NLSIU Scholarship Repository
Not a member yet
2002 research outputs found
Sort by
The Socio-Economic Characteristics of Migrant Constructions Workers in India: An Overview
From Land Reform to Landfare: Land Claims and the Welfare State in Kerala, India
While large-scale land reform may still be underway in many countries, other contexts have states responding to land claims through scattered land provision measures. This article puts forward “landfare” as a lens to capture such measures and unpacks its features in one location. The article first explains this term, outlining its location in and departure from the land reform scholarship. It next shows how Kerala, India, widely cited in the scholarship for its 20th century land reform, addresses the land claims of its Adivasi citizens in the 21st century through landfare. Through an exploration of Adivasi land claims and an examination of state responses in Kerala, the article argues that landfare can work through four key modes—obfuscation, withholding available land, projectisation, and welfare fix. Unlike the “land-to-the-tiller” goals of 20th century land reform, 21st century landfare can be aimed at extinguishing land struggles
TikTok and the free speech conundrum
Can India learn some lessons from the TikTok case? The case suggests that corporate ownership restrictions are not as much of a problem for the freedom of expression given their content-neutral approach
From Discretion to Mandate: Seeking the Specific Performance of Repudiated Contracts
When faced with a repudiatory breach of contract, parties may either terminate the contract or seek its specific performance. The latter choice acquired newfound significance following the 2018 amendment to the Specific Relief Act, which marked a decisive shift away from treating specific performance as a discretionary remedy, establishing it instead as a rule. This paper examines how courts have grappled with this change. It reveals a doctrinal split between one line of jurisprudence, that continues to scrutinize claimants’ conduct and refuse to enforce contracts on a discretionary basis, and another that nominally embraces the new statutory framework, but carves out exceptions and grants compensatory remedies to defendants. While this paper argues that the latter approach falls short of securing contracting parties’ performance interest, it nonetheless represents a step towards the judicial adoption of the fundamental change in India’s contractual remedies framework
Political Economy of Takeover Regulation in India: How Good is India’s Mandatory Bid Rule?
The political economy/interest group theory has emerged as a powerful framework for understanding the differences between takeover regulation in advanced economies like the United States (U.S.) and United Kingdom (U.K.). However, what is largely missing is whether the theory can be extended outside of the U.S. and the U.K., particularly to explain the motivations behind (and the impact of) transplanting takeover law principles from the U.S. and/or the U.K. to other jurisdictions. This article contributes to the ongoing discourse by testing the applicability of the interest group theory offered by Armour and Skeel to explain India’s transplant of U.K.’s mandatory bid rule (MBR) in its regulatory framework governing takeovers. In concluding that the Armour and Skeel theory does not fully explain India’s transplant experiment, this article not only underscores how transplanting takeover law concepts from a country of origin that is fundamentally different from the host country may result in wholly different outcomes, it also constructs a theoretical framework to demonstrate why and how the Indian version of the MBR has resulted in the reverse outcome of entrenching incumbents and shielding them from the disciplining effect of the market for corporate control. Lastly, it goes on to propose the several ways in which the existing formulation of the MBR could be improved by drawing on the experience of jurisdictions that have similarly experimented with the concept