Ors. (Civil Appeal No. 13066/2024) Issue:Whether the subsequent purchasers (Manjit Singh and Anr.) of the suit property were bona fide purchasers under Section 19(b) of the Specific Relief Act, 1963,and thus protected from the decree of specific performance in favor of the plaintiff (Darshana Devi). Rule: Section 19(b) of Specific Relief Act, 1963Specific performance of

Issue: The primary issue was whether a Muslim male in Maharashtra can register multiple marriages, including a third marriage, under The Maharashtra Regulation of Marriage Bureaus and Registration of Marriages Act, 1998, despite the Act’s general focus on a single marriage registration. Can the Registrar legally deny registration of the third marriage based on the

(Civil Appeal Nos. 9975-9976 of 2024) Parties : Appellant: A.B. Govardhan / Respondent: P. Ragothaman  Advocates on Record  : Mr. Narendra Kumar Counsel for the Appellant Mr. V. Prabhakar Counsel for the Respondent Hon’ble Judges/Bench : Ms. Justice Hima Kohli & Mr. Justice Ahsanuddin Amanullah ISSUE The Supreme Court of India was tasked with the following

Issues: Can Vaibhav Motors be considered the owner of the offender vehicle, despite being a mere dealer of Hindustan Motors? Is Vaibhav Motors, along with Hindustan Motors, jointly responsible for compensating the victims of the accident? Do Clauses 3(b) and 4 of the Dealership Agreement formulated by Hindustan Motors help them escape the payment of

Name of the case: Ameya Arun Kulkarni Vs Isha Ameya Kulkarni[FCA No. 18 of 2024]  Parties: Appellant (Org. Respondent): Amey Arun KulkarniRespondent (Org. Petitioner): Isha Ameya Kulkarni Hon’ble Judges/Bench:  Justice Vibha Kankanwadi and Justice SG Chapalgaonkar FACTS The case of Ameya Arun Kulkarni v. Isha Ameya Kulkarni centers on a marital dispute between the parties. The