Indian Lawyers Forum

01/02/2026

26/01/2026

https://www.facebook.com/share/1Bmkjb72jG/

20/03/2021

Supreme Court:

"Liberty across human eras is as tenuous as tenuous can be. Liberty survives by the vigilance of her citizens, on the cacophony of the media and in the dusty corridors of courts alive to the rule of (and not by) law. Yet, much too often, liberty is a casualty when one of these components is found wanting."
— Dr D.Y. Chandrachud, J. in Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. State of Maharashtra, (2021) 2 SCC 427, para 67

22/02/2021

Supreme Court"

"Anti-democratic speech in general and political extremist speech in particular, which has no useful purpose, if and only when in the nature of incitement to violence that “creates”, or is “likely to create” or “promotes” or is “likely to promote” public disorder, would not be protected."
— Sanjiv Khanna, J. in Amish Devgan v. Union of India, (2021) 1 SCC 1

10/02/2021

As the lockdowns are being opened up around the world, Courts have also been opened up in lieu of the loss due to proceedings not being able to hold offline. While many battled challenges like poor internet connections on one hand and no knowhow of technology on the other, there were positives like cleaner environment, less expenditure of resources and more productive time with lawyers not having to go and wait in the Court physically.

Since the Courts are being opened again, it would not be wise to shift back entirely to the offline mode of proceedings and it would niether be wise to stay entirely on the online platforms. Going entirely with one single mode will have its own benefits and limitations while working together both the systems would increase efficiency and make lives easier.

In light of the above, we think that there needs to be a synergistic partnership between the two drastically different platforms. The moment is apt to bring in a policy to meet the bridge in the middle and let the platforms be used together.

What suggestions would you as interested readers of law think should be brought in such policy, if brought in place?

22/01/2021

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA:

Does non-payment of stamp duty in a commercial contract invalidate the arbitration clause? Issue referred to Constitutional Bench

-NN Global Mercantile Pvt Ltd v. Indo Unique Flame Ltd., 2021 SCC Online SC 13, decided on 11-1-2021

21/01/2021

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA:

One-sided and unreasonable clauses in apartment buyer’s agreement & unfair trade practice

-Ireo Grace Realtech (P) Ltd. v. Abhishek Khanna, 2021 SCC Online SC 14, decided on 11-01-2021

21/01/2021

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA:

“Court cannot be said to be completely powerless to grant stay of any executive action under a statutory enactment”: SC stays implementation of Farm Laws

-Rakesh Vaishanv v. Union of India, 2021 SCC Online SC 18, decided on 12-01-2021

21/01/2021

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA:

"The constitutional courts while exercising their powers of judicial review would not assume the role of an appellate authority. Their jurisdiction is circumscribed by limits of correcting errors of law, procedural errors leading to manifest injustice or violation of principles of natural justice. Put differently, judicial review is not analogous to venturing into the merits of a case like an appellate authority."

— Surya Kant, J. in Pravin Kumar v. Union of India, (2020) 9 SCC 471

21/01/2021

WEST BENGAL AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULING, GOODS AND SERVICES TAX:

Whether composite supply of crushed food grains to State Government shall be exempted from GST? Ambit of GST in regard to Govt. functions for public welfare explained

-Sakshi Jhajharia, In re, 2020 SCC Online WB AAR-GST 9, decided on 10-02-2020

21/01/2021

NATIONAL GREEN TRIBUNAL:

Flashback |Read the decision highlighting impact of rafting and camping sites on environment: Does camping fall under the ambit of ‘non-forest’ activity?

-Social Action for Forest and Environment (Safe) v. Union of India, 2015 SCC Online NGT 843, decided on 10-12-2015