- Home
- About ALEC
- Course Offered
- About Exam
- Blog
- Judgements
- Enquiry
- Syllabus
- Online Class
- Privacy Policy
- Enroll Now
Introduction The landmark case dealt with the conflict between individual property rights and state intervention in business operations, specifically in the motor transport sector. The case questioned whether state legislation could curtail individual rights, including the right to conduct business, for the greater public good. This case is a significant reflection on the limits of state power under the newly adopted Indian Constitution, balancing public welfare against individual freedoms. Facts The case arose from the enactment of the C.P. &....
Read MoreBench comprising of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan Introduction: The Supreme Court, in this judgment, clarified an important aspect of Order VII Rule 11 of the Civil Procedure Code (CPC) regarding the rejection of a plaint that seeks multiple reliefs. The Court emphasized that a plaint cannot be rejected solely because one of the reliefs sought is barred by law, as long as the remaining reliefs are valid and within the jurisdiction of the court. Facts: The case involved....
Read MoreBench comprising of J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan The Supreme Court dealt with whether grave and sudden provocation can reduce an offense from murder to culpable homicide. The case involved an altercation where the appellant, after being slapped and abused by the deceased, struck the latter on the head with a cement brick, causing his death. Facts The appellant, along with his friends, was sleeping under a bridge when the deceased, who was drunk, started an argument. The deceased slapped the....
Read MoreIntroduction: This case is significant because it addresses the issue of specific performance under the Indian Contract Act, 1872, particularly in relation to contracts for the sale of immovable property and the enforceability of agreements. Facts: Shyam Sundar Rathi entered into an agreement with B.K.K.G.R.S. & Co. (the appellant) for the sale of land. The agreement stipulated that the buyer would pay a certain amount within a specific period, and the seller would transfer the land. The buyer paid the....
Read MoreBench comprising of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan The Supreme Court, in a landmark judgment, clarified the nature of a suit for specific performance under the Specific Relief Act, 1963, particularly focusing on the power of the trial court after the decree for specific performance has been passed. The Court ruled on the question of whether the trial court retains jurisdiction and control over the decree even after the passing of the decree for specific performance. Facts: In the present....
Read MoreIntroduction The case dealt with the constitutionality of the death penalty under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The appellant, Jagmohan Singh, challenged his death sentence, claiming it violated fundamental rights under Articles 14 (Right to Equality), 19 (Right to Freedom), and 21 (Right to Life) of the Indian Constitution. Facts Jagmohan Singh was convicted for murdering Chhotey Singh due to a longstanding personal dispute. He was sentenced to death by the Sessions Court, and the sentence was....
Read MoreIntroduction Section 27 of the Indian Evidence Act and its interaction with Section 162(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) has been a point of contention, particularly regarding whether it violates the principles of equality enshrined in Article 14 of the Indian Constitution. Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 27: Admissibility of statements leading to the discovery of facts. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 162(2): Prohibition of statements made to police officers from being used in evidence,....
Read MoreA bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan Introduction The Supreme Court of India, questioned the practice of arresting accused persons after the filing of a chargesheet and the court’s cognizance of the same. A bench observed that such a practice is unwarranted, particularly when the accused was not arrested during the investigation. The decision aligns with previous judgments emphasizing the principle of arrest only when necessary, to prevent misuse of authority. Facts The petitioner, accused in a case under the....
Read MoreIntroduction The Supreme Court, in Indian Overseas Bank vs M.A.S. Subramanian & Ors. (2025 LiveLaw (SC) 77), reaffirmed that mere possession under an agreement to sell does not confer ownership unless a registered sale deed is executed as per the Indian Registration Act, 1908. The bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan set aside the National Company Law Appellate Tribunal’s (NCLAT) decision, which held that the sale deed executed by the property owner's legal heirs was not....
Read MoreBench comprising Chief Justice Harilal J. Kania, Justice M. Patanjali Sastri, Justice Mehr Chand Mahajan, Justice Bijan Kumar Mukherjea, Justice Sudhi Ranjan Das. This five-judge bench delivered a unanimous judgment, upholding the validity of the First Constitutional Amendment Act, 1951. Background of the Case: This case is one of the earliest landmark judgments related to the interpretation of the Indian Constitution. It primarily dealt with the constitutionality of the First Amendment Act, 1951, which introduced Article 31A and Article 31B,....
Read More
