Background The couple got married in 2004 after having spent eight years in courtship. The husband shifted to Canada in 2003. Later his wife joined him on a spousal visa. In 2009, the husband had met with a car accident after which his wife nursed hi ..
What was the Petition The petition was in the form of a writ under Article 226 against the New Bar Council of India Rules, for restricting the freedom of speech and expression of the legal fraternity guaranteed under Article 19 (2)(a) of the Indian C ..
Case Background The instant petition was filed by the petitioner challenging the respondent’s application of domestic violence wherein the petitioner was made a party. The petitioner is alleged to have an extra marital affair with the husband o ..
BCI Decides To Keep In Abeyance 'Criticism-Disqualification Rules' For ReviewThe Bar Council of India has decided to formulate a committee to review the recently inserted Sections V and V-A of Chapter II of Part VI of the Bar Council of India ..
Facts of the Case Garvit Innovative Promoters Limited (GIPL), an investor company, was engaged in the business of rental of bikes, and for this purpose, it took investments from the public. A bank account was opened in the Noble Cooperative Bank Limi ..
WHAT DID THE COURT SAY The Supreme Court has refused to entertain a plea filed that seeks the removal of ‘health’ as a subject from the State List and its exclusive inclusion under the Union List. The plea also sought directions to the Ce ..
WHAT DID THE COURT SAY The Telangana High Court has stated that in case there's a violation of the Foreigner’s Act or otherwise, the Magistrate does not have the power to deport the foreign national under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Say ..
WHAT DID THE COURT SAY The Punjab and Haryana High Court has said that a live-in relationship between a minor girl and an adult male is not acceptable. It is neither morally correct nor socially desired. Hence the court cannot grant its seal of appro ..
Overview The petitioner Basheer C.K owns land situated in a commercially important area within the limits of the Kozhikode Corporation. The petitioner wanted to put up a commercial building so, he applied for a building permit from the Corporation. H ..
Overview The petitioner was charged with violating Sections 80, 84, 86, and 87 of the Act, 1963, Rules 144 and 145 of the Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969, and Section 379 of the Indian Penal Code. During the investigation, the Investigating Officer issu ..
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
