Posts

Showing posts with the label Supreme Court of India

Must Read

M.N. Clubwala v. Fida Hussain Saheb, 1964

Image
M.N. Clubwala v. Fida Hussain Saheb, (1964) 6 SCR 642, 651 This case interpretation/case summary is written by Ms. Swati Sharma a student at the Faculty of Law (Delhi University). If you also want to publish your articles or case interpretations/summaries, send your work to  niyamskanoon09@gmail.com . Case Details PETITIONER:  MRS. M. N. CLUBWALA AND ANR. Vs. RESPONDENT: FIDA HUSSAIN SAHEB AND ORS. DATE OF JUDGMENT: 03/02/1964 BENCH: MUDHOLKAR, J.R. SUBBARAO, K. CITATION: 1965 AIR 610 1964 SCR (6) 642 Introduction   The case of M.N. Clubwala v. Fida Hussain Saheb (1964) under the Delhi Rent Control Act is a landmark judgment that clarifies the distinction between a lease and a license and the jurisdiction of the Rent Controller. The primary issue in this case was whether the agreements between the landlord (M.N. Clubwala) and the shopkeepers (Fida Hussain Saheb) created a lease or a license.  Facts of the Case M.N. Clubwala (Landlord) used his building as market by

Top 10 landmark judgement given by justice D.Y. Chandrachud

Image
Top 10 Landmark Judgements of the D.Y. Chandrachud as Supreme Court Judge   Chief Justice of India Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud is known for his transformative role in Indian jurisprudence, blending a deep understanding of constitutional values with a progressive outlook on human rights and technology. Appointed as the 50th Chief Justice of India , he has a distinguished career marked by landmark judgments on privacy, equality, and individual freedoms. Justice Chandrachud’s tenure has focused on making the judiciary more accessible and transparent through digital reforms, promoting live streaming of court hearings, and enabling e-filing to bring justice closer to citizens. His judicial philosophy emphasizes upholding democratic values, protecting civil liberties, and enhancing social justice. Here are some of the landmark judgments he has delivered that showcase his commitment to a fair, inclusive, and rights- centered judiciary. Ayodhya Dispute Case (M. Siddiq v. Mahant Suresh Da