A new, principle-grounded taxonomy is needed to maneuver through the new territory by logically incorporating the claims of digital assets into the hierarchy of Section 53 of the code.

A double-derivative remedy would further these goals. By embracing double‐derivative actions, India would reduce opportunities for regulatory partitioning of wrongs and bring its shareholder remedy framework into harmony with 21st‐century global corporate governance standards.

This article argues that the interpretation of the NCLT Mumbai Bench ruling, providing an indefinite extension for the realization of assets by a secured creditor, is contradictory to the settled stance taken by various other NCLT Benches. The decision undermines the entire edifice of IBC itself, which is the timely resolution of the proceedings.

While the Bill creates a strong foundation, its ultimate success depends on implementation. Passing a law is only the starting point, real challenge lies in building awareness among both workers and employers, with many unfamiliar with formal procedures or maybe fearful of new obligations.

The path forward lies in a stage-sensitive synthesis: treat preliminary timelines as binding but flexible, with extensions granted only on reasoned orders, while enforcing final award deadlines as hard, jurisdictional limits.

India’s decision to include RMG under PMLA supervision was long due, but without distinguishing between skill and chance and ignoring judicial pronouncements, it introduces a compliance dilemma that threatens the growth of India’s digital economy.

The Supreme Court’s ruling in Kamal Gupta is a landmark decision in the field of arbitration in India. The court ensured that the arbitral process in India retained its consensual nature by excluding the intervention of non-signatories, thereby strengthening confidentiality as a statutory imperative.

The SC in Crown Theatres has transformed the philosophy of competition regulation to be based on prevention and market correction rather than punishment by confirming the authority of the CCI to deliver structural and behavioral remedies.

SEBI’s accessibility mandate is both progressive and disruptive. It extends the idea of investor protection beyond disclosure and governance to the very ability of investors to participate.

The Aakash Packaging judgment highlights the tension between judicial oversight and arbitral autonomy in India.

The contradiction between moratorium theory and interest accrual practice represents more than a technical legal gap. With the IBC Amendment Bill 2025 currently pending before the Parliament, the opportunity for meaningful reform arises.

This blog aims to take a look at the strategic shift in how India is trying to positions itself in the global market and facing competition head on vis-a-vis markets like Singapore. 

With the development of Digital Ledger Technology, real estate tokenization has gained much traction.

The judgment of the Delhi High Court marks an important order in India’s audit regulatory landscape as it cements the validity of the NFRA under Section 132 of the Act and its powers to hold audit firms and auditors accountable.

With the development of Digital Ledger Technology, real estate tokenization has gained much traction.

[ Kislay and Sakshi are students at National Law Institute University Bhopal. ] On 3 July 2025, the Securities and Exchange Board of India ( SEBI ) passed an interim order  under the Securities and Exchange Board of India Act 1992  against Jane Street, a prestigious American trading firm in the matter regarding index market manipulation  in the Indian options trading market by earning massive positions in derivatives amounting up to 4.3 billion dollars. While the SEBI order h

The proposed framework by the SEBI on an accreditation-based framework for AIFs reflects its broader vision to depart from a ‘minimum commitment’ threshold to ‘only accreditation’ status as a standard for risk assessment of an investor.

India’s import of the shadow director test, judicially narrowed by an unwarranted impropriety filter, undermines accountability.

The first part of the blog will establish the English jurisprudential benchmark, tracing the evolution of the shadow director test from the rigid “puppet master” standard in Re Hydrodam (Corby) Ltd to the more pragmatic “real influence” test in Secretary of State for Trade and Industry v. Deverell.

This blog argues that, in the age of AI, market definition must adapt, separating hype from structural reality and ensuring that claims of “nascency” do not become convenient cover for an anti-competitive market. 

The Shashoua judgment represents a watershed moment in the evolution of Section 48 public policy jurisprudence, particularly in its application to complex shareholders dispute arbitration. The court’s sophisticated analysis validates contractual deadlock resolution mechanisms while maintaining necessary boundaries between arbitral authority and statutory regulation.

Mandatory dematerialization prima facie appears to be a welcome step as far as reducing the vulnerabilities and risks of physical shares are concerned. However, it is important to consider that the transition is not without challenges.

Good faith is an omnipresent concept throughout contract law, not only permeating all its rules, but also acting as an ‘inspiration’ of those rules.

Unless patent illegality and perversity are confined to obvious, facial flaws, arbitral finality will remain illusory, and Section 34 will continue as a de facto appeal forum.