IndiaLaw LLP

Call Directions Website Contact the business

IndiaLaw LLP IndiaLaw LLP IndiaLaw LLP provides ‘one stop’ Pan India legal services to the corporates.

With offices in all major cities and Associate lawyers in more than 400 districts, lead by highly experienced professional team, IndiaLaw LLP satiates legal requirements of its clients, the major corporates worldwide, from diverse industry sectors for more than one and half decade. IndiaLaw LLP has a professional corporate structure to support its functioning. Each practice area is managed by a team of highly qualified and experienced lawyers and duly supported by other corporate/technical experts with extensive knowledge, experience and capabilities in their respective areas, to ensure invaluable advice, timely delivery and cost effective legal services. The Firm is based out of Mumbai and currently has 12 offices in various cities across the country including Delhi, Chennai, Kolkata, Bengaluru, Hyderabad and Cochin besides an international office at Dubai. Whatever be the legal challenge and wherever it may be required, across the length and breadth of the country, one can stop by the One Stop Window of IndiaLaw LLP. The Firm shall endeavour to provide appropriate legal services with promptitude. IndiaLaw LLP is committed to provide result oriented legal services on time, ensure high professionalism, integrity, international standards with a personal touch. Keeping the corporate world in mind, IndiaLaw LLP provides the following UNIQUE ADDITIONAL SERVICES:

Online access to IndiaLaw LLP Database for case updates
Regular & Periodical updates
Dedicated Centralized Back Office

25/09/2026

In Dr. Arjun Chowdhury v. State of West Bengal, the Calcutta High Court held that a partnership firm of advocates cannot be denied registration merely for not producing a trade licence. The Court reaffirmed that Section 58 of the Indian Partnership Act contains no such requirement and that a lawyer’s office is not a commercial establishment.

Authorities cannot add conditions beyond the parent statute through administrative instructions.

{Advocate partnership firm, trade licence, Section 58 Partnership Act, Calcutta High Court, law firm registration}

23/09/2026

In Ms. Karnika Khandelwal v. Union of India, the Delhi High Court held that CARA could not insist on a procedural requirement that was practically impossible to fulfil in an OCI-parent HAMA adoption involving Australia. The Court instead directed verification under Regulation 69, followed by issuance of the NOC.

In adoption matters, procedure must ultimately serve the child’s welfare, not obstruct it.

{HAMA adoption, CARA NOC, OCI parents, Delhi High Court, child welfare, expatriate adoption}

21/09/2026

In IDFC First Bank Ltd. v. Shyamsundar Distributor, the Calcutta High Court held that a Section 8 application must be filed within the period available for submitting the written statement. An unexplained delay of nearly 11 months was therefore held to be time-barred.

In arbitration disputes, delay can amount to waiver of the right to seek reference to arbitration.

{Section 8 Arbitration Act, arbitration clause, Calcutta High Court, limitation, civil proceedings}

Our Managing Partner, Shiju PV, discussing the evolving Tata Sons vs Tata Trusts governance issue on CNBC TV18.The discu...
18/09/2026

Our Managing Partner, Shiju PV, discussing the evolving Tata Sons vs Tata Trusts governance issue on CNBC TV18.

The discussion explored the legal and corporate-governance questions surrounding the reappointment of N. Chandrasekaran, the special affirmative rights under Tata Sons' Articles, the fiduciary duties of nominee directors, the role of shareholders, and the implications of a potential listing of Tata Sons.

An important corporate-governance debate with implications well beyond the immediate dispute.

YouTube link: https://youtu.be/_8_5aAGhE6A?si=410fF2qjXp3UrrPU&t=310

{Tata Sons, Tata Trusts, Shiju PV, N. Chandrasekaran, CNBC TV18, corporate governance, corporate law, nominee directors, fiduciary duties, shareholder rights, Tata Sons listing}

18/09/2026

In Dr. Ramesh v. State of Maharashtra, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that deficiencies in mandatory Form F records can attract prosecution. The Court stressed that these records play a crucial role in monitoring prenatal diagnostic procedures and preventing illegal s*x determination.

Under the PCPNDT Act, strict statutory record-keeping is essential, and claims of clerical error must be tested during trial.

{PCPNDT Act, Form F compliance, Supreme Court, prenatal diagnostics, s*x determination law}

16/09/2026

In Prateek S Jain & Associates v. Pratim Bayal, the NCLT Kolkata examined a GST consultant’s claim for ₹6.48 lakh in unpaid fees during the CIRP of Nandini Impex.

While GST compliance services may qualify as CIRP costs under Section 5(13) of the IBC, the Tribunal emphasised that such costs must be necessary, reasonable, and proportionate to the work performed. With limited business activity and predominantly Nil GST returns, the fees claimed were found excessive.

The ruling highlights the importance of proportionality in recognising professional fees as CIRP costs, even when statutory priority is involved.

{CIRP Costs, IBC Section 5(13), NCLT Kolkata, GST Consultant Fees, Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, Professional Fees, Insolvency Law}

On the auspicious occasion of Ganesh Chaturthi, IndiaLaw LLP extends its warmest wishes to everyone celebrating this joy...
14/09/2026

On the auspicious occasion of Ganesh Chaturthi, IndiaLaw LLP extends its warmest wishes to everyone celebrating this joyous festival.

May Lord Ganesha bless you and your loved ones with wisdom, happiness, prosperity, and success, and may He remove all obstacles from the path ahead.

Wishing you and your family a blessed and Happy Ganesh Chaturthi!

14/09/2026

The Draft Motor Vehicles (RVSF) Amendment Rules, 2026 propose expanded End of Life Vehicle definitions, stronger Vscrap-VAHAN integration, verified scrapping certificates, stricter equipment standards, and tougher compliance requirements for registered scrapping facilities.

The proposed changes aim to make vehicle scrapping more transparent, accountable, and environmentally compliant.

{Vehicle scrapping rules, RVSF Amendment Rules 2026, End-of-Life Vehicles, Vscrap portal, VAHAN}

11/09/2026

In M/s Rifilis Engineering Pvt. Ltd. v. Arjun Gupta, the Supreme Court held that an employee seeking reinstatement must produce reliable evidence to justify unauthorised absence or prove an attempt to rejoin. The Court therefore set aside the order granting reinstatement and back wages.

In labour disputes, the burden of proof matters. Oral assertions without supporting evidence may not be enough.

{Unauthorised absence, reinstatement, back wages, burden of proof, Supreme Court labour law}



IndiaLaw LegalUpdate

09/09/2026

In Khaja Moideen Leather Company v. Authorised Officer, Indian Bank, the DRAT Chennai reiterated that the right to redeem the secured property is extinguished once the sale notice is published. Payment of outstanding dues after that stage does not automatically restore the borrower’s right to reclaim the property.

In recovery proceedings, timing can determine whether the right of redemption survives.

{SARFAESI Act, right of redemption, DRAT Chennai, property auction, secured assets}

IndiaLaw LegalUpdate

Address

Mumbai
400001

Opening Hours

Monday 9:30am - 6:30pm
Tuesday 9:30am - 6:30pm
Wednesday 9:30am - 6:30pm
Thursday 9:30am - 6:30pm
Friday 9:30am - 6:30pm
Saturday 9:30am - 6:30pm

Telephone

91-22-2219-7400

Website

Alerts

Be the first to know and let us send you an email when IndiaLaw LLP posts news and promotions. Your email address will not be used for any other purpose, and you can unsubscribe at any time.

Contact The Business

Send a message to IndiaLaw LLP:

Shortcuts

Share

Category