Keeping Pace with Legal Change
Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta reinstated a trial court’s verdict in a land partition dispute, overturning the High Court’s dismissal. The Supreme Court emphasized evidence-based adjudication, restoring the original decree and ensuring equitable division of ancestral property, reinforcing procedural fairness in civil disputes.
In the case of New Mangalore Port Trust v. Clifford D’Souza, which was decided by the Supreme Court in 2025, the primary question that was being considered was whether or not demands for past dues under a new licensing price could be filed after a delay. This article provides this explanation.
In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court led by Justice Vikram Nath reaffirmed its inherent power under Section 482 of the CrPC to quash criminal proceedings in bank fraud cases after a complete settlement rendered continued trial unnecessary and unjustified.
This article provides an explanation of Sections 26, 27, and 28 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. These sections define the process by which the High Court or the State Government can award, transfer, or revoke authority from officials. Illustrations are provided to provide a clear explanation of each segment.
In accordance with the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, this article provides an explanation of the sentencing powers that are held by several criminal courts in India. It examines the limits and jurisdiction of High Courts, Sessions Judges, and Magistrates in the process of imposing punishments, including procedures for defaulting on a fine and multiple convictions.
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 provides a comprehensive set of guidelines that outline the procedure for the appointment of Public Prosecutors and Assistant Public Prosecutors, as well as their qualifications, functions, and obligations. The provisions that govern these provisions to guarantee successful prosecution in courts are governed by Sections 18 and 19 of the Sanhita.
The Supreme Court restored essential safeguards in judicial recruitment May 20, 2025, reinstating quotas and minimum experience requirements for entry and promotion. By balancing merit and practical legal training, the judgment ensures consistent standards across states and prepares candidates with necessary courtroom exposure, strengthening India’s subordinate judiciary for future challenges.
The Supreme Court restored essential safeguards in judicial recruitment May 20, 2025, reinstating quotas and minimum experience requirements for entry and promotion. By balancing merit and practical legal training, the judgment ensures consistent standards across states and prepares candidates with necessary courtroom exposure, strengthening India’s subordinate judiciary for future challenges.
In a landmark May 20, 2025 judgment, the Supreme Court reinstated the requirement that candidates for entry-level judicial posts must have practised as advocates for at least three years, counting from provisional enrolment. This rule will apply to all future recruitment processes, while selections initiated before the ruling remain unaffected.
This is the introduction. A fundamental procedural issue concerning the use of High Court powers under Section 482 of the…
This abstract considers Sections 52 and 53 of the Probate and Administration Act 1959 (Revised 1972) with regard to the requirements for the grant of probate and fee payment in Malaysia. Section 52 permits probate or letters of administration of Commonwealth courts to be resealed by the High Court, accorded similar legal effect. Section 53 extends similar coverage to British courts in foreign jurisdictions, subject to any needed amendments. Payment of fees is in accordance with estate duty provisions, ensuring personal representatives’ compliance. These provisions simplify estate administration throughout jurisdictions, reconciling legal powers and financial responsibilities
