The doctrine of promissory estoppel, which prevents a party from going back on a promise that another party has relied upon to their detriment, should generally be applied to past promises in India. While the doctrine is not explicitly codified in Indian law, it has been recognized by the Supreme Court and used to protect individuals and businesses from unfair dealings.

Role of Good Faith in Contractual Obligations: Civil Law vs Common Law
Good faith is a foundational principle in contract law, but its role and legal force differ significantly between civil law and common law jurisdictions.

Civil Law Jurisdictions

Good faith is generally codified and central to contract law in civil law systems. For example, in the UAE (a civil law country), Article 246(1) of the Civil Code explicitly requires that "the contract must be performed in accordance with its contents, and in a manner consistent with the requirements of good faith"—extending obligations beyond the express terms to include duties implied by law, custom, and the nature of the transaction.

Civil law systems (such as those in France, Germany, and many others) view good faith as a guiding principle throughout the formation, performance, and interpretation of contracts. This means parties must not only fulfill their obligations but also consider the legitimate interests of the other party and avoid actions that would harm them solely for personal gain.

Courts in civil law countries have broad discretion to interpret and enforce good faith, allowing them to fill gaps in contracts, adapt obligations to changing circumstances, and ensure cooperation and fairness between parties.

The principle applies not just during contract performance, but also during pre-contractual negotiations and even after primary obligations are fulfilled.

Common Law Jurisdictions

In common law systems (such as England and the United States), good faith is not generally codified as a universal principle. Instead, it is often implied as a covenant in certain types of contracts or specific situations.

The implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing means that parties are presumed to act honestly and fairly, so as not to destroy the right of the other party to receive the contract's benefits. However, this is typically limited to the performance and enforcement of contracts, rather than their negotiation or formation.

In the United States, the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) imposes a general duty of good faith in contracts for the sale of goods, but English law remains more cautious, recognizing good faith only in limited contexts (such as long-term relationships or where a fiduciary duty exists).

Common law courts are generally more reluctant to intervene in contracts on the basis of good faith alone, preferring to rely on the express terms of the agreement and established doctrines like estoppel to address bad faith conduct.

Restricting Freedom of Contract for Substantive Fairness
Extent and Rationale for Restrictions

Freedom of contract is a foundational legal principle, allowing parties to freely negotiate and enter into agreements based on mutual consent. However, this freedom is not absolute and is subject to various statutory and judicial limitations to ensure substantive fairness and protect public interest.

Key Grounds for Restriction
Protection of Vulnerable Parties: Laws restrict contracts to prevent exploitation of weaker parties, such as prohibiting unconscionable terms or contracts made under undue influence, coercion, fraud, or misrepresentation.

Public Order and Morality: Contracts that are illegal, immoral, or against public policy—such as those involving crime, restraint of marriage, or restraint of trade—are void.

Consumer Protection: Statutes may override contractual terms to protect consumers from unfair practices or imbalance in bargaining power.

Reasonableness and Certainty: Agreements that are uncertain, ambiguous, or impose unreasonable restraints (such as on trade or legal proceedings) are void under the Indian Contract Act, 1872.

Legal Framework
Indian Contract Act, 1872: Sections 19, 23, 26–29, and 27 specifically void contracts that are made without free consent, are unlawful, or restrain marriage, trade, or legal proceedings.

Public Policy: Courts have the power to declare contracts void if they are contrary to justice, morality, or the well-being of society.

Exceptions: Certain reasonable restraints, such as those protecting goodwill in business sales, are allowed if they are not excessive in scope or duration.

Balancing Freedom and Fairness
While freedom of contract empowers individuals and businesses to structure their relationships, the law intervenes to ensure that this freedom does not result in unjust, exploitative, or socially harmful outcomes. The extent of restriction is thus calibrated to:

Prevent harm to individuals or society.

Ensure equality and substantive fairness in contractual dealings.

