| SC notice to GSK Consumer on Heinz India's plea | 20-NOV-09 |
|
| The Supreme Court today issued a notice to Glaxo Smithkline Consumer Healthcare in a case relating to the advertising war between two popular health drink brands Horlicks and Complan in India. |
|
|
|
| RNRL withdraws opposition to govt being a party | 20-NOV-09 |
|
| In a new development in the RIL-RNRL appeals in the Supreme Court today on their gas dispute, RNRL revoked its opposition to the Union government being heard. And, the Solicitor General appeared for the first time, on behalf of the government and NTPC. |
|
|
|
| No plan to change Collegium system to appoint judges: Govt | 19-NOV-09 |
|
| Barely a month after lamenting that the present Collegium system was coming in the way of overcoming shortage of judges, the government today said there is no proposal at present to change the existing mode of appointing judges to Supreme Court and High Courts. |
|
|
|
| Will incur heavy loss if K-G gas is not sold to priority customers: Govt | 19-NOV-09 |
|
| The government will incur a loss of Rs 75,000 crore if the gas from Reliance Industries Ltd’s (RIL’s) D-6 block in the Krishna-Godavari basin is not sold to priority customers like fertiliser and power sectors, additional solicitor general Vivek Tankha told the Supreme Court today. |
|
|
|
| Ambani gas row: Govt must approve suitable arrangement | 18-NOV-09 |
|
| The government today asserted in the Supreme Court that any suitable arrangement between the Ambani brothers for the supply of gas from K G Basin has to be approved by it keeping the national interest paramount. |
|
|
|
| M J Antony: Urge to litigate | 18-NOV-09 |
|
| It is well known that the government is the largest litigant in the courts. It is less known that it starves the judiciary of funds. It is even less known that it chokes the courts with unnecessary suits. The last one frequently invites drubbing from the Supreme Court. |
|
|
|
| SC rejects I-T dept's plea against French manufacturer | 16-NOV-09 |
|
| The Supreme Court today dismissed the Income Tax department's (I-T) plea challenging the decision of the Authority of Advanced Rulings (AAR) that allowed French firm Timken France SAS to claim capital gains tax benefits. |
|
|
|
| Earth is minor minerals | 16-NOV-09 |
|
| The Supreme Court (SC) last week dismissed the appeals of Som Datt Builders Ltd against the Allahabad high court judgement raising the question if ‘ordinary earth’ used for filling or levelling in construction of embankments, roads, Railways and building are ‘minor minerals’ inviting royalty. The Centre, in a 2000 notification under the Mines and Minerals (Development and Regulation) Act, has specified minor minerals as an item which attracted royalty. The company in this case entered into a contract with the National Highway Authority of India for widening G T Road in Kanpur region. It bought earth from the farmers and land holders. The Centre demanded royalty on the earth, claiming it to be minor minerals. The company moved the high court which dismissed its petitions. It appealed to the SC. |
|
|
|
| HC hearings on Subhiksha stayed by SC | 14-NOV-09 |
|
| The Supreme Court has stayed for now all hearings in the High Court here on the revival or winding up of Subhiksha Trading Services, the cash-strapped retail chain. |
|
|
|
| Latha Jishnu: Method mania | 12-NOV-09 |
|
| No other patent application has drawn the kind of interest worldwide as the Bilski case has. And no other patent suit has drawn into the debate, various industry interests, academia, the legal fraternity and the open source community. Filed 12 years, the Bilski case has put under the scanner the flood of business method patents issued in the US in the past decade, and as the case found its way to the Supreme Court, websites and the blogsphere has become cluttered with a plethora of opinions on the merits of the patentability business methods or processes. An indication of the high interest in the Bilski outcome was the long line of people wanting to attend the public hearing — it turned out to be a brief 30-minute session ultimately — in the Supreme Court last Monday. |
|
|
|
| Hindi oath row: Petition in SC against Raj Thackeray | 10-NOV-09 |
|
| A writ petition was today filed in the Supreme Court seeking registration of an FIR against MNS chief Raj Thackeray for assaulting SP MLA Abu Azmi in the Maharashtra Assembly for taking oath in Hindi instead of Marathi. |
|
|
|
| Lawyers protest Dinakaran's continuance | 10-NOV-09 |
|
| Karnataka Chief Justice P D Dinakaran, facing land grabbing allegations, was today forced to suspend proceedings and leave his court amid noisy protests by a section of lawyers who abstained from court protesting his continuance. |
|
|
|
| SC notice to Trai, RCom, Tata Tele, Vodafone others | 09-NOV-09 |
|
| The Supreme Court has issued notice to 11 parties, including Trai, Reliance Communications, Tata Teleservices, Vodafone Essar, on a petition by state-run BSNL challenging removal of Access Deficit Charge (ADC), a levy paid by private telecom operators for funding the PSU's operations in rural and remote areas. |
|
|
|
| 'Arbitrator cannot properly deal with malpractice allegations' | 09-NOV-09 |
|
| The Supreme Court (SC) has stated when there are serious allegations of malpractices and manipulation of accounts of a firm, the dispute cannot be properly dealt with by an arbitrator. It would be appropriate to let the civil court decide. In this case, N Radhakrishnan vs M/s Maestro Engineers, partners in the firm split and one of them wanted his share to be paid after resignation. However, there were disputes on the amounts due. The partner wanted arbitration which was denied by the district court. He appealed to the SC which dismissed his plea. It said when there are allegations of manipulation of accounts, fraud, misrepresentation and similar charges, it would not be proper to refer all these to an arbitrator. Therefore, the case was remitted to the civil court in Coimbatore. |
|
|
|
| Can CBEC classification be prospective when it is legally retrospective | 09-NOV-09 |
|
| A fine legal question has arisen which is whether a board's circular can make a classification prospective when legally it is retrospective. This has arisen because of a Supreme Court judgement in the case of Jai Fibres Ltd vs CCE, Mumbai — 2007(218)ELT484(SC) interpreting the retrospectivity of classification on the basis of a CBEC Circular No.54/12/91-CX. |
|
|
|
Content Guide
