to deal with mounting arrears.

30/09/2016

High Court lifts ban on liquor sales in Bihar, In a setback to the Bihar government, the Patna High Court today quashed the government notification completely banning liquor in the state.

30/09/2016

Supreme Court cancels bail granted to Shahabuddin

17/09/2016

Justice Girish Chandra Gupta, Judge, Calcutta HC appointed as Chief Justice, Calcutta HC

17/09/2016

1997 Amendment to Section 28 of Contract Act, 1872 applicable prospectively:
Dealing with an interesting question as to the retrospective applicability of the 1997 Amendment to Section 28 of the Contract Act, 1872, the Bench of C. Nagappan and R.F. Nariman, JJ, answered in the negative and said that Section 28 of the Contract Act, being substantive law, operates prospectively as retrospectivity is not clearly made out by its language as the Amendment does not purport to be either declaratory or clarificatory.
In the present case, the bank guarantees dated 31.1.1996 which restricted the period within which they could be invoked were in question and it was contended by the Union of India that such Bank Guarantees would not be affected by an amendment made one year later i.e. on 8.1.1997 and the relevant date and the relevant law applicable would be as on 31.1.1996, which would be the un-amended Section 28. Accepting the aforementioned contention, the Court said that the un-amended Section 28 would be the law applicable as on 31.1.1996, which is the date of the agreement of bank guarantee.
The Court considered the Statements of Object and Reasons of the Amendment as stated in the 97th Law Commission Report where it was stated that the Amendment seeks to bring about a substantive change in the law by stating, for the first time, that even where an agreement extinguishes the rights or discharges the liability of any party to an agreement, so as to restrict such party from enforcing his rights on the expiry of a specified period, such agreement would become void to that extent. The Amendment therefore seeks to set aside the distinction made in the case law up to date between agreements which limit the time within which remedies can be availed and agreements which do away with the right altogether in so limiting the time. The Court, hence, noticed that these are obviously substantive changes in the law which are remedial in nature and cannot have retrospective effect. [Union of India v. Indusind Bank Ltd., Civil Appeals Nos. 9087-9089 of 2016, decided on 15.09.2016]

05/07/2016

The high courts of Bombay and Madras are set to undergo a change in their names.Union Cabinet on Tuesday approved a Law Ministry proposal to change the names of the two high courts through an Act of Parliament to correspond to the present names of the cities Mumbai and Chennai respectively.There have also been demands to rename the Calcutta high court as the Kolkata high court.The Calcutta high court has the distinction of being the first high court and one of the three chartered high courts to be set up in India, along with the high courts of Bombay, Madras. It was formally opened on July 1, 1862.

16/03/2016

Senior Advocate Dushyant Dave has withdrawn his resignation from the post of the President of Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA). This came after a request was made by Hon'ble Chief Justice of India during the inauguration of the Bar room today in Supreme Court.

16/03/2016

A Bench presided by Chief Justice of India TS Thakur took serious note of this fact in the petition filed by one Vasanthakumar seeking establishment of National Courts of Appeal at Chennai, Kolkata and Mumbai. The Court has made it clear that it will refer the case to a Constitution Bench.
The Court has now asked the Attorney General and Amicus Curiae to submit their suggestions and posted the matter before a 3-judge Bench so that the matter can be referred to a Constitution Bench. The case will now be heard in the week beginning on April 4.

15/09/2015

The Supreme Court today dismissed the three petitions challenging the constitutional validity of the Advocate-on-Record system followed in the apex court.

09/09/2014

A good lawyer knows the law; a great lawyer knows the judge.

09/09/2014

A doctor notices a sidewalk stand that says 'brains for sale.' He goes over to investigate and sees a sign that says 'Doctor brains $8.00 a pound’ and another sign that says ‘Paramedic brains $12.00 a pound, Nurses brains $30.00 a pound, truck driver $40.00 a pound and lawyers brains $90.00 a pound.’
So he asks the man behind the cashregister, “how come his brains are only worth 8.00 and a lawyer's worth 90.00?”
The man replies, “do you know how many lawyers it takes to make a pound of brains?”

07/08/2013

The Hon'ble Supreme Court of India on Monday directed the Madhya Pradesh (MP) government to pay Rs. 10 lakh each as compensation to two girls who were gang r**ed in Betma village in Indore district. In doing so, the Court modified the decision of the MP High Court which had ordered Rs. 2 lakh to be paid to the victims. The Court also came down upon the MP government for disclosing the names of the victims in an affidavit filed by the government.

22/05/2013

A Public interest litigation (PIL) was filed yesterday in the Supreme Court asking for a special investigation team (SIT) probe into cricketing tournament Indian Premiere League’s (IPL) irregularities, including spot fixing. The SC dismissed the PIL giving time to the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI) to complete its investigation...

09/02/2013

Senior Advocate and Additional Solicitor General Mohan Parasaran is being appointed as the new Solicitor-General of India, according to several sources. Parasaran will replace Rohinton Nariman, who had recently resigned from the post due to differences with the Law Minister.

07/02/2013

Rohinton Nariman, the solicitor general who had succeeded Gopal Subramanium in July 2011, resigned.
According to both TOI and IBN, the reasons behind the resignation are “not known yet”, though IBN citing “sources” wrote that “there were differences of opinion between Nariman and Law Minister Ashwani Kumar”.

01/01/2013

happy new year 2 all

18/12/2012

In some relief to West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee, the Calcutta High Court on Tuesday dismissed a plea seeking contempt proceedings against her.
The judges, however, disapproved of Mamata's comments against the judiciary.
The chief minister had in the state assembly on August 14 said that judgments were being bought in lieu of money.

18/12/2012

The Supreme Court will soon get three more judges with its collegium clearing the elevation of three Chief Justices of High Courts: M.Y. Eqbal (Madras), Vikramajit Sen (Karnataka) and V. Gopalagowda (Orissa).

Justice Eqbal (61), who hails from Jharkhand, will have a tenure of a little over three and half years; Justice Sen (62), who hails from Delhi, three years and Justice Gowda (61), who hails from Karnataka, a little over four years.

With the elevation of three judges, the strength of the Supreme Court will go up to 28 as against the sanctioned number of 31. Appointments are not made on the basis of seniority or regional considerations, yet, as per convention, every State is represented by at least one judge at any point of time in the Supreme Court

18/12/2012

Against the backdrop of the current debate over the proposed Judicial Accountability Bill, Mr. President, Pranab Mukherjee on Saturday said the credibility of the judiciary will depend on the quality of the judges who man various courts in the Country. Mr. President also said judging the judges was a delicate and sensitive topic and one which has been viewed with some concern by jurists.
"Legislation which carefully balances the independence of the judiciary with the need to protect and preserve its credibility is a useful complement to the judiciary’s own efforts. Ultimately, the credibility of the judiciary will depend on the quality of the judges who man the various Courts of the country. Therefore, the process of selection and appointment of judges should conform to the highest of standards and should be based on well established principles," Mr. president said.

17/12/2012

Revenge is an act of passion; vengeance of justice. Injuries are revenged; crimes are avenged.
Samuel Johnson

17/12/2012

There is a higher court than courts of justice and that is the court of conscience. It supercedes all other courts. ...Mahatma Gandhi

17/12/2012

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.
Martin Luther King, Jr.

07/12/2012

He is no lawyer who cannot take two sides.
Charles Lamb

07/12/2012

In law, nothing is certain but the expense.
Samuel Butler

07/12/2012

If there were no bad people, there would be no good lawyers.
Charles Dickens

07/12/2012

A judge is a law student who marks his own examination papers.
H. L. Mencken