The Supreme Court's ruling in EPCC v. Matix Fertilisers upholds the integrity of corporate capital law within the IBC framework by restating the crucial differentiation between creditor debt and shareholder investment.

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 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.

The split in ACIT v. Shelf Drilling Ron exposes a deeper fault line in Indian tax adjudication: whether courts should privilege the literal boundaries of statutory text or stretch interpretation to preserve the functional life of specialized procedures.

The State must deliberate with the online gaming industry on a licensing regime with stricter compliance measures and penalties, rather than cutting off one of the growing industries in India completely.

Disortho exemplifies the dangers of uncritical adoption of foreign jurisprudence in a distinct legal context. By prioritising the lex contractus over the law of the seat, the decision compromises the procedural autonomy of agreements and departs from established Indian and international norms on lex arbitri determination.

Asian Paints should not be the beginning of corporate criminal empire-building—it should be a prompt for cautious, principled, and restrained evolution.

The dynamism of digital ecosystems is transcending boundaries. To protect consumer  and third-party interests against a refusal to deal abuse, dual penalty system under the Indian antitrust regime exists. However, to safeguard the legitimate business interests of dominant entities, the author advocates for the incorporation of defenses based on principles of necessity and proportionality similar to the DMA.

The broad legal reasoning adopted by the court may be invoked in future disputes, raising concerns regarding a roadmap for future regulation and taxation. Applying the aspect theory here may result in jurisdictional overreach and risk upsetting the delicate federal balance enshrined in the Constitution of India.

While res judicata has been firmly applied to SEBI’s quasi-judicial functions, its administrative actions remain largely untouched by the principle.

From a critical standpoint, Gayatri Balasamy is a double-edged development for arbitration law.

The Bhushan Power case will be studied as a cautionary tale. On one side, it underscores that insolvency laws are not toy models to be treated lightly; procedural rules serve the code’s integrity. On the other, it delivers a jolt by showing that even long-implemented deals can be unwound for technical lapses, a double-edged signal to investors and professionals alike.

The Schott Glass ruling requires a structured, effects-based test in line with international best practice and appropriately directs focus away from form-based claims toward demonstrating competitive harm.

In arbitration, as in all adjudication, when one more is too many, equal say is non-negotiable.

The Supreme Court of India’s recognition of a power to modify arbitral awards under Section 34 marks a significant and controversial departure from the text, structure, and legislative intent of the Act.

Although the Supreme Court of India’s decision has garnered significant criticism, it is not without its merits. It emphasizes how the integrity of the insolvency process must remain sacred. The IBC transcends the role of a simple debt recovery mechanism; it is a framework rooted in legal principles and the equitable treatment of all stakeholders involved.

[ Ujan is a student at National Law University Odisha. ] On 30 April 2025, a 5-judge bench of the Supreme Court of India ( SC ) held that...

In this article, the author identifies two major challenges revealed by the impugned judgments: lack of a statutory time limit to implement resolution plans and imprecise role of monitoring committees in ensuring implementation of resolution plans.

Clear legislative reform is essential to resolve the existing uncertainties around the power of arbitral tribunals to implead non-signatories.

Subsequent to the Mahakali judgment adopting a clear stance that the MSMED Act would override the provisions of A&C Act, the party autonomy in the arbitration agreements involving an MSME, has taken a backseat.

In this piece, the author argues that the decision of the SC in Disortho has two main problems. First, the court fails to appropriately decide the seat. Second, the law laid down by the SC is problematic due to its misconceived implementation of party intention and the principle of separability. 

While the power of modification may not necessarily be antagonizing to the Indian arbitration regime, the source of such power shall be through legislative means rather than judicial craftiness.

While the BPSL-JSW is already forming into a landmark precedent in the IBC landscape, it risks creating a precedent, which undermines the revival aspect of IBC and has the possibility of deterring future CIRP proceedings.