{"id":187484,"date":"2018-02-09T16:11:47","date_gmt":"2018-02-09T10:41:47","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=187484"},"modified":"2018-02-09T16:11:47","modified_gmt":"2018-02-09T10:41:47","slug":"2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/","title":{"rendered":"2018 SCC Vol. 1 February 7, 2017 Part 5"},"content":{"rendered":"

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 Ss. 34 and 37 \u2014 Award \u2014 Noninterference with, when the same is reasonable and on the basis of a plausible view:<\/strong> When it comes to setting aside of an award under the public policy ground, it would mean that the award should shock the conscience of the Court, and would not include what the Court thinks is unjust on the facts of the case seeking to substitute its view for that of the arbitrator to do what it considers to be \u201cjustice\u201d. [Sutlej Construction Ltd. v. State (UT of Chandigarh), (2018) 1 SCC 718<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitution of India \u2014 Arts. 19(1)(a) & (2), 21, 14 and 32 \u2014 Artistic creation:<\/strong> Restriction on public viewing of artistic creation (cinema or theatre) of expressive mind should be as per prescription law: In this case writ petition was filed before Supreme Court for direction staying nationwide release of a documentary film containing video clip pertaining to petitioner and also for direction or order to CBFC to delete the clip. Petitioner claimed rights especially under Arts. 14 and 21 that he should not be projected in manner in which film is going to depict. It was held that Court would be slow to pass any restraint order and petition has to be dismissed. [Nachiketa Walhekar v. CBFC, (2018) 1 SCC 778<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitution of India \u2014 Arts. 19(1)(a) and 19(2) \u2014 Freedom of expression \u2014 Cinema, theatre:<\/strong> Artistic licence should be determined objectively on facts of each case. Restriction on creativity should be reasonable, depending upon kind of restriction imposed and its impact. [Manohar Lal Sharma v. Sanjay Leela Bhansali, (2018) 1 SCC 770<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitution of India \u2014 Arts. 19(1)(a) and 32 \u2014 Freedom of expression by artistic creation covered by Art. 19(1)(a) \u2014 Scope:<\/strong> In this case State Government imposed restriction on public exhibition of a film (Padmaavat\/Padmavati) even after grant of certificate by CBFC under Cinematograph Act on ground of maintenance of law and order. A writ petition was filed seeking interim stay of government order\/notification: It was held that once CBFC grants certificate, non-exhibition of film would be violation of statutory provisions as well as fundamental right. Grant of certificate raised prima facie presumption that regulatory measures provided under S. 5-B of Cinematograph Act and Guidelines issued by Central Government including public order must be taken into consideration by authority concerned. Maintenance of law and order prime responsibility of Government, hence interim stay of State Government notifications\/orders deserves to be granted. Other States also restrained from issuing such notifications\/orders. [VIACOM 18 Media (P) Ltd. v Union of India, (2018) 1 SCC 761<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitution of India \u2014 Arts. 21, 14, 15, 141 and 145(3) \u2014 Fundamental rights vis-\u00e0-vis social morality \u2014 Sexual orientation freedom:<\/strong> Challenge to part of S. 377 IPC which criminalised consensual carnal intercourse between adult humans. Suresh Kumar Koushal, (2014) 1 SCC 1 upholding S. 377 IPC, held, requires reconsideration, hence, matter referred to larger Bench. [Navtej Singh Johar v. Union of India, (2018) 1 SCC 791<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Constitution of India \u2014 Pt. III \u2014 Linking of Aadhaar:<\/strong> Last dates for linking of Aadhaar with bank account, mobile number and social welfare schemes, extended to 31-3-2018 pending adjudication of dispute regarding the same before the Court. [K.S. Puttaswamy v. Union of India, (2018) 1 SCC 809<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 \u2014 S. 204 \u2014 Issue of process summons:<\/strong> Order issuing process summons against appellant-accused cannot be interfered with by Supreme Court in its appellate jurisdiction under Art. 136. It is more so, when appellants would get full opportunity to raise all factual and legal pleas in accordance with law while contesting complaint on merits. [Leena Vivek Masal v. State of Maharashtra, (2018) 1 SCC 781<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Education Law \u2014 Medical and Dental Colleges \u2014 Migration\/Transfer:<\/strong> Interim order directing migration from one dental college to another, pending writ appeal in High Court, held, unsustainable. Nature of said interim order amounts to final order. [Dental Council of India v. Anhad Raj Singh, (2018) 1 SCC 723<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 \u2014 Ss. 25-K, 25-O and 2(s) \u2014 Benefit under S. 25-K \u2014 Applicable if unit has more than 100 workers: <\/strong>In this case dispute was whether unit has more than 100 workmen, status of employee, whether workman or supervisor. High Court reversed finding of Tribunal and held that unit did not have more than 100 workers but only 99 workers. Said finding of High Court, held, did not warrant interference under Art. 136 of the Constitution as it involved questions of fact, and there was no perversity in this case. [National Kamgar Union v. Kran Rader (P) Ltd., (2018) 1 SCC 784<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 \u2014 Ss. 166 and 168 \u2014 Fatal accident \u2014 Compensation:<\/strong> While computing monthly income of female agricultural labourer, it is needed to impute value for her contribution to household work. [Laxmidhar Nayak v. Jugal Kishore Behera, (2018) 1 SCC 746<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 \u2014 Ss. 166 and 173 \u2014 Compensation \u2014 Contributory negligence:<\/strong> If one drives a vehicle without a licence, he commits an offence but by itself, the same may not lead to a finding of negligence as regards accident. Thus, it was held that deduction of forty per cent made on ground of contributory negligence in this case is without any basis. [Dinesh Kumar v. National Insurance Co. Ltd., (2018) 1 SCC 750<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Police \u2014 Generally \u2014 