Latest laws Helping good people to do good things.

Breaking News

हिंदी समाचार पढ़े

हिंदी में समाचार पढ़ने के लिए यहां क्लिक करें

Expand

Home / Humour @ Latest Laws / Cartoons

Cartoons

Facebook Comments

KAMAL NATH Vs. ELECTION COMMISSION OF INDIA

Registration of Electors Rules, 1960, Rules 22(1)(c). Writ Petition (Civil) No. 935 of 2018 is filed by the petitioner, who is the President of the Madhya Pradesh Congress Committee, claiming the some reliefs: The writ petitions dismissed.

A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan, JJ.

12/10/2018 View judgement PDF

OM PRAKASH AGARWAL SINCE DECEASED THR LRS. Vs. VISHAN DAYAL RAJPOOT

Uttar Pradesh Civil Laws (Amendment) Act, 2015 - Provincial Small Cause Courts Act, 1887, Section 25. These appeals have been filed by the appellant(landlord), questioning the judgment of Allahabad High Court in Small Causes Court Revision filed by the respondents(tenant) challenging the decree of eviction passed by Additional District Judge, Firozabad. The issue which has arisen in these appeals pertains to the jurisdiction of Court of Additional District Judge in deciding Small Causes Suit on 22.10.2016. The Appeals allowed.

A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan, JJ.

12/10/2018 View judgement PDF

POWARI PANCHSHEEL CO-OP.HNG.STY. Vs. MAHARASHTRA HOUSING AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (MHADA))

Maharashtra Housing & Area Development Authority Act, 1976. This appeal is directed against the final judgment and order dated 26.03.2008 passed by the High Court of Bombay in Writ Petition No.2017 of 2003 whereby the High Court dismissed the Writ Petition filed by the appellants. The Appeal allowed.

Abhay Manohar Sapre and S. Abdul Nazeer, JJ.

12/10/2018 View judgement PDF

DAHISAR SARASWATI COOP. HSG. SCY. LTD Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Criminal Procedure Code, Section 378 (4) - Maharashtra Ownership Flats Act. This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 27.7.2009 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in Criminal Application No. 241 of 2008 whereby the said application filed by the appellant was dismissed. The Appeal allowed.

Abhay Manohar Sapre and Indu Malhotra, JJ.

12/10/2018 View judgement PDF

THE LIFE INSURANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA Vs. SRI KALAPPA M. SANKAD (D) THR. LRS.

Service Matter. This appeal is filed against the impugned final judgment and order dated 13.02.2015 passed by the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru in Writ Appeal No. 3120 of 2014(S-RES) whereby the High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the appellant. The Appeal disposed of.

Abhay Manohar Sapre and Indu Malhotra, JJ.

12/10/2018 View judgement PDF

MALLIKARJUN KODAGALI (DEAD) REPRESENTED THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Criminal Procedure Code, Section 378(4) - Indian Evidence Act, 1872 - Limitation Act, 1963. The appellant (Kodagali - now dead but represented by his legal representatives) was the victim of an attack on the night of 6th February, 2009. He lodged a First Information Report with the police and after investigations, necessary proceedings were taken before the District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot against the accused persons under several sections of the Indian Penal Code (the IPC). 12. In S.C. No. 49 of 2010 the District and Sessions Judge, Bagalkot (Karnataka) acquitted the accused by a judgment and order dated 28th October, 2013.

Madan B. Lokur, S. Abdul Nazeer and Deepak Gupta, JJ.

12/10/2018 View judgement PDF

MALLIKARJUN KODAGALI (DEAD) REPRESENTED THROUGH LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES Vs. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA

Madan B. Lokur, S. Abdul Nazeer and Deepak Gupta, JJ.

12/10/2018 View judgement PDF

MOHAMMED IMRAN Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

Service Matter. The appellant, a successful aspirant for judicial service, is aggrieved by the order dated 04.06.2010 cancelling his selection for appointment due to the character verification report of the police, and the refusal of the High Court to interfere with the same. The Appeal allowed.

Kurian Joseph, Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Navin Sinha, JJ.

12/10/2018 View judgement PDF

M/S. TVS MOTOR COMPANY LTD. Vs. THE STATE OF TAMIL NADU AND OTHERS

Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, Section 19(5)(c) - Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Rules, 2007, Rule 10(9)(a) - Constitution of India, Articles 14, 19(1)(g), 256 and 301. The instant appeals have been preferred against the common impugned judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Madras dated October 29, 2014 (hereinafter referred to as \"Impugned Judgment I\") in the writ petitions which were filed by the appellants and the impugned judgment dated 17th November, 2017 of the High Court of Judicature at Madras (hereinafter referred to as \"Impugned Judgment II\") in W.P. No. 29393 of 2017. The Appeals allowed.

A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan, JJ.

12/10/2018 View judgement PDF

ALD AUTOMOTIVE PVT LTD Vs. THE COMMERCIAL TAX OFFICER AND ORS NOW UPGRADED AS THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER (CT)

Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006, Section 19(11) - Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Rules, 2007, Rule 10(2). All these appeals have been filed against common judgment dated 17.07.2013 of Madras High Court dismissing a bunch of writ petitions filed by the appellants. The main challenge in the writ petitions was provision of Section 19(11) of Tamil Nadu Value Added Tax Act, 2006 (hereinafter referred to as the \"Tamil Nadu VAT Act,2006\"). For appreciating the issues raised in this batch of appeals it is sufficient to notice the facts in Civil Appeal Nos. 10412-10413 of 2018 arising out of SLP(C)Nos. 36112-36113 of 2013 (ALD Automotive Pvt. Ltd. v. The Commercial Tax Officer and others). The Appeals dismissed.

A.K. Sikri and Ashok Bhushan, JJ.

12/10/2018 View judgement PDF

Latest CaseLaw

Cartoons

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Get Latest Laws News Alert