Cyril Amarchand Mangaldas’ Post

In a significant decision, the Supreme Court of India clarified the doctrine of legitimate expectation, emphasizing that it cannot be extended to private contractual disputes. The Court highlighted that legitimate expectation must be based on a legal right or consistent practice by a public authority, not mere hope or anticipation. This ruling affirms that private entities are not bound by the same public law doctrines as governmental bodies, and disputes must be resolved based on the established legal framework. #supremecourt #legitimateexpectation #publiclaw #contractlaw #employmentlaw #legaldoctrine #legalprinciples #judgment #lawupdates #legalnews #indiancourts #privatevspublic #lawandjustice ⚖️📜

#law #limitation #condonation #statute #timebarring #laches Citation please. No comment on the decision ,just a respectful disagreement. This is a grey area .Limitation Act and Statute specific limitation laws go for a toss if unduly liberal view is taken of delay leading to barring by time.Withdrawal of application by counsel is a conscious decision and when we sign a vakalatnama we give binding rights to the lawyer. There are laws where filing and withdrawing of appeal is to be signed by appellant .E.g.income tax law Which was the statute in the instant case is not known.I presume the counsel had the right under law.Else he should be charged under s 35 of Advocates Act.Even otherwise if it was professional misconduct , he is liable.Why not an observation on it Else how can a bonafide legal action by an AR ,binding on appellant ,be construed as granting SUFFICIENT CAUSE?There is a whole body of law on the subject. Was the appellant not guilty of sleeping over his rights if he did not follow up for 425 days ?Can it also not be construed as an after thought and hence not coming before the court with clean hands? Were we being just ,vexing the opposite party 425 days after the withdrawal?Justice must work both ways. And finally we have a great first principle in the form of LACHES generally.Opposite party can /should make a case of prejudicial delay or the court suo motu can take that view. Else the proverbial Damocles sword will be hanging over the head of the respondent for infinite time and doctrine of finality wont even be worth the paper its written on. P.S.was able to find the citation. CA No. 8435-8436 of 2024 (@ S.L.P. (Civil) Nos. 2733 -2734 of 2024 dt. 5-8-2024) A moot point arises from reading of the decision that since there was no adjudication on merit by courts below ,should the honble Court have decided the merits as virtually a first adjudicator thereon? LACHES would probably not apply here.Nor would my objection about justice to opp party since it was UOI. The final penalisation was withholding of one increment without cumulative effect-honble Court ,even while agreeing its s minor penalty held it to be disproportionate ...mind you this is not an Art 142 matter but a regular appeal.Even a WP would be a different matter. I have deep reservations respectfully ,on the issue.Maybe justice was served ,but due process was denied an opportunity it deserved. My humble pov.

Greetings!!! Supreme Court Considers Public Access to General Power of Attorney (GPA) in Property Transactions The Supreme Court is set to examine whether GPAs used in property transactions should be open for public inspection. Could legislative reform increase transparency and reduce fraud in the real estate sector? Read more about this crucial legal development 👉 https://lnkd.in/gVwJgUjx #SairamLawAssociates 📞 9611195911 | 9900984444 📩 adv@sairamlawassociates.in 🌐 www.sairamlawassociates.in @ Buying a New Property ? Facing a Family Issue? Don't navigate it alone. ⚖️🏢🏠 #PropertyLaw, #GPAAccess, #RealEstateLaw, #SupremeCourtIndia, #LegalReform, #RTIAct, #PublicInterest, #Transparency, #PropertyTransactions, #IndianLaw

On September 2, the government established 23rd Law Commission of India for a three-year term. Our Managing Partner, Sameer Jain shares his comments with The Economic Times in an article titled, "Govt. constitutes 23rd Law Commission; lawyers expect reforms." Read more at : https://lnkd.in/g22BwdUF #knowledgesharing #opinion #policy #lawcommission #lawfirm #pslchambers

