This Court proposes to refer to certain relevant facts, which are as under: The respondent no. 1, i.e., EDC Ltd. is a Company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956. Earlier it was known as the Economic Development Corporation of Goa. It is ..
Division Bench after rejecting the claim of the appellants herein found all of them guilty of criminal contempt and convicted them under Section 12 read with Sections 15 and 2(c) of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 (hereinafter referred to as “the Ac..
The Legislature of Uttar Pradesh enacted the U.P. Industrial Area Development Act, 1976, (hereinafter referred to as ‘Act 1976’) for the purpose of proper planning and development of industrial and residential units and to acquire and develop the lan..
The facts of this case are that the respondent was in the service of the National Council of Educational Research and Training (for short ‘the NCERT’). The employees of the NCERT were given an option to choose either the Central Provident Fund Scheme..
This is yet another case of gruesome honour killing, this time by the accused-appellant of his own daughter. ..
Notice was issued in the Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.8660 of 2009 on 2nd April, 2009, confined to the question regarding the Petitioner’s liability by way of contributory negligence in the accident which occurred on 18th July, 2004. Special Lea..
All the three appeals have been preferred against the common judgment and order dated 14.7.2003 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Madras in Criminal Appeal Nos. 981 and 986 of 2002, by which the High Court had disposed of the said appeals pre..
Civil Appeal No. 2924 of 2008 has been filed by Smt. Rasila S. Mehta, mother of late Harshad S. Mehta and Civil Appeal No. 2915 of 2008 has been filed by Smt. Rina S. Mehta, sister-in-law of late Harshad S. Mehta against the final judgment and order ..
This appeal, by special leave, is directed against judgment dated 21st May 2009 delivered by the High Court of Delhi in Criminal Misc. Case No.3842 of 2008, in a petition filed by the appellant herein under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedu..
In order to explain the controversy with clarity, it may be essential to state that the appellant Smt. S. Thilagavathy who had joined as an Orgnizer -cum- Tailoring Instructor in Grade I on 27.1.1986 in the Labour Welfare Board, Government of Tamil N..
The question for determination, therefore, is as to whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the mandatory order as passed by the Division Bench was justified, or whether the learned Single Judge having exercised his discretion appropriat..
In these civil appeals, we are required to consider essentially the erstwhile legislations with regard to the administration of property left behind in India by evacuees migrated to Pakistan during partition and the compensatory redistribution of the..
The appellant herein is the transferee of leasehold rights of the land to an extent of 25 acres in Survey No. 336/1A1 (75 acres in total) of Aletti village of Sullia Taluk, Dakshnia Kannada district. The original order of lease grant was made in the ..
Contempt – Fraud by Advocate - Conviction upheld..
As per the said contract, Contractors deposited the sum of Rs.10 lacs by undated cheque no.027840 drawn against South Indian Bank Ltd., Palarivattom Branch, Cochin branch with the respondent no.1 as refundable security deposit for the due performa..
Whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal of the appellants herein and confirmed their conviction and sentence under Sections 143, 147, 148, 342, 449 and 302 read with Section 149 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as “IPC”) passed by th..
Appellants had challenged the validity and propriety of a Circular issued by the Director General of Civil Aviation, (hereinafter called as `DGCA’), respondent No.1 dated 29.5.2008, to the effect that Civil Aviation Requirements(hereinafter called as..
This is an appeal against the order dated 03.04.2008 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana dismissing the writ petition CWP No.5587 of 2008 of the appellant challenging his termination from service under the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabhandhak Committe..
Writ Appeal No. 963 of 2000 filed by the appellants against the order of the learned Single Judge, who declined to interfere with the order passed by Land Tribunal, Gulbarga (for short, “the Tribunal”) for grant of occupancy rights to the respondents..
By special leave, against the common judgment dated April 21, 2010 passed by the High Court of Andhra Pradesh whereby the Single Judge of that Court allowed the petitions filed by the private respondents under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Proc..
© 2026 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
