Keeping Pace with Legal Change
The case of Delhi Development Authority (DDA) vs. Corporation Bank and Ors. of 2025 decided by the Supreme Court of…
On July 1, 2025, the Rajasthan High Court—which was established by Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand—provide a important ruling stressing on…
To this extent the Supreme Court observed that a plaintiff relying on Order IX Rule 4 CPC is entitled to file a fresh suit after a restoration plea is dismissed, and such dismissal does not create res judicata. This ruling affirms problems with procedural rights in civil lawsuits.
The Supreme Court of the United States addressed the legal repercussions of consent decrees in family division cases in this significant decision. The court reaffirmed that after such decrees have been issued, they cannot be challenged via a new litigation and must only be opposed through recall processes.
The Supreme Court threw out the criminal case against S.C. Garg, saying that a company can’t be charged with a crime unless the firm itself is also charged. The Court highlighted how important it is for things to be final and stopped parallel criminal trials on things that had already been decided.
It was decided by the Supreme Court that SEBI could not reopen a matter that had already been resolved in order to impose new sanctions on the same entities. In the context of securities law, it used the principle of res judicata and stressed the significance of finality in judicial and quasi-judicial rulings.
