Venue Is Construed As Seat In Absence Of Contrary Indicia, If Arbitration Agreement Only Mentions 'Venue': Allahabad HC
https://www.livelaw.in/high-court/allahabad-high-court/allahabad-high-court-judgment-clarifies-venue-vs-seat-arbitration-agreement-299174

Indus mobile distribution v. Datawind innovations, 2017

Place seat venue and exclusive jurisdiction of courts where seat is situated.

Discussed landmark judgments.

#Arbitration@CurrentLegalGK


The above recent case
“If the arbitration agreement mentions only one place and even if it is termed as the 'venue', then unless there is a contrary indicia the 'venue' is construed as the 'seat',”

@CurrentLegalGK

Documentary Evidence in civil cases.

@CurrentLegalGK

🗳️ The right to vote a unique status in Indian democracy

On the Jurisprudential aspect:
While framing the question, the court relied on Salmond and held Since every legal right, which would include a Constitutional Right, [as the Constitution is also law through the Grundnorm and not law for the Purpose of Article 13] must have a title, we must ascertain whether a citizen of India has a right to a legal remedy, “the facts or events, because of which, the rights become vested in it owner”, who is the person of inherence, we will explore, whether Article 326 contains the facts and reasons and whether it also contains the content of a Right.

Article 326 prescribes that a citizen who is 18 years of age and not disqualified by law on the grounds of non-residence, unsoundness of mind, crime, corrupt or illegal practice shall be entitled to be registered as a voter.

The law has to be made and it was made 1950, 1951, section 16 of 1951 act prescribes restrictions.
and right to vote in section 62.

What are the limits of these restrictions made by law?

Even if it is treated as a statutory right, which, at any rate, cannot be divorced or separated from the mandate of Article 326.

So whether it is a constitutional right?
The answer is No

Whether it is a statutory Right?
The answer is yes (kuldip nayar v. Union of India 2006)

In Anoop Baranwal v. Union of India 2023 thr court made it clear that they are not laying down what is the status of rifht and no departure is made from kuldip nayar but one aspect was made clear that Article 326 cannot be departed.

Because

What is important is that the Court noted in Anukul Chandra Pradhan, Advocate Supreme Court v. Union of India, 1997 that holding of free and fair elections constitute a basic feature of the Constitution and approved of the view apparently that the Right to Elect is fundamental to democracy [Jyoti Basu and Others. Debi Ghosal, 1982]


Right to vote is not a fundamental, constitutional or common law right but mere statutory right.

Right to contest election is also a mere statutory right.

That is to say “right to vote” is an ingredient of the free and fair elections. It is essential but not the necessary ingredient.

What is democracy? 👇



#COI@CurrentLegalGK

What is true democracy for India

@CurrentLegalGK

2 Essential Components of Democracy

@CurrentLegalGK

PAST 15 YEARS AIBE SOLVED PYQS

AIBE EXAM PREVIOUS QUESTION PAPERS

@CurrentLegalGK

Any rules regarding how the 3 years of practice will be ascertained?

Is it mandatory to practice before district and sessions courts or the trial courts and not before tribunals or special courts.

These questions will be of prime importance.

@CurrentLegalGK

Ending Modern-Day Untouchability – Kashmir Observer
https://kashmirobserver.net/2025/01/27/ending-modern-day-untouchability/

👨‍🎓🎓 NLU v. Non NLU

State recognised inequalities.

Justice VG Arun remarked, “There is no logical basis for the assumption that professionalism and competence is the fiefdom of only those passing from elite institutions.”

#Vacancy@CurrentLegalGK

सुरक्षित और वाहन-योग्य सड़कों का अधिकार अनुच्छेद 21 के तहत जीवन के मौलिक अधिकार का हिस्सा: सुप्रीम कोर्ट
https://hindi.livelaw.in/supreme-court/right-to-safe-motorable-roads-part-of-fundamental-right-to-life-under-article-21-supreme-court-299367

#Hindi@CurrentLegalGK

Inclusion Of Leprosy As Ground For Divorce 'Embarrassing', Says Supreme Court
https://www.livelaw.in/top-stories/supreme-court-discriminatory-laws-leprosy-as-ground-for-divorce-embarrassing-union-states-to-take-remedial-action-299351

Police Summons Under Section 35 BNSS Can't Be Served Electronically : Supreme Court Reiterates
https://www.livelaw.in/supreme-court/police-summons-under-section-35-bnss-cant-be-served-electronically-supreme-court-reiterates-299354

ENGINEERING PROJECTS INDIA LIMITED

                   v.
MSA GLOBAL LLC (OMAN)
               2025

Topic: Anti Arbitration Injunction

Relied on

O.N.G.C. v. Western Co. of North America, 1987

AND HELD

Thus, the aforesaid decision categorically lays down a precedent for restraining a party from proceeding before a foreign-seated arbitral  proceeding, provided the case is of such gravity that it warrants such extraordinary interference. It equally settles that such a restraining order could be passed by the High Court as well and Section 41(b) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963 would have no bearing on this power of the High Court. No doubt, the case indicates that such a remedy is to be provided in extraordinary and rare situations wherein the denial of this relief would effectively result into a patently unjust and unconscionable outcome for the plaintiff.

Dabhol Power Company

Court held that neither Section 5 nor Section 45 of the 1996 Act ousts the jurisdiction of this Court from issuing an injunction if it finds that the arbitral proceedings against the plaintiff in a foreign country are oppressive and call for interference.

#Arbitration@CurrentLegalGK

Satendra Kumar Antil v. CBI
[July 2025]
Reiterated January 2025 Order which reaffirmed 2022 order and Delhi High Court guidelines in
Rakesh Kumar v. Vijayanta

No whatsapp/email notices under 35 BNSS/41A CrPC

Why no electronic mode in section 35 BNSS?

Section 35 has substantive element in it i.e. the liberty of an individual is involved (when there is non compliance of notice) and personal liberty is a part of Article 21 of constitution.

Any attempt to interpret the provision as a mere procedural one, would amount to rewriting the provision itself.

The Legislature, in its wisdom, has specifically excluded the service of a notice under Section 35 of the BNSS, 2023 from the ambit of procedures permissible through electronic communication, that have been delineated under Section 530 of the BNSS, 2023.

#BNSS@CurrentLegalGK

AI on trial , discussion on the book on the subject AI and law.

https://youtu.be/vx_OoNQWpHE?feature=shared

National-Strategy-for-Artificial-Intelligence. NITI AYOG