The Hon’ble Supreme Court (“SC”)[1] debated on the seminal question of maintainability of writ petitions against an order/ award under the Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises Development Act, 2006 (“MSME Act”). In M/s Tamil Nadu Cements Corporate Limited v. Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council and Another[2] (“
Electronic devices, mass media/ social media applications are now universally used for communications, collaboration and everyday work.
The judiciary, too, has embraced such technological advances. E-filings and virtual hearings have become a regular part of legal practice in the country, and are not exceptions any longer.
Continue Reading WhatsApp Blocked: SC Directs Service of Section 41A CrPC Notice by Permissible Modes Only
The Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 (“Act”), marked a pivotal development in India’s framework for data protection by addressing the longstanding need for safeguarding personal information, data protection, and data handling.
Continue Reading Internal Investigations Under the Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023
This article analyses the Supreme Court judgment in Indore Vikas Praadhikaran (IDA) & Anr. v. Shri Humud Jain Samaj Trust & Anr. (Civil Appeal No. 13089 of 2024 arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 9940 of 2022), dealing with the highest bidder’s legal challenge following the cancellation of a tender process by the Indore Vikas Praadhikaran (“IDA”). This analysis delves into the case facts, the legal principles, relevant Indian law, and the potential impact of the judgment.
Continue Reading No Vested Right for Highest Bidder: Examining IDA v. Shri Humud Jain Samaj Trust
The seventh edition of the Singapore International Arbitration Centre (“SIAC”) arbitration rules (“2025 Rules”) came into force on January 1, 2025. The 2025 Rules are considerably longer than the previous edition, but SIAC’s very helpful summary of all its key features is available here. This piece discusses some of these key features and their implications for India-related arbitrations.
Continue Reading Some Key Features of the SIAC rules 2025 and their implications for India-related Arbitrations
On October 30, 2024, the United States (“US”) Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Asset Control (“OFAC”) sanctioned 19 Indian companies and 2 Indian individuals under its Russia-related sanctions program under the Executive Order (“EO”) 14024. This action was in the nature of imposition of secondary sanctions on third-country actors to discourage non-US persons from engaging in certain transactions, even without a US nexus, that might be harmful to the objectives of the US sanctions programs.
Continue Reading US-India discussion on Sanctions: Indian Companies to remain diligent about Sanctions Compliance
A scheme of arrangement is an oft used mechanism for company restructuring, which may take the form of a ‘merger’, a ‘demerger’ or even a ‘compromise’ with creditors. Sections 391-394 of the Companies Act, 1956 (“1956 Act”), read with the Companies (Court) Rules, 1959, were the relevant statutory framework governing this.
Continue Reading Objections at the first motion stage: Light at the end of the rainbow?
Recently, the Delhi High Court (“DHC”) has reiterated that Section 34 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 (“Act”), empowers courts to partially set aside an arbitral award and it would not amount to a modification, as an arbitral award consists of distinct components independent of each other.
Continue Reading Court’s power to partially set aside arbitral awards: An Indian perspective
In the previous blog published on November 19, 2024, we had discussed the United States (“US”) Office of foreign Asset Control (“OFAC”) sanctioning nearly 400 entities and individuals for their contribution to Russia’s efforts against Ukraine and the implications of this action on Indian businesses. The US has since imposed sanctions on several entities under its Russia-related sanctions program as well as under its other sanctions programs. There has also been a major focus on the Iran-related sanctions program.
Continue Reading Ripple Effect of Sanctions- II: Recent Iran-related sanctions imposed by the United States
Securing bail under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (“PMLA“), is challenging due to the high threshold for bail stipulated by the Act. Section 45 of the PMLA stipulates that bail may be granted to an accused in a money laundering case only if two conditions are met: first, the Public Prosecutor must be given the opportunity to oppose the bail application; second, there must be prima facie satisfaction that the accused has not committed the offence and is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. It is frequently contended that these twin conditions pose a significant challenge to the prevailing legal principle in criminal jurisprudence that “bail is the rule and jail is the exception”. The Hon’ble Supreme Court has observed that the twin conditions challenge an accused’s right to liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution[1].
Continue Reading Renewed focus on Liberty – Delhi High Court upholds Constitutional Safeguards on Bail under PMLA