ValkyaEditorial

Valkya Editorial

Weekly reports and landmark-judgment digests for the Indian bar — written by litigators, for litigators.

Latest

Supreme Court ReferenceSupreme Court of India

Arvind Kejriwal v. Directorate of Enforcement: the 'need and necessity to arrest' under Section 19 PMLA

On 12 July 2024, a two-judge bench granted Arvind Kejriwal interim bail in the ED's Delhi excise-policy matter, held that an arrest under Section 19 PMLA must rest on cogent, fairly weighed material and is judicially reviewable, and referred framed questions on whether the 'need and necessity to arrest' is a distinct ground of challenge to a larger bench.

Valkya Editorial··8 min
Supreme CourtSupreme Court of India

Atul Chauhan v. State of Haryana: Rule 23(1) suspends financial assistance, not compassionate appointment

The Supreme Court held that Rule 23(1) of the Haryana Civil Services (Compassionate Financial Assistance or Appointment) Rules, 2019 — which suspends benefits while a family member faces a murder or abetment charge in the death of the Government employee — applies by its plain text and marginal heading only to 'compassionate financial assistance' and has no application to 'compassionate appointment', a structurally distinct relief under the same Rules. Rule 23(1) is constitutionally valid within its own domain, but the State erred in invoking it to defer an appointment claim. The Court upheld the provision under Article 14, flagged the resulting anomaly for legislative cure, and directed the appellant's claim be decided within three months, uninfluenced by Rule 23(1).

Valkya Editorial··9 min
Supreme CourtSupreme Court of India

B. Santoshamma v. D. Sarala: partial specific performance and the limits of the subsequent purchaser's protection

On 18 September 2020, a three-judge Bench of the Supreme Court upheld a decree of partial specific performance where a vendor had promised the same land twice over. A digest of Section 12 of the Specific Relief Act read purposively, the post-2018 shift from discretion to obligation, and why a subsequent purchaser with notice of an earlier contract cannot invoke Section 19(b).

Valkya Editorial··7 min
Supreme CourtSupreme Court of India

Banda Development Authority v. Moti Lal Agarwal: the modes of taking possession of acquired land

On 26 April 2011, a two-judge bench of Justices G.S. Singhvi and Asok Kumar Ganguly set out the principles on what constitutes 'taking of possession' of acquired land. There is no universal rule — the mode turns on the nature of the land. For vacant land, the authority going to the spot and drawing up a panchnama ordinarily suffices; where a crop is standing or a structure exists, notice to the occupier and possession before independent witnesses is ordinarily required. It remains the go-to statement of the possession-and-vesting principles.

Valkya Editorial··7 min
Supreme CourtSupreme Court of India

Bejla Oraon v. Kali Das Oraon (2026): proving a custom, and the limits of a 'ghardamad's' claim

The Supreme Court set aside concurrent findings in a 51-year-old Oraon land dispute, restating the four attributes of a valid custom and the narrow Article 136 grounds for disturbing findings of fact — and holding that under Oraon custom a ghardamad inherits only if adopted by the last male owner or his widow, not by an uncle-in-law.

Valkya Editorial··8 min

Weekly Reports

View all →

A weekly scan of the decisions, amendments and notifications that change how lawyers practise — distilled, cross-referenced to the bare Act, and citation-ready.

Banking and SARFAESI in May 2026: the redemption carve-back, the 2024 Fraud Master Directions interpreted, the OTS sanctity ruling, and the RBL Bank foreign-stake transaction

The April-to-early-June 2026 cycle in Indian banking and SARFAESI law has produced an unusually dense set of doctrinal recalibrations. The Supreme Court has carved back the Celir LLP line on redemption, delivered the first major interpretation of the 2024 RBI Master Directions on Fraud Risk Management, reaffirmed the sanctity of one-time settlements against post-settlement criminal-recovery tactics, treated corporate guarantees as financial debt at the banking-IBC interface, and restored a dismissal in a bank-employee disciplinary case. Around these, the cycle has produced the largest-ever foreign-investment transaction in an Indian private bank, a third consecutive MPC rate hold, and a DRAT-Chennai limitation ruling that aligns SARFAESI demand-notice limitation with the Limitation Act s.18 architecture.

Valkya Editorial··14 min

The Code on Social Security 2020: gig workers, aggregators, and the unified frame

The Social Security Code consolidates nine statutes — EPF 1952, ESI 1948, Maternity Benefit 1961, Payment of Gratuity 1972, Workmen's Compensation 1923, BOCW Cess 1996 and three more — and adds the world's first national statutory frame for gig and platform workers. A practitioner's read on the gig and platform definitions, the 1-to-2 per cent aggregator contribution, the pro-rata gratuity rule, and the June 2026 commencement gap.

Valkya Editorial··12 min

The Code on Wages 2019: floor wage, minimum wage, and the unified payment framework

The first of the four labour Codes consolidates the Payment of Wages Act 1936, the Minimum Wages Act 1948, the Payment of Bonus Act 1965 and the Equal Remuneration Act 1976 into a single instrument. Partially commenced in December 2020; the substantive chapters await further Section 1(3) notifications. A practitioner's read on the architecture, the open compliance questions, and the old-law judgments that continue to govern.

Valkya Editorial··14 min

Landmark Judgments

View all →

Close reading of the decisions that matter: the facts, the holding, the ratio, and what it changes for the practitioner — with the citation kept front and centre.

Supreme Court ReferenceSupreme Court of India

Arvind Kejriwal v. Directorate of Enforcement: the 'need and necessity to arrest' under Section 19 PMLA

On 12 July 2024, a two-judge bench granted Arvind Kejriwal interim bail in the ED's Delhi excise-policy matter, held that an arrest under Section 19 PMLA must rest on cogent, fairly weighed material and is judicially reviewable, and referred framed questions on whether the 'need and necessity to arrest' is a distinct ground of challenge to a larger bench.

Valkya Editorial··8 min
Supreme CourtSupreme Court of India

Atul Chauhan v. State of Haryana: Rule 23(1) suspends financial assistance, not compassionate appointment

The Supreme Court held that Rule 23(1) of the Haryana Civil Services (Compassionate Financial Assistance or Appointment) Rules, 2019 — which suspends benefits while a family member faces a murder or abetment charge in the death of the Government employee — applies by its plain text and marginal heading only to 'compassionate financial assistance' and has no application to 'compassionate appointment', a structurally distinct relief under the same Rules. Rule 23(1) is constitutionally valid within its own domain, but the State erred in invoking it to defer an appointment claim. The Court upheld the provision under Article 14, flagged the resulting anomaly for legislative cure, and directed the appellant's claim be decided within three months, uninfluenced by Rule 23(1).

Valkya Editorial··9 min

Browse by topic

supreme-court 196dispute-resolution 121constitutional-law 109article-21 76constitution-bench 70criminal-procedure 50criminal-law 49ibc 43article-14 40service-law 35insolvency 30arbitration 29bail 28intellectual-property 28