Police service \u2014 Candidates having criminal antecedents, including those not honourably acquitted \u2014 Suitability of, for police service:<\/strong> Acquittal is not conclusive of suitability of candidate, unless it is honourable acquittal. Employer can go into issue of suitability. Even if candidate has self-declared his criminal antecedents, employer still has right to consider such criminal antecedents to decide his suitability. [State (UT of Chandigarh) v. Pradeep Kumar, (2018) 1 SCC 797<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Right to Fair Compensation and Transparency in Land Acquisition, Rehabilitation and Resettlement Act, 2013 \u2014 S. 24:<\/strong> Matter referred to larger Bench involving issue that proceedings under repealed LA Act, 1894 whether would lapse in view of S. 24(2) when compensation had been deposited before Land Acquisition Collector but landowners had declined to receive it and continued with litigation. [Indore Development Authority v. Shailendra, (2018) 1 SCC 733<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 \u2014 S. 3(2)(v) [prior to amendment by Act 1 of 2016] \u2014 Requirement of Intention of accused:<\/strong> There is requirement of intention of accused to belittle person belonging to SC\/ST community, for punishment under S. 3(2)(v). As there was absence of any evidence proving such intention, conviction under S. 3(2)(v), set aside. [Asharfi v. State of U.P., (2018) 1 SCC 742<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Stamp Act, 1899 \u2014 Ss. 2(16), (16)(c), (14) & (12) r\/w Sch. I Art. 35 \u2014 Definition of \u201clease\u201d under S. 2(16) of Stamp Act \u2014 Nature and scope:<\/strong> Definition of \u201clease\u201d under S. 2(16) of Stamp Act is extensive in nature in comparison to definition of that term contained in S. 105 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882. Any instrument by which tolls of any description are let, is considered as \u201clease\u201d under S. 2(16)(c) of Stamp Act for purpose of payment of stamp duty under that Act. Thus, where Municipal Corporation, on accepting bids of appellants, awarded contract to appellants for collection of \u201ctehbazari\u201d and \u201cparking fees\u201d, such contract, held, was in the nature of a \u201clease\u201d as defined in S. 2(16)(c) of Stamp Act. Hence, was chargeable to stamp duty in terms of Art. 35 of Sch. I of Stamp Act as a \u201clease\u201d. [Nasiruddin v. State of U.P., (2018) 1 SCC 754<\/a>]<\/p>\n

Trade Marks Act, 1999 \u2014 S. 21 \u2014 Special leave to appeal to Supreme Court:<\/strong> High Court, based on a detailed consideration of the materials brought on record by both the parties, inter alia, concluded that the petitioner had not demonstrated that it was the first user of the logo\/mark and that it was the respondent who was the first user. High Court was also of the view that notwithstanding the class of customers serviced by the parties before it, it could not be said that the two logos\/marks would not give rise to confusion amongst the customers. In this case, held, the view recorded by High Court was a perfectly possible and justified view of the matter and the conclusion(s) reached could reasonably flow from a balanced consideration of the evidence and materials on record. Therefore, special leave to appeal to Supreme Court against the order of High Court, refused. [Royal Orchid Hotels Ltd. v. Kamat Hotels (India) Ltd., (2018) 1 SCC 728<\/a>]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 Ss. 34 and 37 \u2014 Award \u2014 Noninterference with, when the same is reasonable and on <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":91,"featured_media":182154,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[5,16],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-187484","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casesreported","category-supremecourtcases"],"yoast_head":"\n2018 SCC Vol. 1 February 7, 2017 Part 5 | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"2018 SCC Vol. 1 February 7, 2017 Part 5\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 Ss. 34 and 37 \u2014 Award \u2014 Noninterference with, when the same is reasonable and on\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-02-09T10:41:47+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1330\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Saba\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"6 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/\",\"name\":\"2018 SCC Vol. 1 February 7, 2017 Part 5 | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-02-09T10:41:47+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg\",\"width\":1330,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"2018 SCC Vol. 1 February 7, 2017 Part 5\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785\",\"name\":\"Saba\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Saba\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"2018 SCC Vol. 1 February 7, 2017 Part 5 | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"2018 SCC Vol. 1 February 7, 2017 Part 5","og_description":"Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 \u2014 Ss. 34 and 37 \u2014 Award \u2014 Noninterference with, when the same is reasonable and on","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2018-02-09T10:41:47+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1330,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Saba","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Saba","Est. reading time":"6 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/","name":"2018 SCC Vol. 1 February 7, 2017 Part 5 | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg","datePublished":"2018-02-09T10:41:47+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg","width":1330,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/09\/2018-scc-vol-1-february-7-2017-part-5\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"2018 SCC Vol. 1 February 7, 2017 Part 5"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/e8e76b10dfc9c0d576324bfdbb2c2785","name":"Saba","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/a815285315cd85d8b3246c60ed8ed99825949c1b85b370c49212daa54ededa98?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Saba"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_2\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/01\/SCC-weekly-7-Jan-2018.