The first reference under Article 143 was made in the Delhi Laws case, wherein, the President referred three questions to the Supreme Court for its opinion.
Supreme Court has ordered that the Rajasthan High Court's impugned order being interlocutory in nature, shall not be treated as precedent for cancellation of bail granted to the petitioner in other cases, and the question of law was kept open to be decided in an appropriate case.
Supreme Court: The bench of Indira Banerjee* and JK Maheshwari, JJ has explained that to be ‘substantial’, a question of law must
“The scenario is that any order or judgment passed by this Court becomes a reportable exercise to create more volumes of reported cases! This thus has a possibility at times of causing some confusion on the legal principles prevalent.”
Kerala High Court: While adjudicating a question of law as to whether pre-arrest bail can be granted to an accused while he
Supreme Court: While addressing a case raising significant question of law on principles governing compassionate appointment, the Division Bench of D.Y. Chandradhud
Whether the State had the legislative competence to levy duty on the sale of electricity to an intermediary distributor is a question of law.
Kerala High Court: N. Anil Kumar, J., decided a matter wherein the son-in-law claimed his right on father-in-law’s property while pleading that
Supreme Court: In an important ruling on Res Judicata, the 3-judge bench of Dr. DY Chandrachud*, Vikram Nath and Hima Kohli, JJ
Supreme Court: A 3-Judge Bench of N.V. Ramana, CJI and A.S. Bopanna and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ. upheld the judgment of the Madras
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Tarlok Singh Chauhan, J., allowed an appeal against the judgment of the first appellate court. The plaintiff had
Bombay High Court at Goa: A Single Judge Bench comprising of C.V. Bhadang, J., dismissed an appeal filed against the concurrent findings