Muhammad Ahmed Khan v. Shah Bano Begum (1985): Maintenance, Personal Law, and the Secular Reach of Section 125 CrPC Author: Priyanka Kiran KhawaleStudent, Mumbai University ———————————————————- 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. The Supreme Court held that Section 125 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is a secular provision applicable to all citizens irrespective of […]
Kedar Nath Singh v. State of Bihar (1962): Sedition, Free Speech, and the Constitutional Line Between Dissent and Disorder Author: Shaikh Shama ParveenStudent, KES Shri Jayantilal H. Patel Law College ——————————————————————————————- 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. The Supreme Court upheld Section 124A IPC but decisively narrowed its scope — sedition applies only to speech that
Dolly Rani v. Manish Kumar Chanchal (2024): When a Certificate Is Not a Marriage Author: Niharika MishraStudent, KES Shri Jayantilal H. Patel Law College —————————————————————————– 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. A Hindu marriage is not valid unless the essential ceremonies under Section 7 of the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955 are performed — a certificate from
Dolly Rani v. Manish Kumar Chanchal (2024): When a Certificate Is Not a Marriage Read More »
Joseph Shine v. Union of India (2018): Striking Down the Adultery Law as a Violation of Constitutional Dignity Author: Bhumika Kiran Dubey Student, KES Shri Jayantilal H. Patel Law College ———————————————————————————————————————————– 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. The Supreme Court unanimously struck down Section 497 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as unconstitutional — holding that
Alopi Prashad & Sons Ltd. v. Union of India (1960): Where Commercial Hardship Ends and Frustration Begins Author: RashiStudent, Symbiosis Law School, Noida —————————————————————————– 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. The Supreme Court held that commercial hardship, price escalation, and financial loss do not amount to frustration under Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872
Aligarh Muslim University v. Naresh Agarwal (2024): Rethinking Minority Status and the Limits of Statutory Origin Author: Syed Mohd MuazStudent, Aligarh Muslim University —————————————————————————– 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. The Supreme Court’s seven-judge Constitution Bench held by a 4:3 majority that the mere fact of statutory incorporation does not disqualify an institution from being recognised
Mohori Bibee v. Dharmodas Ghose (1903): Decoding the Statutory Framework Behind a Minor’s Contractual Incapacity Author: Md. Kibria NurStudent, Southern University Bangladesh ————————————————————————- 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. A minor’s agreement is void ab initio under the Indian Contract Act, 1872 — it has no legal existence from inception, and neither Section 64 nor Section
Donoghue v. Stevenson [1932]: The Case That Built the Modern Law of Negligence Author: Yashoda RajputStudent, SAGE University Bhopal ————————————————————– 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. Donoghue v. Stevenson established that a manufacturer owes a duty of care to the ultimate consumer even in the absence of any contractual relationship — liability in tort is independent
Donoghue v. Stevenson [1932]: The Case That Built the Modern Law of Negligence Read More »
Smt. Sushila Devi and Another v. Hari Singh and Others (AIR 1971 SC 1756): Frustration, Partition, and the Limits of Contractual Obligation Author: Akansha AlangeStudent, Amity University, Mumbai ————————————————————————– 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. Section 56 of the Indian Contract Act, 1872 applies to executory contracts — including agreements to lease — but not to
Balfour v. Balfour [1919]: Why Domestic Promises Are Not Contracts Author: Khan Husnaara Khatoon Iqrar AhmedStudent, Amity Law School —————————————————————————————- 💡 3 Quick Takeaways 1. An intention to create legal relations is an essential element of a valid contract — without it, even a clear promise supported by consideration will not be legally enforceable. 2.
Balfour v. Balfour [1919]: Why Domestic Promises Are Not Contracts Read More »