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":264130,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/03\/23\/decoding-the-public-policy-of-india-and-patent-illegality-on-the-face-of-an-award\/","url_meta":{"origin":187484,"position":0},"title":"Decoding the Public Policy of India and Patent Illegality on the Face of an Award","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 23, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"by Hiroo Advani\u2020, Kanika Arora\u2020\u2020 and Srishti Ramchandani, Vidyotma Malik\u2020\u2020\u2020 Cite as: 2022 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 26","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-93.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-93.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-93.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-93.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-93.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":344877,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/04\/02\/one-court-to-rule-them-all-jurisdictional-overlap-arbitration-act\/","url_meta":{"origin":187484,"position":1},"title":"One Court to Rule Them All? Jurisdictional Overlap in Post-Award Enforcement Regime under the Arbitration Act","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"April 2, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"by Vasanth Rajasekaran* and Harshvardhan Korada**","rel":"","context":"In "Experts Corner"","block_context":{"text":"Experts Corner","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/experts_corner\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Jurisdictional Overlap in Award Enforcement","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Jurisdictional-Overlap-in-Award-Enforcement.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Jurisdictional-Overlap-in-Award-Enforcement.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Jurisdictional-Overlap-in-Award-Enforcement.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Jurisdictional-Overlap-in-Award-Enforcement.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":203195,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/05\/additional-recommendations-laid-down-against-violence-towards-artistic-expression-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":187484,"position":2},"title":"Additional recommendations laid down against violence towards artistic expression: SC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 5, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: A Bench comprising of CJ Dipak Misra and A.M. Khanwilkar and Dr D.Y. Chandrachud, JJ., laid down some recommendations in addition to the ones in Destruction of Public and Private Properties, In re, (2009) 5 SCC 212, concerning the issue of\u00a0 \u201cmob violence, protests and demonstrations\u201d erupted in\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":291921,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/05\/12\/alls-not-well-that-ends-well-the-challenge-in-enforcing-domestic-awards-before-indian-courts\/","url_meta":{"origin":187484,"position":3},"title":"All\u2019s (Not) Well that Ends Well: The Challenge in Enforcing Domestic Awards before Indian Courts","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"May 12, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"by Ila Kapoor\u2020 and Mrinali Komandur\u2020\u2020 Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 42","rel":"","context":"In "Experts Corner"","block_context":{"text":"Experts Corner","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/experts_corner\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"enforcing domestic awards","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/enforcing-domestic-awards.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/enforcing-domestic-awards.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/enforcing-domestic-awards.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/05\/enforcing-domestic-awards.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":255070,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/10\/02\/whether-limitation-falls-within-the-power-of-the-arbitral-tribunal-to-rule-on-its-own-jurisdiction-rf-narimans-judgment-in-indian-farmers\/","url_meta":{"origin":187484,"position":4},"title":"Whether limitation falls within the power of the Arbitral tribunal to rule on its own jurisdiction – RF Nariman\u2019s judgment in Indian Farmers case","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 2, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"by Hiroo Advani\u2020 and Manav Nagpal\u2020\u2020 Cite as: 2021 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 73","rel":"","context":"In "Op Eds"","block_context":{"text":"Op Eds","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/op-ed\/legal-analysis\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-58.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-58.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-58.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-58.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/10\/MicrosoftTeams-image-58.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":206027,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/12\/01\/no-restriction-on-court-in-awarding-compensation-exceeding-claimed-amount-under-section-168-of-motor-vehicles-act-1988-just-compensation-explained-sc\/","url_meta":{"origin":187484,"position":5},"title":"No restriction on Court in awarding compensation exceeding claimed amount under Section 168 of MV Act 1988; “just compensation” explained: SC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"December 1, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court:\u00a0A Bench comprising of N.V. Ramana and M.M. Shantanagoudar, JJ. allowed an appeal for enhancing the compensation awarded under Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 by the Kerala\u00a0High Court. The claimants were the dependants (wife, 2 children, and aged father) of the deceased who died in an accident in 2008. The\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187484","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/91"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=187484"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/187484\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/182154"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=187484"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=187484"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=187484"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}