MGG said that BOCL wanted to borrow money from a bank &MGG wanted to be a guarantor on those shares. ..
The respondent is guilty of the alleged corrupt practices under RPA Act...
The Court stated that the Defendant-Petitioner has acted in a manner to cause colossal insult to justice and to the concept of speedy disposal of civil litigation. ..
The penalty imposed under Order 11, Rule 21 is of high penal nature and should be used only in extreme cases and should no way be imposed unless there is a clear failure to comply with the obligations. It should be applied only in extreme contumacy o..
Before declaring the Judgment the Court carefully explained the term indigent as mentioned under Rule 1 Order 33 of CPC. Apart from the said immovable properties, the petitioners owned 450 grams of gold jewels and properties valued more than Rs.1000/..
The Supreme Court of India rejected the order of High Court and gave sanction to the claim of appellant...
The High Court ultimately held that such an application for eviction was maintainable. Hence the appeal to this Court Allowing the appeal and remitting the case back to the Rent Controller. ..
No particular amount for maintenance can be fixed by the Act as the amount may differ from case to case. The Courts have to fix the amount of maintenance considering all the circumstances of both the parties...
In the judgment of the case – Sunil Rathee & others v. The State of Haryana & Others, delivered on July 23, 2020, the Supreme Court has explained two conditions, based on which the Apex-Court can withdraw a case from a High Court to itself, exercisin..
The petition was dismissed as there was no merits in the review petition...
In a well-balanced, well-reasoned, well-analysed and well-worded judgment, a two Judge Bench of the Principal Bench at Jabalpur of Madhya Pradesh High Court comprising of Justice Sanjay Yadav and Justice Atul Sreedharan in its judgment titled In Re..
It has to be stated right at the outset that in a major and significant development, the Bombay High Court in a recent, remarkable and righteous decision titled “Zee Entertainment Enterprises Limited Vs Teleone Consumer Product Pvt. Ltd. & Ors.” in ..
"Section 96 and 100 of the Code of Civil Procedure provide for preferring an appeal from any original decree or from decree in appeal respectively. The aforesaid provisions do not enumerate the categories of persons who can file an appeal. However, i..
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the right of the board to appeal in High Court as the right to appeal was available to the respondent at the time of initiation of the dispute before the amendment which wasn’t preserved thereof...
The Court first clarified the word "property" used in Section 17 and held that it includes properties. The court reiterated that interpretation of word "portion of the property" cannot only be understood in a limited and restrictive sense of being po..
By examining the case, the High Court reversed it’s decision on the judgment which was already given by the Trial Court, stating that the Learned trial court interpreted Section 10 wrongly, as the plaintiff has taken all measures in issuing letters a..
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the decision of the High Court that the civil court didn’t have the territorial jurisdiction to try the said suit...
Delhi High court didn’t have the jurisdiction and the appeal is dismissed...
The court held that the High court should not have shown indulgence of such magnitude by adjourning the matter when the counsel for the appellant was not present. It is difficult to envision why the Court directed fresh notice to the appellant when t..
In a well-balanced, well-reasoned, well-analysed and well-articulated judgment, the Himachal Pradesh High Court in Abhishek Kumar Singh vs. State of Himachal Pradesh in Cr.MP(M) No. 1017 of 2020 delivered on July 30, 2020 has made it absolutely cle..
Member Strength 9,46,564 and growing..
© 2024 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