Maintain public order and morality.

In summary: Freedom of contract should be restricted to the extent necessary to prevent exploitation, uphold public policy, and ensure substantive fairness, without unduly stifling legitimate private autonomy and economic activity. The law seeks a balance—intervening primarily where contracts undermine justice, morality, or the rights of the weaker party.

Classification Criteria for MSMEs: Article 14 Analysis
Background- The revised MSME definition in India now uses both investment and turnover as criteria for classification, replacing the earlier system based solely on investment in plant and machinery or equipment. This change aims to make the system more objective, transparent, and aligned with the GST regime, using reliable data sources like the GST Network.

Article 14: Principles of Equity and Proportionality
Article 14 of the Constitution guarantees "equality before law" and "equal protection of the laws" to all persons. It prohibits arbitrary discrimination and mandates that any classification by the State must be reasonable, based on intelligible differentia, and have a rational nexus to the objective sought to be achieved.

The principle of proportional equality under Article 14 means:

Equals should be treated equally.

Unequals can be treated differently, but the differentiation must be reasonable and justifiable.

Reasonable Classification Test
For a classification to be constitutionally valid under Article 14:

There must be an intelligible differentia distinguishing those grouped together from others left out.

The differentia must have a rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the law.

Application to MSME Classification
Justification for Investment and Turnover Criteria

Using investment and turnover as criteria for MSME classification is intended to objectively distinguish businesses of different scales, aligning policy support with the needs of smaller enterprises.

The use of turnover, backed by GST data, enhances transparency and reduces subjectivity compared to self-declared investment figures.

The classification aims to support ease of doing business and adapt to economic changes efficiently.

Potential Concerns

The Standing Committee noted possible issues, such as:

Wide gaps in turnover limits within a single category (e.g., an enterprise with ₹6 crore turnover and another with ₹75 crore both being classified as 'small'), which may lead to incongruous results.

Risk of larger corporates misusing the system by splitting operations into multiple entities to avail MSME benefits.

Fluctuations in turnover could cause frequent reclassification, potentially undermining stability for businesses.

Equity and Proportionality Assessment

The dual criteria are not arbitrary; they are based on measurable economic indicators and aim to group businesses with similar economic footprints for targeted policy benefits.

While the system may have operational challenges (such as broad turnover bands), these do not inherently violate Article 14 unless the classification is shown to be manifestly arbitrary or lacking rational nexus to the policy objective.

The principle of proportional equality is served as the classification differentiates based on economic capacity, which is relevant to the purpose of MSME support.

Conclusion
The revised MSME classification criteria based on investment and turnover do not, on their face, violate the principles of equity and proportionality under Article 14, as they are founded on reasonable and objective economic indicators with a clear nexus to the objective of supporting small and medium enterprises. However, operational issues such as broad turnover bands and potential misuse may warrant future refinement to ensure the classification remains fair and effective. The current approach is constitutionally valid as long as it is not arbitrary and continues to serve the legitimate aim of targeted economic support.

No, Indian contract law, as it stands, does not adequately address gig economy contracts and platform labor relations. Traditional labor laws, which are based on a binary classification of formal and informal employment, do not fully encompass the nature of work done by gig workers, leaving them without many of the legal protections and benefits enjoyed by traditional employees. While the new labor codes define gig workers, they are not yet fully implemented and the protections they offer are still being debated.



Show all

No, retrospective registration as an MSME generally does not entitle a supplier to invoke remedies under the MSMED Act for contracts entered into before the registration date. The Supreme Court of India has consistently held that benefits under the MSMED Act are not available retrospectively.
Mandatory Registration:
The MSMED Act requires registration as an MSME before claiming benefits like dispute resolution through Facilitation Councils, as stated in Supreme Court's case on Silpi Industries.
Prospective Effect:
Registration is generally considered prospective, meaning it applies to transactions and agreements entered into after the registration date.
Avoiding Abuses:
The Ministry of Micro, Small & Medium Enterprises has a rationale for preventing the possibility of opportunistic invocation of the Act's protections after a dispute arises, which could happen if retrospective benefits were granted.

