IndianLawLive
How to Subscribe Free
- Go to bottom of this page.
- Write Your Email Address in the column and Click the button “Subscribe”.
How to add ‘IndianLawLive‘ to Home Screen of Your Mobile Phone?
- 1. Click on the three DOTS (…) on the Right-Side Top of this Page.
- 2. Click “Add to Home Screen”.
How to Find a Topic in the Articles in ‘IndianLawLive’?
- In Google-Search, give (i) the “required word” or “phrase” and also (ii) “Koduvath” – in Quotation marks ( “………” “Koduvath” ).
- Contact: (+) 9400230025
Alpha Corp Development Private Limited v. Greater Noida Industrial Development: Findings on Lifting Corporate Veil of Companies and Subsidiary Companies
Jojy George Koduvath In Alpha Corp Development Private Limited v. Greater Noida Industrial Development (Sanjay Kumar Alok Aradhe, JJ.), 2026 INSC 449, the Supreme Court of India considered – Lifting Corporate Veil of Companies and Subsidiary Companies. Findings on Lifting Corporate Veil, in a Nutshell The relevant paragraphs are 53 to 56. They read as…
Dispossession and Knowledge: Essential Requirements of Adverse Possession
Though these requirements are are not expressly spelt out in Article 65 of the Limitation Act, as well as in the maxim nec vi, nec clam, nec precario, they are implicit in this Article and in this maxim. Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam. Abstract Two distinctive and interrelated key elements are emphasised in the law of…
Adverse Possession: Legal Principles and Classic Cases in the UK and the US
Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam Adverse Possession, Indian Law Require – (i) Dispossession and (ii) Knowledge 1. Article 65 of the Limitation Act, 1963, lays down the period of limitation for adverse possession as 12 years. It reads as under: 65. For possession of immovable property or any interest therein based on title. 12 years When the possession of…
Adverse Possession: Should Unobstructed Possession Subsist for 12 Years Immediately Preceding the Suit?
Jojy George Koduvath Should Unobstructed Possession Subsist for 12 Years Immediately Preceding the Suit? Where adverse possession has already ripened into title (by continuous, open, and peaceable possession for a period of 12 years), it is not necessary that such unobstructed possession should subsist for the 12 years immediately preceding the suit. Subsequent disturbance or…
Is Registration of a Deed, Notice to Government and Public so as to Attract Adverse Possession?
Read also: Does Registration of a Document give Notice to the Whole World? Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam. Is Registration of a Deed, Notice to Government and General Public? No. The duty of a Sub-Registrar is ministerial and administrative. For the above, it cannot be said – the Sub Registrar receives or accepts notice on behalf of the…
Shanti Devi v. Jagan Devi, 2025 INSC 1105; Accamma Sam Jacob v. The State of Karnataka, 2026 INSC 362)
Fraudulent or Void Transaction: Is ‘Declaration’ Required? The Supreme Court Says No Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam. A Seeming Conflict Between Two Decisions In the earlier decision in Hussain Ahmed Choudhury v. Habibur Rahman, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 892 (J.B. Pardiwala, R. Mahadevan JJ.), it was clearly opined, as regards an assailed instrument,as under: However, in the subsequent decision in Shanti Devi…
Maurice W. Innis v. Lily Kazrooni – Executing Court Executes Decree as it Stands, Without any Modification. It cannot Go Beyond or Vary its Term
Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam. Preface The executing court executes a decree: S. 47 CPC Deals with – Questions to be Determined by the Executing Court Section 47 of Code of Civil Procedure provides – ‘all questions arising between the parties’ and relating to the execution are to be determined by the Executing Court. Section 47, CPC, reads…
Channappa v. Parvatewwa Critically Analysed: Suit Dismissed for Order II Rule 2 Bar and Constructive Res Judicata – For No ‘Consequential Declaration’ on Title, in the Earlier Suit
Saji Koduvath, Advocate, Kottayam. Points Decided in Channappa v. Parvatewwa, 2026 INSC 343 1. Adverse IA Orders can be challenged in Appeal from Decree: Once an Order is passed in an Interlocutory Application in a suit, it stands as res judicata at its subsequent stages, including the appeal, revision, etc. 2. Order II Rule 2,…
Applicability of Res Judicata on IA Orders (at Different Stages of the Same Suit)
Jojy George Koduvath Abstract IA Orders are Conclusive Determination of the Issue Raised In Satyadhyan Ghosal v. Deorajin Debi, AIR 1960 SC 941, it was observed as under: In Hope Plantations Ltd. v. Taluk Land Board, Peermade, 1999 (5) SCC 590, it was held that if an issue has been decided at an earlier stage…
M.V. Ramachandrasa v. Mahendra Watch Company, 2026 INSC 348: Decision on Subletting Without Consent of Landlord
Jojy George Koduvath In M.V. Ramachandrasa v. Mahendra Watch Company, 2026 INSC 348, the Supreme Court of India (Ahsanuddin Amanullah, R. Mahadevan, JJ.), considered two questions of substantial importance. ‘No’ was the answer given by the Apex Court in the first question. The findings, on eviction on the ground ‘sub-letting’, in a nutshell, is that…
Something went wrong. Please refresh the page and/or try again.
Follow My Blog
Get new content delivered directly to your inbox.
Saji Koduvath Associates 