Eminent advocate Ashwini Kumar Upadhyay, who spearheaded legal reforms by PILs, has told the Supreme Court during the black days of the emergency, the government by the Constitution (42nd Amendment) Act inserted ‘Socialist Secular Integrity’ in Preamble without changing the adoption date i.e. November 26, 1949 and on behalf of the Constituent Assembly, which did not exist in 1976 and even without following due process of law. “Such a substantial factual brazen mistake and manifest arbitrariness cannot be allowed to continuously exist in the Constitution of the largest and oldest democracy of the world. In fact, such a post facto alteration of the facts needs to be restored with immediate effect,” he said. To read full article, click link below 👇 https://rb.gy/359tv0 . . Lawstreet Journal Ashwini Upadhyay #lsjjudiciary #lawstreetj #PreambleDebate #ConstitutionalAmendment #SupremeCourt #LegalChallenge #ConstitutionalLaw #SCArguments #BJP #ConstitutionFraud #IndianConstitution #LegalUpdate #india #legalnews

The Supreme Court has said it is about time that frivolous and vexatious proceedings are met with due sanctions in the form of exemplary costs to dissuade parties from resorting to tactics, which add up to the pendency and delay in disposal of cases crying for justice. A bench of Justices B R Gavai and K V Vishwanathan said, Of late we notice pleadings or petitions with outrageous and ex facie unbelievable averments are made with no inhibition whatsoever. This is especially so in some family law proceedings, both civil and criminal. Reading some of the averments, we are left to wonder whether at all the deponents were conscious of what has been written purportedly on their behalf, before appending their signatures. To read full article, click link below 👇 https://rb.gy/v2wwme . . Lawstreet Journal #lsjjudiciary #lawstreetj #SupremeCourt #FrivolousLitigation #ExemplaryCosts #TimelyJustice #LegalReforms #CourtEfficiency #JusticeDelayed #LegalProfession #LawAndOrder #JudicialReforms #india

Discover the 25 essential things every law student must know about the Constitution of India Don't miss out! Tap the link to learn more https://lnkd.in/d6kiT7YZ #ConstitutionOfIndia #LegalKnowledge #LawStudents

In a critical judgment, the Supreme Court of India in Vijay Laxman Bhawe vs. P & S Nirman Pvt. Ltd. reinforced that "entertaining an application filed by a stranger is totally unsustainable in law." This decision, delivered by Honorable Justice B.R. Gavai, underscores the importance of procedural integrity. This ruling sets a crucial precedent for ensuring that only directly involved parties can influence legal proceedings, thereby maintaining the sanctity of the judicial process. Dive into our detailed analysis to understand the profound impact of this judgment on future litigation in India. https://lnkd.in/gUkCkUMT

In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court has emphasized the importance of timely implementation of bail orders. The Court's ruling comes in response to a case where it was found that an accused was entitled to bail, but the court delayed implementing the order. The Apex Court has held that once a finding is made that an accused is entitled to bail, the court cannot delay the implementation of the bail order. This decision underscores the need for courts to prioritize the rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and ensure that the liberty of the accused is not unnecessarily curtailed. #SupremeCourtOfIndia #SupremeCourt #HighCourt #Legal #Law #India

𝗪𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗜𝘀 𝗝𝘂𝗱𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗣𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗲𝗱𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗜𝗻𝗱𝗶𝗮 Judicial precedents are binding legal principles established by higher courts, guiding lower courts in similar cases. ⚖️ Enshrined under Article 141 of the Indian Constitution, these precedents ensure consistency and predictability in the legal system. 📝The ratio decidendi, or the principle behind a court's decision, is binding, while obiter dicta, or incidental opinions, are not. Despite their foundational importance, challenges arise from inconsistent adherence and potential overruling of decisions. Grab more details and get ahead through the link below. https://lnkd.in/gqQDwTBA #JudicialPrecedents #IndianLegalSystem #HigherCourts #LowerCourts #Article141 #Consistency #Predictability #RatioDecidendi #ObiterDicta #LegalPrinciples #CourtDecisions #Overruling #LegalChallenges Apnilaw #Lawyers #IndiaLaw