SC: Suit Simpliciter For Injunction Without Claiming Declaration Of Title Not Maintainable If Plaintiff's Title Is Disputable
There were two suits involved in this particular case. The first one is T.V. Ramakrishna Reddy v. M. Mallappa. Sr. Advocate Ajit Bhasme appeared for the appellant whereas Sr. Advocate Basava Prabhu S. Patil and Advocate S.K. Kulkarni appeared for the respondents. The second case was Kayalulla Parambath Moidu Haji v. Namboodiyil Vinodan. In both cases, the decision was given by the bench of Justice B R Gavai and Justice L Nageswara Rao.
What do you think about this case?
Supreme Court Upholds Termination Of 38 Workmen By BCCL
The decision was given by Justice Hrishikesh Roy and Justice Sanjay Kishan Kaul. The Supreme Court observed that fraudulent practice to gain public employment cannot be countenanced to be permitted by a Court of law. The case was of ‘Employers In Relation To The Management of Bhalgora Area (Now Kustore Area) Of M/S Bharat Coking Coal Ltd. Appellant(S) v. Workmen Being Represented by Janta Mazdoor Sangh’.
What do you think about this case?
SC: Medical Professionals Cannot Be Held Negligent Merely Because The Treatment Is Not Successful Or Patient Dies During Surgery
The case was Dr. Harish Kumar Khurana v. Joginder Singh. The decision was given by Justices Hemant Gupta and AS Bopanna. The appeal was allowed. The Court also observed that the enquiry that was conducted by the District Magistrate cannot be considered as medical evidence to hold negligence on the part of the doctors or the hospital in the matter of conducting the second surgery and the condition of the patient.
What do you think about this case?
Supreme Court Not Only Meant For People Living Near Delhi
The case was of Karthik Ranganathan v. Disciplinary Committee-IV, Bar Council of Tamil Nadu & Puducherry & Ors. The decision was given by Justice N. Kirubakaran. He urged the Centre to amend the Constitution to set up regional benches. The observation was given in the backdrop of the long-standing demand for creation of regional Supreme Court Benches, in spirit of the right of access to justice.
What do you think about this case?
SC Dismisses Vedanta's Plea For Validating Its Mining Lease Till 2037
The case was of Vedanta Limited v. Director of Mines and Geology and Geetabala M. N. Parulekar v. Director of Mines and Geology. The decision was given by the bench of Justices D. Y. Chandrachud, Vikram Nath and Hima Kohli. The Court asked SG Tushar Mehta that if the state had to maximise revenue, why wasn’t the due process of law followed. The Court also enquired into the reasons as to why the state was backing these large entities in the renewal of their leases.
What do you think about this case?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
