Insights &amp; Notes

SUPREME COURT: A TIME-BARRED PLAINT CAN BE REJECTED AT THE THRESHOLD

The Supreme Court in N. Asha Devi v. R. Aravind Kumar & Anr. reaffirmed that where the plaint itself clearly reveals that the suit is barred by limitation, the Court can reject it at the threshold under Order VII Rule 11 CPC, without waiting for a full-fledged trial. “The Court cannot be hesitant in granting relief of rejection of a plaint when it is so obvious from the pleadings itself.”

20 July 2026

Supreme Court: High Courts Cannot Re-Appreciate Evidence While Exercising Certiorari Jurisdiction Under Article 226

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that the writ of certiorari is a supervisory remedy and not an appellate jurisdiction. High Courts cannot reweigh or reappreciate evidence recorded by subordinate courts merely because a different conclusion is possible. Interference is permissible only in cases involving jurisdictional error, patent illegality, or an error of law.

1 July 2026

Supreme Court: High Courts Cannot Interfere with Arbitral Tribunal's Section 16 Orders in Writ Jurisdiction

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed the principle of minimal judicial intervention in arbitration by holding that High Courts should not interfere with orders passed by an Arbitral Tribunal under Section 16 of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996 while exercising writ jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution. The Court clarified that such orders can ordinarily be challenged only after the final arbitral award under Section 34 of the Act.

15 June 2026

⚖️ Supreme Court Clarifies Constructive Res Judicata: Negligence Is No Excuse

The Supreme Court has reaffirmed that the doctrine of constructive res judicata bars not only issues actually raised in earlier proceedings but also those that could and should have been raised. The Court clarified that omissions caused by negligence, inadvertence, or accident do not exempt a litigant from the doctrine, while emphasizing that its application depends on the facts of each case and the scope of the earlier litigation.

14 June 2026

Supreme Court Clarifies That Limitation Under Section 34 Begins Only After Disposal of Section 33 Application

The Supreme Court has clarified that the limitation period for filing a challenge to an arbitral award under Section 34(3) of the Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996, begins only upon the disposal of a Section 33 application by the Arbitral Tribunal. The Court held that this principle applies irrespective of whether the Section 33 application is allowed or dismissed, providing important clarity on the computation of limitation in arbitration proceedings.

18 April 2026

Supreme Court Clarifies: “Can” in Arbitration Clause Does Not Create Mandatory Arbitration Agreement

The Supreme Court has ruled that the word “can” in an arbitration clause does not create a mandatory obligation to arbitrate disputes. The judgment reinforces that arbitration must be based on clear mutual consent, making precise contract drafting essential for businesses and commercial agreements.

10 February 2026

Quasi-Judicial Authorities Cannot Exercise Review Power Without Statutory Backing

"The Supreme Court strikes down a Revenue Officer’s unauthorized review of a land vesting order, holding that executive instructions cannot override statutory limits. Read our latest analysis on why the power of review is not inherent and what it means for administrative law."

30 January 2026

Supreme Court Fixes Jurisdiction for Arbitration Extensions

Does the High Court keep a 'Big Brother' watch on arbitration? The Supreme Court says no. In a major procedural clarification, the SC rules that Section 29A extensions for arbitration mandates must be filed in the Principal Civil Court, regardless of which court appointed the arbitrator. Learn why the High Court is now 'functus officio' once the tribunal is formed.