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) plays a crucial role in enforcing environmental laws in India. It is a specialized judicial body established to adjudicate environmental cases, ensuring compliance with regulations and protecting environmental rights. NGT orders are binding and enforceable, with the potential for penalties for non-compliance.

The National Green Tribunal (NGT) plays a crucial role in enforcing environmental laws in India. It is a specialized judicial body established to adjudicate environmental cases, ensuring compliance with regulations and protecting environmental rights. NGT orders are binding and enforceable, with the potential for penalties for non-compliance.
functions of the NGT:
Adjudication of Environmental Disputes:
The NGT handles cases related to environmental protection, forest conservation, and enforcement of environmental rights.
Enforcement of Environmental Laws:
It ensures that industries, government agencies, and individuals adhere to environmental regulations.
Providing Relief and Compensation:
The NGT can order monetary compensation to victims of environmental harm and mandate restoration or cleanup activities.
Upholding the Precautionary Principle:
The NGT applies the precautionary principle, prioritizing protective measures when there is uncertainty about a project's environmental impact.
Setting Precedents:
The NGT's decisions contribute to the evolution of environmental jurisprudence by establishing precedents that influence future interpretations of environmental laws.
How binding are NGT orders?
NGT orders are legally binding and executable as decrees of a civil court. Failure to comply with NGT orders can result in penalties, including fines or imprisonment. While the NGT's rulings are binding, dissatisfied parties can appeal to the Supreme Court.
In essence, the NGT acts as a specialized court for environmental matters, providing a mechanism for speedy and effective resolution of environmental disputes and for enforcing environmental laws in India.

The principle of proportionality guides judicial review by ensuring that executive actions affecting fundamental rights are not excessively intrusive or disproportionate. It requires a rational connection between the means used by the government and the intended outcome, and that the least restrictive measures are used to achieve legitimate goals. Essentially, it balances the government's legitimate interests with the protection of individual rights.

Under the Sexual Harassment of Women at Workplace (Prevention, Prohibition and Redressal) Act, 2013, a complaint of sexual harassment can be filed with the Internal Complaints Committee (ICC) or Local Complaints Committee (LCC). The complaint must be filed within three months of the incident, with potential extensions under certain circumstances. The committee then investigates the complaint, potentially utilizing conciliation to resolve the matter amicably before initiating a formal inquiry.
Detailed Process:
1. Filing a Complaint:
The aggrieved woman can file a written complaint with the ICC (if the workplace has one) or the LCC (if it does not). This can also be done by someone authorized on her behalf, such as a friend, relative, or co-worker.
2. Time Limit:
The complaint must be filed within three months of the incident, though this period can be extended in certain cases.
3. Conciliation:
Before a formal inquiry, the committee may attempt conciliation to resolve the matter through amicable settlement.
4. Inquiry:
If conciliation fails, the committee will conduct an inquiry into the complaint, aiming to complete it within 90 days.
5. Findings and Recommendations:
The committee will make a report with its findings, potentially including recommendations for action, such as transfer, leave, or compensation.
6. Interim Relief:
During the inquiry, the aggrieved woman may be granted interim relief, such as transfer or leave, to ensure her safety and well-being.
7. Assistance for Criminal Proceedings:
If the harassment constitutes an offense under criminal law, the committee will assist the woman in filing a police complaint.
8. Annual Report:
The ICC and LCC are required to file an annual report to the District Officer.
9. Penalties for Non-Compliance:
Employers who fail to comply with the Act may face fines, penalties, or even cancellation of their license.
10. Online Complaint Management System:
The Ministry of Women & Child Development has launched She-Box for registering complaints related to sexual harassment at the workplace, according to the Department of Science & Technology.